Assignment Prompt & Instructions
– 2 years ago
**files (1)**
– ## W6Replies.docx
**## W6Replies.docx**
**Directions:** You must respond to the 2 classmates replies below of at least 100 words each. To encourage an atmosphere of a conversational discussion, citations and references are not required for the reply posts. However, any sources cited must have been published within the last five years unless the student is citing classic or historical theoretical information or research. Acceptable sources include course materials, scholarly peer-reviewed sources, and/or the Bible, in current APA format, with at least 1 of the sources being from course materials or scholarly, peer-reviewed articles or texts. Each reply must be labeled in order to identify the classmate you are responding to.
**Classmate One: (Anna)**
What I found most interesting about from these two was module six’s information about all the various neonatal reflexes, also known as primitive reflexes. These are often reflexing infants will have for a short amount of time, such as the tonic neck reflex, which is when a baby turns their head while one arm bends when the other straightens (KhanAcademymedicane, 2015). Another would be parmer grasp or rooting reflect. An absence of any neonatal reflexes could indicate something is not developing correctly. Other reflexes that infants have instinctively are breathing and blinking reflexes. Breathing, blinking, swallowing, etc. are reflexes humans will have permanently.
Adults can gather information about a child’s development based on whether primitive reflexes do not occur or continue. If neonatal reflexes do not occur, then this is likely a sign of developmental delays or impairments. Retention of primitive reflexes could indicate attention, cognitive, or athletic delays or impairments (Lazarus). Retained neonatal reflexes could be due to a problem at birth or the first months of infancy. There are actions one can take to help support children who show signs of persistent neonatal reflects beyond infancy. For instance, “teaching individuals to inhibit their own reflex reactions, and/or…shaping existing reflex reactions into the service of a functional (voluntary) response” (Sigafoos et al., 2021).
While it is no doubt important for adults to examine whether children can conduct these reflexes, there are studies that show not all reflexes have to be present to suggest whether a child is healthy. 100% of children between the ages of four and six show signs of lacking at least one primitive reflex (Pecuch et al., 2021). It is likely that some preschool children who demonstrate few neonatal reflexes may subside by school age. However, this does not eliminate the importance of continuing to watch children who demonstrate continuous primitive reflexes beyond infancy.
References
KhanAcademymedicane. (2015, July 25). Neonatal reflexes | behavior | MCAT | Khan Academy. [Video]. YouTube.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ARZD9Qid9lU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ARZD9Qid9lU)
Lazarus, R. What are retained primitive reflexes? Optometrists Network.
[https://www.optometrists.org/childrens-vision/guide-to-visual-development/vision-therapy-for-primitive-reflexes/what-are-retained-primitive-reflexes/](https://www.optometrists.org/childrens-vision/guide-to-visual-development/vision-therapy-for-primitive-reflexes/what-are-retained-primitive-reflexes/)
Pecuch, A., Gieysztor, E., Wolańska, E., Telenga, M., & Paprocka-Borowicz, M. (2021). Primitive reflex activity in relation to motor skills in healthy preschool children. Brain Sciences, 11(8), 967 Sigafoos, J., Roche, L., O’Reilly, M. F., & Lancioni, G. E. (2021). Persistence of primitive reflexes in developmental disorders. Current Developmental Disorders Reports, 8(2), 98-105.
[https://doi.org/10.1007/s40474-021-00232-2](https://doi.org/10.1007/s40474-021-00232-2)
**Classmate two: (Jeffrey)**
Transactional, bioecological, and relational developmental systems models are all theoretical frameworks within developmental psychology that emphasize the dynamic interplay between an individual and their environment. These systems highlight in their own way how individuals actively shape and are shaped by their surroundings over time. The key difference being the specific focus on the nature of these interactions and the levels of environmental influence considered. Transactional models focus on the bidirectional influence between an individual and their environment. Bioecological models provide a nested system of environmental factors, while relational developmental systems models specifically emphasize the importance of positive relationships in development. Developmental psychology has evolved because of these models and through the work of influential theorists like Urie Bronfenbrenner, Arnold Sameroff, and Richard Lerner. They are shaping its trajectory through their innovative models. Their work has challenged traditional views of development by emphasizing the complex, dynamic, and interconnected nature of human growth.
Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological model (1979) focuses on the multiple layers of environmental influence on an individual’s development. His framework highlights how factors such as family, school, community, and broader societal contexts interact to shape developmental outcomes. Over time, this model has led to an increased emphasis on the importance of environmental contexts in shaping an individual’s life course (Tudge et al., 2021). Sameroff’s transactional model (1975) also builds on the idea that development is shaped by ongoing, bidirectional interactions between individuals and their environments. Rather than seeing development as a linear progression, Sameroff emphasized that these interactions are dynamic and change over time. This has led to a more nuanced understanding of how environmental factors and personal characteristics coalesce to influence developmental outcomes (Sameroff, 2020). Lerner’s relational developmental systems model (2006) further extends this thinking by positing that development occurs through ongoing relationships between an individual’s biological, social, and psychological systems. Lerner argued that development is a process of adaptation, with individuals constantly responding to, and influencing, their environments in complex ways. His work has deepened our understanding of the role of personal agency and contextual factors in human development, making the field more interdisciplinary and dynamic (Lerner, 2020).
