Patterns Of Change: Assumptions About Sequentially And Variability

By Author: Jordon
Total Articles: 91
Comment this article

As diese descriptions of developmental patterns show, how individuals understand their experiences changes over time in ways that reflect individuals' increasing capacity to deal with complex, multifaceted issues. These patterns in ways of thinking evolve in cycles of differentiation and integration, and transition and consolidation as individuals organize and reorganize their thoughts and habits of Replica Omega mind. It is important to note that although developmental theories typically describe sequentially ordered patterns of complexity, this is not the same as suggesting that development occurs in a uniform, lock-step matter. Indeed, there is a great deal of variability (e.g., by content and context) within individuals and across individuals within these patterns; nevertheless, the general trend in the data across all these models is relatively slow, upward change over time.

Variability is not inconsistent with developmental sequences. Indeed, as Thelen and Corbetta (2002) noted, variability is now widely viewed as a general attribute, not ...
... just a harbinger of change or a symptom of being in transition. However, variability is not yet well captured in the metaphors or visual figures typically used to illustrate development. As Siegler (2002) has pointed out, "Implicit metaphors shape our thinking about many topics". One reason that readers of developmental models may assume that developmental theories portray lock-step linear progression may be related to their implicit metaphors, such as when the idea of a developmental continuum is portrayed as a line rather than by a helix or some other visual model or Replica Cartier Roadster rich metaphor that conveys motion, changes in speed, obstructions along the path, and multiple pathways toward the destination that more typically characterize development. Further, putting models on a continuum from early to advanced levels of development implies a straight-forward march from a beginning to an end, not development as continuous, recursive, and variable depending on factors such as context, the difficulty of the task at hand, or emotional stamina.

Even a more representative metaphor like a staircase (discussed by Siegler, 2002) suffers similar drawbacks. On the one hand, it conveys an upward progression, and (if the steps are tall and the staircase long enough), it implies the exertion of effort that is required to develop (i.e., to reorganize one's meaning making structures); it also allows for the possibility of going back to previous steps and possibly falling down. On the other hand, if this developmental staircase is drawn to consist of uniformly sized steps, with each tread equally spaced and each riser with its sudden upward shift the same height, this picture suggests that development itself is uniform, progression between steps is abrupt, and that the distance between any two developmental steps (developmental levels) is the same as that between any other two steps. Are these correct assumptions about the model being discussed Such questions of "distance" between levels seems at odds with a focus on qualitative differences in reasoning being described, but is nevertheless a frequently unstated assumption when change or growth is reported, and is always a factor when it is measured.