Trends in Cognitive Sciences
Development as a dynamic system
Section snippets
Development as a dynamic system
The idea of emergence – the coming into existence of new forms through ongoing processes intrinsic to the system – are not new to developmental psychology. Developmental theorists such as Kuo, Oyama and Gottlieb have long emphasized the probabilistic, epigenetic nature of ontogenetic processes. Biologists and psychologists such as Waddington, von Bertalanffy, Lewin and Gesell have envisioned behaviour and development as morphogenetic fields that unify multiple, underlying components. But only
Multicausality
The first assumption of the dynamic approach is that developing organisms are complex systems composed of very many individual elements embedded within, and open to, a complex environment. As in many other complex systems in nature, such systems can exhibit coherent behaviour: the parts are coordinated without an executive agent or a programme that produces the organized pattern. Rather, the coherence is generated solely in the relationships between the organic components and the constraints
Nested timescales
The second key assumption of the dynamics systems approach is that behavioural change occurs over different timescales. Neural excitation, for example, happens in milliseconds. Reaction times are of the order of hundreds of milliseconds. People learn skills after hours, days and months of practice. Developmental change occurs over weeks, months and years, and evolution over a much longer time period. Traditionally, psychologists have considered action, learning, development and evolution as
The A-not-B error
We present an example of how we have used the dynamic concepts of multicausality and nested time to revisit a classic issue in developmental psychology. The question originally posed by Piaget [19] was ‘when do infants acquire the concept of object permanence?’ He devised a simple object-hiding task, which has been adopted by several generations of researchers. The experimenter hides a tantalizing toy under a lid at location A and the infant reaches for the toy. This A-location trial is
Task dynamics
The dynamic field simulates the decisions of infants to reach to location A or B by integrating, over time, the various influences on that decision. The field model is neurally inspired, of the type described and characterized analytically by Amari [27], but it is abstract and not anatomically specific. The model has a one-dimensional activation field, defining a parameter space of potential activation states (in this case the locations of targets A and B). Inputs are represented by their
Developmental dynamics
The A-not-B error has been important to developmental theory because it is tightly linked to a few months in infancy. However, the neural field model suggests that the dynamics that create the error in infants are basic processes involved in goal-directed actions at all ages. Indeed, by changing the task, researchers can make perseverative errors come and go in older children and adults, just as in infants. Recently, Spencer and colleagues [30] invented an A-not-B task that was suitable for
Implications of a dynamic approach
A dynamic systems theory of development helps to resolve an apparent theoretical contradiction. At a very global level, the constraints imposed by our biological heritage and by the similarities in human environments seem to result in similar developmental outcomes. All intact human infants learn to walk, to progress from making the A-not-B error to not making it, to speak their native language and to form intense social relationships. But when one looks at the details of development, the
Conclusion
The major problem for a theory of development is to explain how to get something more from something less. At multiple levels of analysis at multiple timescales, many components open to influence from the external world interact and in so doing yield coherent higher-order behavioural forms that then feedback on the system, and change that system. In human development, every neural event, every reach, every smile and every social encounter sets the stage for the next and the real-time causal
References (38)
Dynamical approaches to cognitive science
Trends Cogn. Sci.
(2000)The role of target distinctiveness in infant perseverative reaching
J. Exp. Child Psychol.
(2001)- et al.
A longitudinal study of basal cortisol in infants: intra-individual variability, circadian rhythm, and developmental trends
Infant Behav. Dev.
(2002) Principles of dynamic pattern formation and change for a science of human behavior
- et al.
Hidden skills: a dynamic systems analysis of treadmill stepping during the first year
Monogr. Soc. Res. Child Dev.
(1991) - et al.
A Dynamic Systems Approach to Development: Applications
(1993) - et al.
A Dynamic Systems Approach to the Development of Cognition and Action
(1994) The dynamics of general developmental mechanisms: from Piaget and Vygotsky to dynamic systems models
Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci.
(2000)Systems, cycles, and developmental pathways
Hum. Dev.
(1999)- et al.
Applications of Nonlinear Dynamics to Developmental Process Modeling
(1998)
Emotion, Development, and Self-Organization: Dynamic Systems Approaches to Emotional Development
Rethinking Innateness: A Connectionist Perspective on Development
Stage-wise cognitive development: an application of catastrophe theory
Psychol. Rev.
Dynamic development of psychological structures in action and thought
Object naming, vocabulary growth, and the development of word retrieval abilities
J. Mem. Lang.
The intersensory origins of word comprehension: an ecological–dynamic systems view
Dev. Sci.
The Emergence of Language
Systems, attachment, and relationships
Hum. Dev.
Cited by (625)
Time and sequence as key developmental dimensions of joint action
2023, Developmental ReviewSocioeconomic status and home affordances moderate effects of motor delay and intervention
2023, Journal of Applied Developmental PsychologyTasks and their role in visual neuroscience
2023, Neuron