1
J. Lambie (2020). Lifespan Development Module
Lifespan Development
Seminar Pack
(you need this pack and need to attend the seminars in order to make your
lifespan diagrams and write your seminar reflection piece)
“Behaviour is a person’s way of changing their circumstances
not proof they have submitted to them”
(George Kelly, 1969)
"It is our choices…that show what we truly are, far more than
our abilities”
(Albus Dumbledore)
2
J. Lambie (2020). Lifespan Development Module
Contents
1. Lifespan Seminars—Making a lifespan diagram .................................................................. 3
Who can I analyse? – (anybody
1
) ......................................................................................... 4
Seminar 1: Practice analysis ................................................................................................ 5
2. Lifespan Theories ................................................................................................................ 8
1.
Erikson’s Theory .......................................................................................................... 8
2.
Attachment Theory ....................................................................................................... 9
3.
Biopsychosocial Theory .............................................................................................. 14
4.
Kohlberg’s Theory ...................................................................................................... 18
5.
Vaillant’s Theory ........................................................................................................ 21
6.
Blair’s Theory of Psychopathy .................................................................................... 23
7.
Baltes’s Theory ........................................................................................................... 25
3. Lifespan Diagrams (Examples) .......................................................................................... 26
Erikson Diagram—Table format example .......................................................................... 28
Attachment diagram--Table Format Example .................................................................... 29
Attachment diagram – Flow Chart Format Example .......................................................... 30
Biopsychosocial Diagram (mixed table and flow chart example) ....................................... 31
Kohlberg Diagram Example .............................................................................................. 32
Vaillant Diagram Example ................................................................................................ 33
Blair Diagrams .................................................................................................................. 34
Blair Psychopath Diagram Example .................................................................................. 35
4. Seminar work you must complete to get 3 extra marks ...................................................... 36
3
J. Lambie (2020). Lifespan Development Module
1. Lifespan Seminars—Making a lifespan diagram
You will be making a Lifespan Diagram in your seminars.
You need to show your diagram and explain it to one of your fellow students, and
get feedback from them about how to improve it
You also need to give feedback on someone else’s diagram (so this can be done in
pairs, or in a group of 3).
You then write a brief reflection on the feedback you received and what you did to
improve your diagram.
You include this reflection in your coursework as an appendix, and including it will
give you 3 bonus marks.
Here is the content of the seminars
Seminar 1: Introduction to the seminar pack and practice analysis of John Lennon
Seminar 2: Bring a case to the seminar – the life story of any real person (information must
be in the public domain). Start analysing your case and start making a diagram.
Seminar 3: Continue making your diagram and show it to a fellow student for feedback. Tell
your fellow student about the life of your case and explain the diagram to them. Make sure
you write down the feedback they give you.
Seminar 4: Finish your diagram based on your fellow student feedback. The tutor can also
give feedback on diagrams, but you need to get peer feedback first. If you completely
finished your diagram in week 3, start work on your second diagram (the second diagram is
not needed for the reflection piece, but is needed for the written coursework).
Seminar 5: Bring a draft of your coursework to the session and the tutor will give some brief
individual feedback. Prepare one specific question about the coursework for the tutor (e.g.
one small paragraph can be read).
4
J. Lambie (2020). Lifespan Development Module
Who can I analyse? – (anybody
1
)
1
You can analyse anyone about whom there is information in the public domain (basically this means
a “famous” person but they don’t have to be very famous – there just has to be material about their
life in the public domain).
The person must be real – you can’t analyse a fictional character
You can’t analyse someone you know personally (this is for ethical reasons)
You can use books or internet sources, youtube interviews, etc. All information should be referenced
and from a reliable source—quotes from the person themselves or people who knew them well are
good sources.
5
J. Lambie (2020). Lifespan Development Module
Seminar 1: Practice analysis
For today’s seminar, we just want to get you thinking about the different factors that might affect
someone’s psychological development. Your task is to read this short biography of John Lennon, and
then answer the questions about it. Discuss these questions in pairs.
John Lennon (1940-1980)
Personality: in his early Lennon seemed quite impulsive—he would often get into fights; he would also
seek out new experiences—he seemed to have low anxiety about trying out new things.
Early life
Lennon was born in war-time England, on 9 October 1940 at Liverpool Maternity Hospital to Julia (née
Stanley) and Alfred Lennon, a merchant seaman who was away at the time of his son's birth. His father
was often away from home but sent regular pay cheques to 9 Newcastle Road, Liverpool, where
Lennon lived with his mother, but the cheques stopped when he went absent without leave in
February 1944. When he eventually came home six months later, he offered to look after the family,
but Julia—by then pregnant with another man's child—rejected the idea. After her sister, Mimi Smith,
twice complained to Liverpool's Social Services, Julia handed the care of Lennon over to her. In July
1946 Lennon's father visited Smith and took his son to Blackpool, secretly intending to emigrate to
New Zealand with him. Julia followed them—with her partner at the time, 'Bobby' Dykins—and after a
heated argument his father forced the five-year-old to choose between them. Lennon twice chose his
father, but as his mother walked away, he began to cry and followed her. It would be 20 years before
he had contact with his father again.
