A Synthesis Of Ideas From The History Of Modern Psychology

CARILLO, Khrizelle V. December 2019
Psych 206 | Syntegration
My age is directly proportional with the degree of my admiration for the innocence and
pure-heartedness of children. I believe that as an adult, children can teach me more than I can
teach them when it comes to truly living and embracing life. As the old adage goes, the children
are our future. We should protect and nurture this future at all costs. However, the innocent and
pure nature of children can only last so long which is why as adults it is our responsibility to
guide, teach, and hone them well as they mature. Child-rearing is a basic concept but at the same
time a complex one. It has become more intricate in the last 10 years with the advent of newer
and more advanced technologies and the seemingly widening of the generation gap. Now more
than ever, we should turn our eyes, heads, and arms towards the children. Indeed they will still
be facing the problems we have now such as poverty, famine, diseases, threats to democracy, and
unemployment but unlike us, they will also have to confront misinformation, worse natural
disasters, environmental degradation, and graver threats to human existence. Hence, it is critical
that we raise our children to be resilient, capable, physically and mentally healthy, and well-
loved individuals who can cope with the challenges that lie ahead. The question now is: how can
we do that?
In the course of the history of modern Psychology, childhood and infancy studies were
mostly overlooked. It was the functionalists who first delved on child development as a topic
worthy of studying in a psychological perspective (Schultz & Schultz, 2011). This development
can be credited to the astounding influence Charles Darwin had on functionalism. It was he who
was able to popularize and articulate the idea that it is in the course of nature that species of this
world adapt to its ever-changing environment. His ideas greatly impacted the functionalist
perspective that the mind should be studied by its functions and how these functions are used by
human beings for survival (Schultz & Schultz, 2011). Darwin‟s „A Biographical Sketch of an

Infant,‟ a culmination of his observations and records on learning acquisition, was also
instrumental in inspiring researchers in England to study about child development (Hellal &
Lorch, 2013). Indeed, one of the better ways to start studying adaptation, natural selection, and
individual differences is by observing infants and children. G. Stanley Hall was actually able to
compare the course of the evolution of the human race with the development of human beings
from being unrestrained infants to rational adults (Schultz & Schultz, 2011). Hall‟s interest in
child psychology was primarily rooted in his interest in genetics and evolution (Schultz &
Schultz, 2011). His studies on children were an impetus in the launch of the child psychology
movement, and later on in his life, he took a great interest in studying the later phases of human
development (Schultz & Schultz, 2011). Explanations on child development were biological in
nature given that its foundations can be traced back on theories on genetics and evolution. In
order to only produce human beings of the best qualities, Francis Galton advocated eugenics or
the notion that fit individuals should reproduce more while unfit individuals do not (Schultz &
Schultz, 2011). He believed that it was all a matter of heredity (Schultz & Schultz, 2011). In line
with the goal of selective breeding, he developed tests and measures that would be able to
classify individuals as fit or not (Schultz & Schultz, 2011). According to Schultz and Schultz
(2011), a cluster of psychologists in the United States later analyzed the data collected by Galton
in his tests and their analyses led to the recognition of trends for childhood and adolescent
development as well as maturity within the confines of the sample used. Galton‟s mental tests
and statistical methods also heavily influenced the testing movement that came about as an
outgrowth of the functionalism school of thought. Galton shared the same passion for mental
testing and quantification with James McKeen Cattell who actually first used the term „mental
test‟ (Schultz & Schultz, 2011). Cattell had directed the new American Psychology into a

quantifiable, statistical, and experimental science and had reinforced how this new approach is
the best way to utilize and apply psychology in different settings (Schultz & Schultz, 2011).
Cattell may have pioneered the testing movement but according to Schultz and Schultz (2011),
Alfred Binet did not follow Cattell‟s usage of sensorimotor measurements to examine
intelligence instead, Binet used cognitive abilities as a measure of intelligence. The latter was
able to come up with such a test and with the concept of mental age by studying children who
were having difficulties at school (Schultz & Schultz, 2011). Binet‟s test proved to be more
useful as it is still being used to this day, with revisions from Lewis Terman, as the Stanford-
Binet Intelligence Scale (Schultz & Schultz, 2011). In addition to Binet, Florence L.
Goodenough created a measure of nonverbal intelligence test for children called „Draw-A-Man-
Test‟; meanwhile, Psyche Cattell developed an intelligence scale for infants called „Cattell Infant
Intelligence Scale‟ (Schultz & Schultz, 2011).
The testing movement was an integral part in the more pragmatic approach in studying
child development. From initially testing cognitive functions, it was able to expand its services
by helping children with mental disabilities and learning difficulties and by being of practical use
in the educational setting. In the clinical setting, Lightner Witmer had set up a clinic wherein he
was able to deal with problems that children have (Schultz & Schultz, 2011). Schultz and Schultz
(2011) also stated that as Witmer gained more experience, he was able to conclude that both
genetic and environmental factors are accountable for the behavioral and cognitive problems
children experience. Since then the conversation has evolved into nature versus nurture, even
more so as Behaviorism‟s influence grew. The underpinnings of Behaviorism are still the
influences of biological forces in observable behavior, but on top of that, it also recognizes that
human behavior is also a product of reinforcement, conditioning, stimuli and responses. John B.

