Human Growth And Development Fall 2018 Psy 213 R1 Test 1 Dir

Human Growth And Developmentfall 2018psy 213 R1test 1directions Plea

Human Growth and Development Fall 2018 Psy 213 R1 Test 1. Directions: Please answer all of the following questions. Each of your responses should be a few paragraphs long. Your paper is due on Wednesday, November 28th. You may email your completed paper to me prior to the 28th at [email protected]. Should you choose the email option, I will respond to you via email.

1. Which perspective on human development is closest to your own and why? The perspectives are: psychoanalytic, learning, cognitive, evolutionary/sociobiological, and contextual.

2. Provide an example of a critical period of childhood development and discuss all of the domains of development: physical, cognitive, and psychosocial. In each of the domains, give an example of change that is quantitative and an example that is qualitative.

3. In the future, if specific genes are identified as being associated with particular characteristics or traits such as obesity or sexual orientation, what possible outcomes would you predict in terms of increase or decrease in the amount or availability of genetic testing? What, if any, ethical issues do you think this may present?

4. In your opinion, what is the most interesting topic that we've covered in class or in your readings in the textbook? Why? Please be specific.

Paper For Above instruction

Human development is a complex interplay of biological, psychological, and social factors that evolve throughout an individual’s lifespan. Among the various theoretical perspectives explaining human growth, the cognitive perspective resonates most closely with my understanding of development. This perspective emphasizes the importance of mental processes, like thinking, memory, and problem-solving, in shaping behavior and development. I align with this view because I believe that understanding how individuals process information and learn provides critical insights into their growth—both psychically and socially. For instance, Piaget’s theory on cognitive development highlights stages where children acquire increasingly sophisticated ways of thinking, which I find compelling because it emphasizes active learning as a central feature of human growth. The cognitive perspective’s focus on internal processes aligns with my intuitive belief that much of human development depends on mental frameworks that evolve over time.

In exploring the concept of critical periods in childhood development, I think of early language acquisition as a prime example. Critical periods are specific windows in development during which certain skills or abilities are most easily acquired, and failure to develop these skills within the window may result in permanent deficits. Physically, a critical period can be seen in the development of vision; for example, if an infant's vision is deprived (due to cataracts, for instance) during the first few months of life, the visual system may be permanently impaired. Quantitative change occurs as the infant’s visual acuity gradually improves over time, while qualitative change involves the development of depth perception and visual discrimination abilities. Psychosocially, early attachment during infancy is crucial; secure attachment can foster confidence and social competence, whereas deprivation may hinder social-emotional development. Quantitatively, an infant's emotional responses may intensify with age, while qualitatively, the nature of attachment—whether secure or insecure—changes dramatically during this period.

Regarding the future of genetic research, if specific genes are identified that correlate with traits like obesity or sexual orientation, the implications could be profound. I predict an increase in the availability and usage of genetic testing, especially for traits linked to health risks. This could enable early intervention and personalized medicine, leading to improved health outcomes. However, ethical considerations are significant. Genetic testing for traits such as sexual orientation raises concerns about privacy, consent, and potential discrimination. There is a risk that genetic information could be misused, leading to stigmatization or exclusion. Moreover, the sociocultural implications of determining traits genetically could reinforce stereotypes or diminish individual agency by overly emphasizing biological determinants. Therefore, while advances could offer benefits, it is essential to carefully regulate genetic testing to prevent ethical violations and societal harms.

The most intriguing topic I encountered in this course was the nature versus nurture debate, particularly how modern research demonstrates that development results from intricate interactions between genetics and environment. What makes this topic fascinating is understanding that neither biology nor environment solely determines development; instead, they continuously influence each other. For example, genetic predispositions may manifest differently based on environmental factors like parenting, education, or socio-economic status. This reciprocal influence underscores the complexity of human growth and shift away from simplistic models. Recognizing this interplay helps clarify why individuals from similar backgrounds can develop differently and highlights the importance of supportive environments in fostering positive development. The implications for policy and intervention are profound, as they emphasize nurturing environments to optimize growth, regardless of genetic predispositions, making the topic both fascinating and vital for understanding human development comprehensively.

References

• Crain, W. C. (2011). Theories of Development: Concepts and Applications (6th ed.). Pearson.
• Piaget, J. (1972). The psychology of the child. Basic Books.
• National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. (2010). Critical periods in early development. https://www.nichd.nih.gov
• Gopnik, A., Meltzoff, A. N., & Kuhl, P. K. (2016). The Scientist in the Crib: What Early Learning Tells Us About Humanity. HarperCollins.
• Bowlby, J. (1982). Attachment and loss: Retrospect and prospect. American journal of Orthopsychiatry, 52(4), 664–678.
• Million, M. (2008). The Ethical Dilemmas of Genetic Testing. Journal of Medical Ethics, 34(5), 292–298.
• Sluyter, D. J., & Spock, B. (1982). Behavioral and emotional development of children. John Wiley & Sons.
• Shonkoff, J. P., & Phillips, D. A. (2000). From Neurons to Neighborhoods: The Science of Early Childhood Development. National Academies Press.
• Bruner, J. (1960). The process of education. Harvard University Press.
• Gerrard, M., Gibbons, F. X., & Bushman, B. J. (2017). Social context, decision-making, and health. Routledge.