Sadly, young John’s choice did not bear fruit, for on returning to Liverpool, he did not stay with his
mother, but was again taken to live with his Aunt Mimi. There, John was offered the comfortable, and
relatively safe setting of “Mendips,” the Smith’s semi-detached home at 251 Menlove Avenue, located
in the middle-class suburb of Woolton (http://absoluteelsewhere.net/).
By the time he was seven, John had compiled his own series of jokes, drawings, and cartoons,
influenced by ‘Alice in Wonderland’. It was clear that John Lennon was an intelligent, artistic-minded
child, but his talents were lost on the straight-laced, practical Aunt Mimi. At primary school (6-11
years) John was very rebellious and fought with a lot with other boys (http://absoluteelsewhere.net/).
Despite Lennon’s rebelliousness, his intelligence combined with a minimum of study saw him through
the "11-plus" test which earned him a place at Grammar School. Passing the 11-plus in the 1950s
equates to having an IQ above about 115.
In September 1980, Lennon commented about his family and his rebellious nature:
“Part of me would like to be accepted by all facets of society and not be this loudmouthed lunatic
poet/musician. But I cannot be what I am not ... I was the one who all the other boys' parents—
including Paul's father—would say, 'Keep away from him'... The parents instinctively recognised I was
a troublemaker, meaning I did not conform and I would influence their children, which I did. I did my
best to disrupt every friend's home ... Partly out of envy that I didn't have this so-called home ... but I
did... There were five women that were my family. Five strong, intelligent, beautiful women, five
sisters. One happened to be my mother. [She] just couldn't deal with life. She was the youngest and
she had a husband who ran away to sea and the war was on and she couldn't cope with me, and I
ended up living with her elder sister. Now those women were fantastic ... And that was my first
6
J. Lambie (2020). Lifespan Development Module
feminist education ... I would infiltrate the other boys minds. I could say, "Parents are not gods
because I don't live with mine and, therefore, I know.”
His mother bought him his first guitar in 1956, an inexpensive Gallotone Champion acoustic for which
she "lent" her son five pounds and ten shillings on the condition that the guitar be delivered to her
own house, and not Mimi's, knowing well that her sister was not supportive of her son's musical
aspirations. As Mimi was sceptical of his claim that he would be famous one day, she hoped he would
grow bored with music, often telling him, "The guitar's all very well, John, but you'll never make a
living out of it". On 15 July 1958, when Lennon was 17 years old, his mother, walking home after
visiting the Smiths' house, was struck by a car and killed.
Later life
Lennon was a witty, creative, and at times angry young man, who was desperate for success.
Lennon’s band, The Beatles (1962-1970), became the most successful pop group of all time,
and John was acknowledged as a highly talented singer and song-writer; his songs with
McCartney had a massive cultural impact.
He was addicted to heroin in 1969, saying he took it because he was “in so much pain” at the
way people around him were treating him and his second wife Yoko. (Wenner; Lennon
Remembers). Some say the heroin made him withdraw creatively from the Beatles in 1969
during the Let it Be sessions.
(In the short term, heroin increases dopamine release and leads to a rush of pleasure. It also
reduces pain by acting on the CNS. Long term it affects sleep and appetite, and can lead to
addiction, depression, and social isolation (Abadinsky & Abadinksy, 2014.)
In 1970 he wrote a song called “Mother” in which he sang “Mother you had me but I never
had you/ Father you left me but I never left you”.
Lennon didn’t always treat his first wife Cynthia very well, and wrote the song “Jealous Guy”
(1971) seemingly to apologise to the women he had hurt in his life. (“I was feeling
insecure/You might not love me anymore/ I was shivering inside/ Oh I didn't mean to hurt
you/ I'm sorry that I made you cry/ Oh my I didn't want to hurt you/ I'm just a jealous guy”).
See also, “Woman” (1980).
He was a devoted father to his second son Sean (b. 1975), but was not very involved with his
first son, Julian (b. 1963). Julian said that after John left his mother in 1968, “I probably saw
him, after he disappeared when I was five…a total of ten times before he was murdered. I
didn’t really know him”. (BBC Radio 4, 2011).
Lennon was murdered in 1980.
Turn to next page for the questions.
7
J. Lambie (2020). Lifespan Development Module
QUESTIONS:
1.
What significant life events did he undergo, and what might their psychological effects
be?
2.
Are there any examples of the influence of early social relationships on later
relationships and later ways of behaving?
3.
What are some of Lennon’s psychological attitudes and beliefs? How does he view
himself? How does he view other people?
4.
What biological factors might be affecting Lennon’s development? (e.g. think of IQ,
abilities, personality factors – insofar as those may have a genetic component; you
could also think of the biological effects of drugs and alcohol)
8
J. Lambie (2020). Lifespan Development Module
2. Lifespan Theories
1. Erikson’s Theory
Key source references:
Erikson, E. (1963). Childhood and society (2
nd
ed.) London: Vintage. Chapter 7: Eight Ages of
Man.
Crain, W. (2005). Theories of Development: Concepts and Applications. New Jersey: Pearson.
(5th Edition). Chapter 12: Erikson and the Eight Stages of Life.