Watson‟s Behaviorism helped people understand that our genetic predispositions can be
countered by environmental adjustments and in turn, this understanding made people hopeful in
tackling their predicaments (Schultz & Schultz, 2011). According to Schultz and Schultz (2011),
Watson argued that adulthood problems can be prevented by good childhood conditioning. He
also criticized permissive child-rearing practices and the lack of skills of parents during that time
in his article, „Psychological Care of the Infant and Child‟ (Schultz & Schultz, 2011).
Additionally, Mary Cover Jones‟s counterconditioning and B.F. Skinner‟s behavior modification
program also strengthened the idea that human behavior is subject to change. Another approach
to addressing maladaptive behaviors was conceived by Albert Bandura wherein his behavior
modification methods go by the principle of vicarious learning and modeling (Schultz & Schultz,
2011). The contributions of Jones, Skinner, and Bandura on behavior modification are proved to
be useful and are still currently applied in various settings and serve as basis for behavioral
therapy (Schultz & Schultz, 2011).
Charles Darwin‟s influence in psychology went beyond functionalism. His theories on
emotional behavior, sex drive, and instinct were basis for Sigmund Freud‟s theories on childhood
development (Schultz & Schultz, 2011). For Freud, childhood experiences are the root and cause
of any emotional disturbance experienced by an adult; and using this idea, he was able to
construct the Psychosexual Stages of Personality Development (Schultz & Schultz, 2011).
According to Schultz and Schultz (2011), among all other figures in the field, it was Freud who
first stressed the importance of child maturation. Freud‟s theories are very sexual in nature which
was something the Neo-Freudians disagreed on. They argued that psychological and social
forces, not just biological ones, should be taken into account in the study on how one‟s
personality is formed (Schultz & Schultz, 2011). In addition, Anna Freud argued that a child‟s

total personality should not be assessed wholly by its pathology; instead, a child‟s status of
development must be central to the study (as cited in Malberg and Pretorius, 2017). For object-
relations theorists such as Melanie Klein, the formation of interpersonal relationship between the
gratifying „object‟ and the child is much more important than the simple gratification of a drive
and that this interpersonal relationship significantly affects the child‟s personality (Schultz &
Schultz, 2011). Furthermore, Klein emphasized the importance of the emotional connection
between mother and child; she argued that in infancy, this connection, be it loving or hostile, is
generalized towards others (Schultz & Schultz, 2011). Parent-child relationship was also
highlighted by Karen Horney (Schultz & Schultz, 2011). According to Horney, depending on the
type of relationship that a parent has fostered with the child, basic anxiety may arise in the child
who, in order to cope with this anxiety, will develop a neurotic need (Schultz & Schultz, 2011).
Moreover, in contrast with Freud‟s view, Horney and Carl Jung both indicated that personality
formation is continuous and that one‟s experiences even after childhood are capable of shaping
personality (Schultz & Schultz, 2011). Both Jung and Alfred Adler also contradicted Freud‟s
emphasis on the power of childhood experiences in shaping behavior and personality instead,
they argued that one‟s goals and aspirations for the future are stronger determinants of
personality and behavior (Schultz & Schultz, 2011).
The theories and ideas discussed tackled the roles of reinforcements, behavior,
personality, genetics, and interpersonal relationships in child development; notably absent in the
discussion is the role of cognition and how it develops from infancy to childhood. It was Jean
Piaget who was able to propose that a child‟s cognitive development goes through four stages
namely, sensorimotor, preoperational, concrete operational, and formal operational (Babakr,
Mohamedamin, & Kakamad, 2019). According to Piaget, the starting point of a child‟s cognitive