Source:
https://theoriesinpsychologyf10.wikispaces.com
9
J. Lambie (2020). Lifespan Development Module
2. Attachment Theory
Key papers in the development of the theory:
Bowlby (1969; 1973) came up with the original attachment theory and the concept of the internal
working model.
Ainsworth et al (1978) came up with the three infant attachment types of secure, insecure-avoidant,
and insecure ambivalent, and the “strange situation” measure of attachment
Main and Solomon (1986) came up with the fourth infant attachment type: disorganized
George, Kaplan & Main (1985): Adult attachment interview-- measured four types of attachment in
adulthood: secure, dismissing, preoccupied, and unresolved (fearful).
Bartholomew & Horowitz (1991) used the same four attachment types as Mary Main but organized
them in terms of two dimensions based on whether the model of self or other was positive or
negative:
Brennan, Clark and Shaver (1998) reconceptualised this as two dimensions of anxiety and avoidance in
relation to attachment:
These can be viewed
as different internal
working models
10
J. Lambie (2020). Lifespan Development Module
Here is another version of the model which I drew with Friends characters:
Adult Attachment Interview (see next page)
George, Kaplan & Main (1985)
See Hesse (2008) for how to do analyse someone using this.
This is a way to classify people based on the way they talk about their own parents (Adult
Attachment Interview).
Note, that this is not based on whether people say their parents were nice or not!
It is based on how coherently people describe their parents and their experiences of being parented,
whether or not these experiences were positive or negative.
You can use this technique if you have some discourse from your person where they talk or write
about their parents and their childhood. This might come from an autobiography or from an
interview.
High fear of
abandonment
Low fear of
abandonment
Low fear of
intimacy
High fear of
intimacy
SECURE
PREOCCUPIED
DISMISSING
FEARFUL
11
J. Lambie (2020). Lifespan Development Module
ADULT ATTACHMENT SCORING GUIDE
Use this when a person is talking about attachment experiences with parents, lovers or
children. You need quotes from the person to use this method.
The person does not need to tick every bullet point for each attachment type – just see which
one of the four they most closely resemble.
Secure-Autonomous (F)
High Coherence – the account stays on topic and descriptions and evaluations of
attachment-related experiences are consistent, whether the experiences appear to
have been favourable or unfavourable.
Meta-cognitive monitoring – speaker may comment on contradictions in their
account, on their own personal biases, on representational diversity (different
people have different views of the same event).
Comments on missing, needing and depending on others.
States that attachment experiences have affected his/her development.
Seems at ease with imperfections in the self.
Explicit or implicit forgiveness of or compassion for parents.
Can flexibly change view of person or event.
Sense of balance, proportion, or humour.
Acknowledges flawed behaviour of self.
Dismissing (Ds)
Low Coherence: positive accounts of history are unsupported or contradicted by
episodes recounted.
Idealization – discrepancy between high valuation of the parent and active or
inferred evidence to the contrary (e.g. “wonderful” Mum, plus evidence of extreme
rejection).
Insistence of lack of memory of childhood.
Attitudes to attachment– Self positively described as strong, independent or
normal.
12
J. Lambie (2020). Lifespan Development Module
Little articulation of hurt, distress or feelings of needing to depend on others.
Minimizes descriptions of negative experiences. May emphasize fun activities with
parents, or presents.
Attention focussed away from attachment history or its implications.
May express contempt for other people, or for events usually considered sad (e.g.
loss or funerals).
Preoccupied (E)
Low Coherence: excessively long answers, vague terms, the present may be
brought in when asked about the past, irrelevant people or facts may be brought at
odd times.
Angry preoccupation with experiences of being parented
Attitudes to attachment– May attempt to involve interviewer in agreement with
parents’ faults; may confusedly praise parents, but with oscillations suggestive of
ambivalence.
Unbalanced, excessive blaming or either parents or self. Indecisive, e.g. oscillate
between positive and negative evaluations of parent.
May offer authoritative psychological “insights” into the motives of self or others.
The lexicon of “pop” psychology may appear with excessive frequency.
Unresolved (U)
Unresolved loss or unresolved abuse; e.g. when discussing loss: chronic mourning
–grief goes on too long or failed mourning—grief does not seem to occur.
During discussions of loss or abuse, the individual shows striking lapses in the
monitoring of reasoning or discourse, e.g. the individual may briefly indicate a
belief that a dead person is still alive in the physical sense, or that this person was
killed by a childhood thought.
Statements indicating failed protection, being in danger and being unable to
receive care;
Statements indicating being out of control, extreme lack of emotion regulation,
unresolved fear, unresolved distress
13
J. Lambie (2020). Lifespan Development Module
Analysing someone’s attachment type:
1. Look at their behaviour in relationships: (a) do they seek or avoid closeness? (b) do they worry
about abandonment or not? These are 2 separate dimensions and can allow you to class someone in
one of four categories according to the Brennan et al (1998) model.
2. Look at how they talk about relationships: are they coherent and reflective? Do they acknowledge
flaws in themselves?; do they idealize a parent or do they have a realistic view (whether good or bad)?
Do they deny negative emotions and wish to be seen as strong? Are they worryingly preoccupied with
relationships? Are they fearful and express failed protection in childhood? Score according to AAI
model (Hesse, 2008).
3. Look at how they view themselves and others in relationships (internal working model). Score
using Bartholomew and Horowitz (1991) model—which of these descriptions do they fit best?
Secure
It is easy for me to become emotionally close to others. I am comfortable
depending on them and having them depend on me. I don’t worry about being
alone or having others not accept me.
Dismissing
I am comfortable without close emotional relationships. It is very important to me
to feel independent and self-sufficient, and I prefer not to depend on others or
have others depend on me.
Preoccupied I want to be completely emotionally intimate with others, but I often find that
others are reluctant to get as close as I would like. I am uncomfortable being
without close relationships, but I sometimes worry that others don’t value me as
much as I value them.
Fearful
I am uncomfortable getting close to others. I want emotionally close relationships,
but I find it difficult to trust others completely, or to depend on them. I worry that
I will be hurt if I allow myself to become too close to others.
14
J. Lambie (2020). Lifespan Development Module
3. Biopsychosocial Theory
There are several variations on the biopsychosocial model of lifespan development.
E.g.
Rutter, M., & Rutter, M. (1993). Developing minds: Challenge and continuity across the life span. Basic
books.
Gottlieb, G. (2007). Probabilistic epigenesis. Developmental Science, 10(1), 1-11.
Bronfenbrenner, U., & Morris, P. A. (2007). The bioecological model of human
development. Handbook of child psychology, 1.
Sameroff, A. (2010). A unified theory of development: A dialectic integration of nature and nurture.
Child Development, 81(1), 6-22.
McAdams, D. P., & Olson, B. D. (2010). Personality development: Continuity and change over the life
course. Annual review of psychology, 61, 517-542.
But they all share the key feature of the bio-psycho-social approach to lifespan development, which is
that the three levels ALL INTERACT with each other OVER TIME.
See this figure from Gottlieb (1991; 2007)—see how all the levels interact. There is circular causality in
that influences can go from top down or from bottom up.
MIND &
15
J. Lambie (2020). Lifespan Development Module
Here is a model from Sameroff (2010), which is based on Bronfenbrenner’s (1994) model.
The model above is a cross-section at one time, so for lifespan development you would have to
imagine it moving across time (longitudinally), see below….
The above diagram shows Sameroff’s (2010) view that the individual person (made up of
psychology and biology) becomes more important relative to social influences over time (see
how the middle circles get bigger).
The model also shows a good way to conceptualize social influences at several levels from
parent to school to nation to geopolitical culture.
16
J. Lambie (2020). Lifespan Development Module
Here is my attempt at drawing a diagram illustrating the biopsychosocial model of Rutter and Rutter
(1993):
And
If you are not sure how the interactions between the different factors happen, have a look at this
wonderful passage from Haidt (2012, pp. 326-328) – NEXT PAGE.
17
J. Lambie (2020). Lifespan Development Module
Let’s imagine a pair of fraternal twins, a brother and sister raised together in the
same home. During their nine months together in their mother’s womb, the
brother’s genes were busy constructing a brain that was a bit higher than average
in its tendency to feel pleasure when exposed to radically new experiences. The
sister’s genes were busy making a brain with the opposite settings.
The two siblings grew up in the same house and attend the same schools, but they
gradually create different worlds for themselves. Even in nursery school, their
behaviour causes adults to treat them differently. One study found that women
who called themselves liberals as adults had been rated by their nursery school
teachers as having traits consistent with threat insensitivity and [high] novelty-
seeking [Block & Block, 2006]. Future liberals were described as being more curious,
verbal, and self-reliant, but also more assertive and aggressive, less obedient and
neat. So if we could observe our fraternal twins in their first years of schooling,
we’d find teachers responding differently to them. Some teachers might be drawn
to the creative but rebellious little girl; other might crack down on her as in unruly
brat, while praising her brother as a model student.
But dispositional traits are just the lowest of the three levels [of personality],
according to McAdams [McAdams & Pals, 2006]. The second level is our
“characteristic adaptations”. These are traits that emerge as we grow [e.g. motives,
values]. They are called adaptations because people develop them in response to
the specific environments and challenges that they happen to face. For example,
let’s follow out twins into adolescence, and let’s suppose they attend a fairly strict
and well-ordered school. The brother fits in well, but the sister engages in constant
battles with the teachers. She becomes angry and socially disengaged. These are
now parts of her personality—her characteristic adaptations—but they would not
have developed had she gone to a more progressive school.
By the time they reach high school and begin to take an interest in politics, the two
siblings have chosen different activities (the sister joins the debate team in part for
the opportunity to travel; the brother gets more involved with his family’s church)
and amassed different friends (the sister joins the goths; the brother joins the
jocks). The sister chooses to go to college in New York city, where she majors in
Latin American studies and finds herself a calling as an advocate for the children of
illegal immigrants… In 2008, she is electrified by Barack Obama’s concern for the
poor and his promise of change.