development is the need to adapt to the environment (Papalia & Feldman, 2012). Similarly, this
was what Charles Darwin and the functionalists have emphasized; however, Piaget‟s theory
credits the child as having a more active role in its adaptive and cognitive measures. Piaget
suggested that children create categories from their observations (organization), handle new
information either via assimilation or accommodation (adaptation), and are continuously
motivated to strike a balance between what they know and not know (equilibration) (Papalia &
Feldman, 2012). And through these three processes, a child‟s cognitive abilities develop (Papalia
& Feldman, 2012). According to Papalia and Feldman (2012), Piaget‟s cognitive stage theory
was able to disprove the idea that a child‟s mind is a miniature of an adult‟s. Despite being
comprehensive and insightful, Piaget‟s theory has its own shortcomings and there were ethical
concerns on his data gathering methods as well (Babakr, Mohamedamin, & Kakamad, 2019).
Nonetheless, Piaget‟s cognitive developmental theory had an enormous impact on developmental
psychology (Babakr, Mohamedamin, & Kakamad, 2019). Another important figure in the
cognitive perspective is Lev Vygotsky. Unlike Piaget, Vygotsky argued that cognitive
development occurs in collaboration with social and cultural interactions, not in solitude (Papalia
& Feldman, 2012). Additionally, he stated that the cultural and linguistic development of a
human being is at first social before transitioning to being psychological or individual (Vasileva
& Balyasnikova, 2019). Vygotsky also indicated that children use language not just to
communicate but also as a means to perceive and deliberate about their environment (Papalia &
Feldman, 2012). On a psychosocial perspective, John Bowlby and Mary Ainsworth‟s attachment
theory highlighted the importance of a child‟s bond to a parent, specifically the mother (Papalia
& Feldman, 2012). Bowlby‟s empirically based research enabled him to conclude that “the infant
and young child should experience a warm, intimate, and continuous relationship with his

mother (or a permanent mother substitute) in which both find satisfaction and enjoyment” in
order to be mentally healthy people (as cited in Bretherton, 1992).
Now that a glimpse of the evolution of developmental psychology has been provided, I
feel compelled to ask how much of the things I have covered are actually relevant to answering
the question on how do we raise children, who, as adults, have the qualities that will enable them
to survive and thrive in the future. Indeed, much of the theories discussed are still given
importance and being researched in the present. However, since child rearing and development is
undeniably personal and perhaps unique between every individual, it is imperative that social and
cultural aspects of it are also understood, not just individualistic perspectives such as biological
and psychoanalytical. Thus, in order for developmental psychology to maintain its relevance and
practical use to different societies, the field should also be studied in the local, cultural, and
indigenous level.
In the Philippines, it appears that there are no limitations as to the topics of research in
developmental psychology. Research studies range from tackling parental self-efficacy,
adolescent risk-taking behavior and aggression, emotional and social problems, happiness,
motivation, and academic performance to spirituality among children, adolescent perspectives on
their parents and on adoption, and coping mechanisms. According to Ventura (n.d), most
researches in developmental, or more specifically, in child psychology tackled sex differences,
relied on tests to gather data, conducted in urban areas, utilized one-session designs, and studied
social and emotional aspects of child development (Ventura, n.d.). It was found out that since the
start of the 1980‟s, the amount of research on adolescent experience, most of which on socio-
emotional factors and predicaments encountered in youth has significantly increased (Peña-
alampay, Dela Cruz, & Liwanag, 2003). Despite having a number of phenomenological or

exploratory researches in the field, it is apparent that the utilization of Western ideas and
methods to study child and developmental psychology in the Philippines is the trend. An
example is a study conducted by Parcon (2017) that employed regression analyses to find out the
relationship between empathy and anxiety-attachment, avoidant-attachment, and gender. Another
example of the use of Western methods and ideas is the development of a Filipino Social
Desirability Scale (Cagasan, 2016) in which students from a Central Luzon university were the
participants. Moreover, one notable figure in the field, Liane Peña-Alampay, has made a number
of contributions on various multicultural and longitudinal studies such as those that discussed
corporal punishment (Lansford, et al., 2014), expectations on family obligations (Lansford, et al.,
2015), and risk taking behavior (Duell, et al., 2018). Clinical child psychology in the Philippines
also has Western roots. In a an article published in the Journal of Clinical Child Psychology,
Serafica (1975) provided an overview on the settings that found the aid of clinical child
psychologists useful, the roles and responsibilities of being a clinical child psychologist, and the
status of the field. Serafica (1975) indicated that the assessment tools such as WISC, Stanford-
Binet, and the Goodenough Draw-A-Man Test were used for individual testing of Filipino
subjects and that these tests were given in English given the bilingual tongue of Filipinos.
Clearly, this could be problematic given that these tests are created for a very different culture
and people, thus may not accurately describe the abilities of Filipino children. Additionally, so
much is lost in the translation between any two languages. Since there is limited access to journal
articles on clinical psychology in the country, it is not determined if the status provided by
Serafica (1975) still reflects that of the present.
In rummaging through public and online journal articles on developmental psychology in
the Philippines, I have noticed that a large chunk of research was conducted in urban settings