The brother, in contrast, has no interest in moving far away to a big, dirty, and
threatening city. He chooses to stay close to family and friends by attending the
local branch of the state university. He earns a degree in business and then works
for a local bank, gradually rising to a high position. He becomes a pillar of his church
and his community….the most common moral themes in his life are personal
responsibility…and loyalty to the many groups and teams to which he belongs. He
resonates to [Republican] John McCain’s campaign slogan, “Country First”.
Things didn’t have to work out this way. On the day they were born, the sister was
not predestined to vote for Obama; the brother was not guaranteed to become a
Republican. But their different sets of genes gave them different first drafts of their
minds, which led them down different paths, through different life experiences, and
into different moral subcultures.
BIO
SOCIAL
response
to PSYCHO
PSYCHO
response
to SOCIAL
PSYCHO
built by
BIO
BIO leads
to
PSYCHO,
affected
by SOCIAL
PSYCHO
chooses
SOCIAL
PSYCHO
chooses
SOCIAL
PSYCHO
response
to SOCIAL
18
J. Lambie (2020). Lifespan Development Module
4. Kohlberg’s Theory
Kohlberg, L. (1975). The cognitive-developmental approach to moral education. The Phi Delta
Kappan, 56, 670-677.
Colby, A.,
Kohlberg, L., Gibbs, J., Lieberman. M., Fischer, K., & Saltzstein, H.
(1983). A
Longitudinal Study of Moral Judgment. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child
Development., 48(1/2), 1-124.
Definition of Moral Stages (from Kohlberg, 1975, p. 671)
I. Preconventional level
At this level, the child is responsive to cultural rules and labels of good and bad, right or wrong, but interprets
these labels either in terms of the physical or the hedonistic consequences of action (punishment, reward,
exchange of favors) or in terms of the physical power of those who enunciate the rules and labels. The level is
divided into the following two stages:
Stage 1: The punishment-and-obedience orientation. The physical consequences of action determine its
goodness or badness, regardless of the human meaning or value of these consequences. Avoidance of
punishment and unquestioning deference to power are valued in their own right, not in terms of respect for an
underlying moral order supported by punishment and authority (the latter being Stage 4).
Stage 2: The instrumental-relativist orientation. Right action consists bf that which instrumentally satisfies one's
own needs and occasionally the needs of others. Human relations are viewed in terms like those of the
marketplace. Elements of fairness, of reciprocity, and of equal sharing are present, but they are always
interpreted in a physical, pragmatic way. Reciprocity is a matter of "you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours,"
not of loyalty, gratitude, or justice.
II. Conventional level
At this level, maintaining the expectations of the individual's family, group, or nation is perceived as valuable in
its own right, regardless of immediate and obvious consequences. The attitude is not only one of conformity to
personal expectations and social order, but of loyalty to it, of actively maintaining, supporting, and justifying the
order, and of identifying with the persons or group involved in it. At this level, there are the following two
stages:
19
J. Lambie (2020). Lifespan Development Module
Stage 3: The interpersonal concordance or "good boy--nice girl" orientation. Good behavior is that which
pleases or helps others and is approved by them. There is much conformity to stereotypical images of what is
majority or "natural" behavior. Behavior is frequently judged by intention -- "he means well" becomes important
for the first time. One earns approval by being "nice."
Stage 4: The "law and order"orientation. There is orientation toward authority, fixed rules, and the
maintenance of the social order. Right behavior consists of doing one's duty, showing respect for authority, and
maintaining the given social order for its own sake.
III. Postconventional, autonomous, or principled level
At this level, there is a clear effort to define moral values and principles that have validity and application apart
from the authority of the groups or persons holding these principles and apart from the individual's own
identification with these groups. This level also has two stages:
Stage 5: The social-contract, legalistic orientation, generally with utilitarian overtones. Right action tends to be
defined in terms of general individual rights and standards which have been critically examined and agreed upon
by the whole society. There is a clear awareness of the relativism of personal values and opinions and a
corresponding emphasis upon procedural rules for reaching consensus. Aside from what is constitutionally and
democratically agreed upon, the right is a matter of personal "values" and "opinion." The result is an emphasis
upon the "legal point of view," but with an emphasis upon the possibility of changing law in terms of rational
considerations of social utility (rather than freezing it in terms of Stage 4 "law and order"). Outside the legal
realm, free agreement and contract is the binding element of obligation. This is the "official" morality of the
American government and constitution.
Stage 6: The universal-ethical-principle orientation. Right is defined by the decision of conscience in accord with
self-chosen ethical principles appealing to logical comprehensiveness, universality, and consistency. These
principles are abstract and ethical (the Golden Rule, the categorical imperative); they are not concrete moral
rules like the Ten Commandments. At heart, these are universal principles of justice, of the reciprocity and
equality of human rights, and of respect for the dignity of human beings as individual persons
Notes on Kohlberg’s theory
Kohlberg’s theory is about moral reasoning (why do you think that is right or wrong?), not on moral
behaviour.
So if I help a friend in need, that tells you nothing about what stage of moral development I am at
(according to Kohlberg). You have to say: why did you help her?, and score the reasons.
For example, let’s say someone said: “I think we should help refugees”. And you said why? Their
answers could then be scored on Kohlberg’s stages, e.g: We should help refugees because….
Stage 1. (Punishment): “Otherwise other countries might get cross and punish us”
Stage 2. (Self-interest, and fair exchange): “It’s in our best interests as a country to take them; they are good
for the economy”
Stage 3. (Pleasing other people): “We need to be seen to be kind”
Stage 4. (Law and order): “Our laws say that we should do so”
Stage 5. (Social contract): “We agreed with other countries that we should collectively help as many people
who need asylum as possible”
Stage 6. (Universal principles of justice, equality of human rights)
“All human beings without exception have a right not to be tortured and to seek refuge from persecution”.
20
J. Lambie (2020). Lifespan Development Module
Some specific examples of where Kohlberg placed certain people and rules
Person or rule
Stage
Comments
Adolf Hitler
Stage 1
(with Stage
4 rules)
According to Kohlberg “prinicples” are universalizable, but “rules”
are not. “Hitler chose the rule “exterminate the enemies of the
Aryan race” but such a rule is not a universalizable principle” (p.
673n). Deference to power and punishment is a Stage 1 position.
No racist views can ever be Stage 5 or 6, since racist views are not
universalizable. Some countries enshrine racist laws at level 4, but
racism is normally Stage 1 or 2.
Richard Nixon
Stage 2/4
“No public word or deed of Nixon ever rose above stage 4, the “law
and order stage”. His last comments in the White House were of
wonderment that the…Congress could turn on him after so many
Stage 2 exchanges of favours in getting them elected” (Kohlberg,
1975, p. 674n).
The Ten
Commandments
Stage 4
Stage 4 because it just asks you to follow rules without question
The US Constitution
Stage 5
Stage 5 because a series of individual rights agreed on by the whole
society
The Golden Rule: the
principle of treating
others as one's self
would wish to be
treated.
Stage 6
Found in the Christian New Testament but also in Confucianism,
Buddhism, Hinduism, and other religions—Stage 6 because it is a
principle that is universalizable (everyone can agree with it)
Kant’s Categorical
Imperative
Stage 6
Two versions of Kant’s categorical imperative:
“Treat others an end, never merely as a means”
“Choose only as you would be willing to have everyone choose in
your situation”
Rawl’s Veil of
ignorance
Stage 6
Veil of ignorance: Imagine you don’t know what position in society
you will be born in or what your attributes are. What would be fair
under this “veil of ignorance”?
Martin Luther King
Stage 6
“Now is the time to make justice a reality for all of God's children…I
have a dream that one day this nation will rise up, live out the true
meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that
all men are created equal."
Tips for Applying Kohlberg’s Theory:
Look at how your person seems to talk about right and wrong: NOTE this is a theory about speech and
language rather than behaviour
Do they justify things in terms of punishment (stage 1), what’s in it for me? (stage 2), pleasing other
people (stage 3), following authority (stage 4), the greatest good for the greatest number (stage 5), or
respecting the rights of every individual person (stage 6)
For example, if someone wrote on twitter that some behaviour was wrong because it was “bad for
society” – that would be stage 4 or 5; if they said it was wrong because “it failed to respect the dignity of
all individuals involved” that would be stage 6.
Remember to use quotes from the person (or about the person) or specific examples of their
behaviour to illustrate their moral views.
Did they move from stage 1 as a child up to stage 6 by the time they were an adult? Do they fit this
pattern or not?
21
J. Lambie (2020). Lifespan Development Module
5. Vaillant’s Theory
Reading:
Vaillant, G. E. (2011). Involuntary coping mechanisms: a psychodynamic perspective.
Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience, 13(3), 366–370.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3182012/
Maturing defence mechanisms across the lifespan
Some definitions of difference defences
Denial
–
Refusal to believe that something is happening
Projection
–
Place your own uncomfortable feelings onto others; e.g. someone who is
worried about their own bravery calls everyone around them a “coward”
Passive aggression/ Turning against the self
–
Vaillant puts these 2 together: they are a way of minimizing aggression by
being indirect or by acting on yourself instead of another
–
E.g. teasing, sulking, procrastinating, self-harm
–
Vaillant (1993, p. 51) writes that “downtrodden privates and adolescents [are]
experts at passive aggression”
Acting out
–
Impulsive action without reflection; reduces anxiety by reducing the time
spend worrying about consequences
Isolation (see also Intellectualization)
–
Splitting feelings and ideas so that the ideas are ‘isolated’ and become
unemotional; e.g. using the phrase “collateral damage” takes the emotional
content out of the idea of people being killed by bombs
Repression
–
Ideas that would lead to negative emotion are kept out of consciousness
Reaction Formation
–
If an idea produces a negative emotion, you can reverse the idea to give a
positive emotion: e.g. you hate someone, but are excessively nice to them to
defend against your hatred
Altruism
–
You fulfil the needs of others instead of fulfilling your own needs (which may be
anxiety-provoking)
Sublimation
–
You replace an unacceptable wish with a similar more acceptable one, e.g. you
channel your aggression into fighting social injustice; you use acting or music to
express strong feelings
Suppression
–
Dealing with distress by intentionally choosing not to think about certain
anxiety-provoking ideas
22
J. Lambie (2020). Lifespan Development Module
Vaillant’s levels of maturing defence mechanisms
Level
Age
Description
Example
Psychotic
Young children
(or in psychosis
or dreams)
Denial
You refuse to believe a loved one has
died
Distortion
You convince yourself you won a game
when actually you lost
Immature
Adolescent
Acting out
You smash up your room when you are
angry
Passive
aggression
You threaten to harm yourself if your
girlfriend leaves you
Dissociation
You try to separate yourself from your
feelings – e.g. using drugs, alcohol,
splitting your personality
Projection
You feel cowardly so you accuse other
people of being cowards
Intermediate
(neurotic)
Young adult
Displacement
Your boss tells you off and you go home
and shout at your children
Isolation
You feel no emotion when you kill a
mouse; You get dumped and tell yourself
it’s all for the best as you can now get on
with your work.