such as Quezon City and Cebu. As the Philippines is home to diverse cultures, traditions,
customs, and languages, and that not a lot of its places can exactly be described as urban, the
representation and generalizability of the findings are difficult. In line with representation, a lot
of people, indigenous or not, are marginalized when there is still reliance on Western theories
and ideas to understand Philippine developmental phenomena. In addition, majority of research
in the field sampled adolescents. It goes without saying that adolescence is a period in human
development that warrants continuous study; however, the field could use more research on the
Filipino child and child-rearing practices. I have also noticed that there is a lack of research on
the later phases of human development which, of course, is also an interesting area of study.
Personally, I would like my future researches to be about the experiences, behaviors, and
perceptions of Filipino children and about child-rearing practices in the Philippines. The ultimate
goal is to answer the question on how to raise children to be resilient, physically and mentally
healthy, and well-loved adults. As of writing, my topics of interests direct me to qualitative type
of researches. If given the opportunity, I would like to conduct naturalistic observations in
schools and households. When I have developed the intellectual capacity for it, I would also like
to construct theories on the topics mentioned using a bottom-up approach. When these theories
have been validated, I would like to support them with quantitative analyses because I now
believe that qualitative and quantitative researches are equally important. If there will be
adjustments on research, it is the method in which the research will be conducted that should
adjust accordingly with the topic, not the other way around. The nature of the research subject
should determine if the study is going to be quantitative or qualitative. Of course, this all sounds
very ideal and optimistic, and I know that in the future some of my research goals may not be
feasible or perhaps worth pursuing which is why I am all ears… and eyes and heart and brain.

References
Babakr, Z. H., Mohamedamin, P., & Kakamad, K. (2019). Piaget‟s Cognitive Developmental
Theory: Critical Review . Educaction Quarterly Reviews, 2(3), 517–524. doi:
10.31014/aior.1993.02.03.84
Bretherton, I. (1992). The Origins of Attachment Theory: John Bowlby and Mary
Ainsworth. Developmental Psychology, 28, 759–775.
Cagasan, L. P. (2016). The Development and Validation of a Filipino Social Desirability
Scale. Philippine Journal of Psychology, 49(1), 19–42.
Duell, N., Steinberg, L., Icenogle, G., Chein, J., Chaudhary, N., Di Guinta, L., … Chang, L. (2018).
Age Patterns in Risk Taking Across the World. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 47(5). doi:
10.1007/s10964-017-0752-y
Hellal, P., & Lorch, M. (2013). Darwin's Contribution to the Study of Child Development and
Language Acquisition. Language and History, 53(1), 1–14. doi:
https://doi.org/10.1179/175975310X12640878626147
Lansford, J. E., Sharma, C., Malone, P. S., Woodlief, D., Dodge, K. A., Oburu, P., … Di Giunta, L.
(2014). Corporal Punishment, Maternal Warmth, and Child Adjustment: A Longitudinal Study in
Eight Countries. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 43(4), 670–685. doi:
10.1080/15374416.2014.893518
Lansford, J. E., Godwin, J., Alampay, L. P., Tirado, L. M. U., Zelli, A., Al-Hassan, S. M., …
Tapanya, S. (2015). Mothers, fathers and childrens perceptions of parents expectations about

childrens family obligations in nine countries. International Journal of Psychology, 51(5), 366–
374. doi: 10.1002/ijop.12185
Malberg, N., & Pretorius, I.-M. (2017). Anna Freud's Diagnostic Profile: Then and Now. Journal of
Infant, Child, and Adolescent Psychotherapy, 16(2), 127–130. doi: DOI:
10.1080/15289168.2017.1308129
Papalia, D. E., & Feldman, R. D. (2012). Experience Human Development (12th ed.). New York,
NY: McGraw Hill.
Parcon, A. M. C. (2017). Anxiety-Attachment, Avoidance-Attachment and Gender as Predictors of
Empathy. Philippine Journal of Psychology, 50(1), 77–102.
Peña-alampay, L. S., Dela Cruz, A. D., & Liwanag, M. E. C. undefined. (2003). Research on
Adolescent Development in the Philippines: A Review and Evaluation of the Past Two
Decades. Philippine Journal of Psychology, 36(2). Retrieved from
https://ejournals.ph/article.php?id=1610
Schultz, D. P., & Schultz, S. E. (2011). A History of Modern Psychology (10th ed.). Belmont,
California: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning.
Serafica, F. C. (1975). Clinical child psychology in the Philippines. Journal of Clinical Child
Psychology, 4(2), 53–57. doi: 10.1080/15374417509532650
Vasileva, O., & Balyasnikova, N. (2019). (Re)Introducing Vygotsky's Thought: From HIstorical
Overview to Contemporary Psychology. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1515. doi:
10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01515

Ventura, E. R. (n.d.). An overview of child psychology in the Philippines. Retrieved December 3,
2019, from https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1985-19786-001.

A Synthesis Of Ideas From The History Of Modern Psychology

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from Michelle Shaw

More from Michelle Shaw (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

A Synthesis Of Ideas From The History Of Modern Psychology