Repression
You feel anxious around older men but
you have forgotten an incident in which
such a man abused you
Reaction
formation
You find your neighbour really annoying
so you are excessively nice to them
Mature
Mature Adult
Altruism
You channel your own anxieties into
helping other people
Suppression
You choose to consciously not think
about a worrying event while at work
(but can choose to process it later).
Sublimation
You channel your aggression, anxiety, or
sexual frustration into playing football, or
writing a song, or dancing, etc.
Humour
You find the funny side of negative events
23
J. Lambie (2020). Lifespan Development Module
6. Blair’s Theory of Psychopathy
This theory is specific to psychopathy or conduct disorders. You can use it if your person
seems to meet the criteria for either of these conditions (even if they haven’t been formally
“diagnosed”) but you will need to show that they meet the criteria.
Reading:
Blair, R. J. R. (2013). The neurobiology of psychopathic traits in youths. Nature Reviews
Neuroscience, 14(11), 786-799. Available electronically via Reading Lists @Anglia for this
module.
Diagram:
Explanation (Blair, 2013):
“This model shows the aetiological (genetic and environmental), neural, cognitive and
behavioural aspects of conduct disorder.
Genetic factors reduce amygdala activation, specifically in response to distress cues, and
consequently reduce emotional empathy. Genetic factors may also influence striatal and
ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC) responsiveness to prediction error and expected value
information and thereby lead to impaired decision making, but this has yet to be empirically
demonstrated. Owing to the extensive interconnections between the amygdala, striatum and
vmPFC, early dysfunction in one area is likely to be associated with dysfunction in the others.
Perinatal factors, such as maternal substance abuse during pregnancy, can affect the
functional integrity of these regions. All of these factors may lead to similar dysfunction at
Psychopathy
(low anxiety;
low empathy)
Conduct
disorder with
high anxiety
& anger
24
J. Lambie (2020). Lifespan Development Module
the cognitive level and may result in callous–unemotional traits and in increased antisocial
behaviour and instrumental aggression. Impairments in decision making increase the risk
that these individuals fail to achieve their goals, become frustrated and demonstrate
frustration-based reactive aggression. Specific genetic polymorphisms as well as exposure to
trauma, violence and neglect can result in increased amygdala responsiveness, specifically
to threat cues. Such increased responsiveness increases threat sensitivity and the likelihood
that a threat triggers reactive aggression (as opposed to freezing or escape behaviour).
Increased amygdala responsiveness is also associated with an increased risk for anxiety
disorders. Thus, patients meeting criteria for conduct disorder can have callous–unemotional
traits or high levels of anxiety: callous–unemotional traits are associated with reduced
amygdala responses to threat, whereas anxiety is associated with increased amygdala
responses to threat.
This suggests that there are at least two forms of conduct disorder.
The first is referred to here as 'conduct disorder with psychopathic traits' and includes
behaviours marked in red.
The second is known as 'conduct disorder associated with anxiety and emotional lability'
and includes the behaviours marked in blue (also see
Box 1
). Both forms are likely to show
under-regulated responses to social provocation (marked in green).” (Blair, 2013).
Note: The colours are for the boxes in the last column labelled “behavioural”. Reading from
top to bottom down this column, the first 3 are red, the next one green, and the last 2 blue.
Tips for Applying Blair’s Theory
Start by focussing on the cognitive and behavioural factors from the diagram above.
Does your person have “reduced empathy” and “callous, unemotional traits”, etc? Give
examples of these. Remember to use quotes from the person (or about the person)
or specific examples of their behaviour to illustrate reduced empathy
You won’t know the neural factors in your person (unless they have had a brain scan),
but you can infer them from the cognitive profile.
Likewise, you won’t know the genetic factors for your specific person, but you can infer
them from the theory
You may have some evidence you can find for “perinatal factors” and “trauma,
violence and neglect”. Although notice that in Blair’s theory having violence in your
childhood is not a feature of the psychopath (callously aggressive), but of “anxiously
aggressive” conduct disorders (see lecture for more details).
See the example diagram later in this pack
25
J. Lambie (2020). Lifespan Development Module
7. Baltes’s Theory
Baltes, Lindenberger, & Staudinger (1998). Life-span theory in developmental psychology. In
Lerner, R.M. (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology (5
th
ed., pp. 1028-1143). New York Wiley.
Paul and Margaret Baltes are famous for a theory of aging, but they also have a general
theory of development across the whole lifespan, called the selection, optimization, and
compensation theory (SOC). Basically, at all times of your life, you are trying to deal with gains
and losses due to both biology and culture
26
J. Lambie (2020). Lifespan Development Module
3. Lifespan Diagrams (Examples)
There are two main types: tables or flow charts. You can use either (you don’t need to do
both—e.g. if doing an attachment diagram, either do a table or a flow chart).
Whichever type you choose, you need to show change across the time of someone’s life—i.e.
the diagram must be longitudinal.
Before you start on your diagram, you may want to practice making either a table or a flow
chart in Word or Powerpoint
Both Word and Powerpoint have “insert table” or “insert shapes” functions.
For flow charts use text boxes (or shapes) and arrows.
Finished flow charts or tables can be cut and pasted into other documents, so you can cut and
paste it into your final coursework.
Table Format
Age
Life Data
Application of theory
Flow chart format
27
J. Lambie (2020). Lifespan Development Module
On the next few pages you can see examples of Lifespan Diagrams.
You need to make at least one diagram in the seminars (and get feedback on it)
You need to make two diagrams for the coursework – one for each theory.
The diagrams below are based on the life of Joe Bloggs.
This is Joe. I made up Joe’s life. Of course, you need to analyse a REAL PERSON.
ooooweeeee
Joe Bloggs
(any resemblance to Mr Poopybutthole is pure coincidence)
28
J. Lambie (2020). Lifespan Development Module
Erikson Diagram—Table format example
Stage
Life Data
Application of theory
Trust vs
mistrust
His mother was described as
“neglectful”; Joe expressed views
later in life that “you can’t trust
people” (Bloggs, 1995, p. 34)
Sense of mistrust rather than trust. There
is no evidence of good quality interactions
with his mother in early life.
Autonomy
vs shame
and doubt
Joe’s neighbour found him asleep in
their coal shed as a toddler, and his
Mum didn’t know he was there
(Bloggs, 1995, p. 12)
Joe’s mother sounds under-controlling
rather than over-controlling—although a
sense of autonomy is good, a total lack of
boundaries is not a “favourable ratio of
autonomous will over shame and doubt”
(Erikson, 1963, p. 244), and so Joe may feel
some anxiety exerting his will (doubt)
Initiative vs
guilt
Joe’s father told him he was a “very
bad boy” when he drew with pens
on the kitchen wall and smacked him
with a ruler. Bloggs recalls several
incidents like this as a young child
(Bloggs, 1995; pp. 17-18).
Joe may have internalized a sense of guilt
and had a strict superego (see Erikson,
1963, p. 231).
Industry vs
inferiority
Joe did badly in academic subjects as
school but was very good at music
and was in the school football team
There is a mixed picture: academically, Joe
felt inferior, but with regard to music and
sport Joe developed a strong work ethic
and a sense of self-esteem. Overall, there
is a favourable ratio of industry over
inferiority.
Identity vs
role
confusion
Joe was confused about his social
identity and changed from being a
punk to a mod in his teens; he had a
crisis of religious belief at age 15 and
decided he didn’t believe in God
anymore and became a committed
atheist; his sexual identity was quite
stable throughout his teen years.
Some role confusion (social identity) and
crisis (religious identity), but also some
“identity achievement” (Marcia, 1966)
after crisis (i.e. new religious identity).
Intimacy vs
isolation
Joe married Martha at age 22 and
they got divorced when he was 27.
Martha described him as “difficult to
get close to” (Green, 2006, p. 172)
Although being married for 5 years, it is
not clear that Joe achieved a real sense of
intimacy in his marriage; he seems
emotionally isolated at this stage.
Generativity
vs
stagnation
Joe had a daughter with Martha, but
after the divorce he hardly saw her
(Green, 2006, p. 180). In his 40s his
did get involved in charity work.
Despite the charity work, there is not much
evidence that Joe really focuses on other
people and his neglect of his daughter
suggests stagnation rather than
generativity
Ego
integrity vs
despair
At age 70 Joe said “I’ve had a good
life, but I’m not ready to die, there’s
too many things I need to sort out…”
(youtube interview; Jones, 2014).
Conflictual points here—“good life”
suggests integration, but “too many things
I need to sort out” suggests despair.
Overall, despite some positives there is not
a full sense of integrity.
29
J. Lambie (2020). Lifespan Development Module
Attachment diagram--Table Format Example
Age
Life data
Application of theory
0-2
years
Not a lot known about Joe’s infancy,
but mother described as “neglectful”
by a neighbour (Jones, 2014, youtube)
Possible insecure attachment, as this
comment may reflect low parental sensitivity
3-5
Joe said he was “left alone in my room”
and “my mother never played with me”
(Bloggs, 1995, p. 26; p. 28).
Low parental engagement may lead to
insecure-avoidant attachment type
(Ainsworth et al, 1978), and dismissing IWM
6-10
At primary school: “I loved football and
had a lot of friends, but I never had a
best friend” (Bloggs, 1995, p. 40).
Sociability may indicate a secure attachment,
but lack of best friend also consistent with
insecure-avoidant style, as fear of intimacy is
Chia sẻ với bạn bè của bạn: |