These models have collectively shifted developmental psychology from focusing on isolated developmental stages to understanding development as an ongoing, multidimensional process. Over the past several decades, developmental psychology has become more integrative, with a stronger focus on the role of culture, environment, and individual agency in shaping development. There has been growing recognition that development is not merely a matter of biological maturation but also involves complex interactions between an individual and their environment (Sameroff, 2020). As researchers continue to explore the intricate web of factors influencing development, these theories remain foundational in broadening the scope of developmental science. These models align with the understanding that individuals are shaped by both God and their surroundings. Scripture teaches that humans are fearfully and wonderfully made (Psalm 139:14), acknowledging both the intrinsic qualities and external factors that influence personal growth.
References
King James Bible. (2008). Psalm 139:14. Thomas Nelson, Inc. (Original work published 1769)
Lerner, R. M. (2020). Relational developmental systems and the concept of development. International Journal of Developmental Science, 14(3), 45-57.
[https://doi.org/10.3233/DEV-210100](https://doi.org/10.3233/DEV-210100)
Sameroff, A. J. (2020). Transactional model of development: How children and contexts shape each other
_._ Psychological Science, 31(1), 103-118.
[https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797620909310](https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797620909310)
Tudge, J. R. H., Liang, L. J., & Govedarica, B. (2021). Bronfenbrenner's bioecological model and its relevance to developmental psychology. Developmental Psychology, 57(4), 597-608.
[https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0001065](https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0001065)
**## W6Replies.docx**
**Directions:** You must respond to the 2 classmates replies below of at least 100 words each. To encourage an atmosphere of a conversational discussion, citations and references are not required for the reply posts. However, any sources cited must have been published within the last five years unless the student is citing classic or historical theoretical information or research. Acceptable sources include course materials, scholarly peer-reviewed sources, and/or the Bible, in current APA format, with at least 1 of the sources being from course materials or scholarly, peer-reviewed articles or texts. Each reply must be labeled in order to identify the classmate you are responding to.
**Classmate One: (Anna)**
What I found most interesting about from these two was module six’s information about all the various neonatal reflexes, also known as primitive reflexes. These are often reflexing infants will have for a short amount of time, such as the tonic neck reflex, which is when a baby turns their head while one arm bends when the other straightens (KhanAcademymedicane, 2015). Another would be parmer grasp or rooting reflect. An absence of any neonatal reflexes could indicate something is not developing correctly. Other reflexes that infants have instinctively are breathing and blinking reflexes. Breathing, blinking, swallowing, etc. are reflexes humans will have permanently.
Adults can gather information about a child’s development based on whether primitive reflexes do not occur or continue. If neonatal reflexes do not occur, then this is likely a sign of developmental delays or impairments. Retention of primitive reflexes could indicate attention, cognitive, or athletic delays or impairments (Lazarus). Retained neonatal reflexes could be due to a problem at birth or the first months of infancy. There are actions one can take to help support children who show signs of persistent neonatal reflects beyond infancy. For instance, “teaching individuals to inhibit their own reflex reactions, and/or…shaping existing reflex reactions into the service of a functional (voluntary) response” (Sigafoos et al., 2021).
While it is no doubt important for adults to examine whether children can conduct these reflexes, there are studies that show not all reflexes have to be present to suggest whether a child is healthy. 100% of children between the ages of four and six show signs of lacking at least one primitive reflex (Pecuch et al., 2021). It is likely that some preschool children who demonstrate few neonatal reflexes may subside by school age. However, this does not eliminate the importance of continuing to watch children who demonstrate continuous primitive reflexes beyond infancy.
References
KhanAcademymedicane. (2015, July 25). Neonatal reflexes | behavior | MCAT | Khan Academy. [Video]. YouTube.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ARZD9Qid9lU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ARZD9Qid9lU)
Lazarus, R. What are retained primitive reflexes? Optometrists Network.
[https://www.optometrists.org/childrens-vision/guide-to-visual-development/vision-therapy-for-primitive-reflexes/what-are-retained-primitive-reflexes/](https://www.optometrists.org/childrens-vision/guide-to-visual-development/vision-therapy-for-primitive-reflexes/what-are-retained-primitive-reflexes/)
Pecuch, A., Gieysztor, E., Wolańska, E., Telenga, M., & Paprocka-Borowicz, M. (2021). Primitive reflex activity in relation to motor skills in healthy preschool children. Brain Sciences, 11(8), 967 Sigafoos, J., Roche, L., O’Reilly, M. F., & Lancioni, G. E. (2021). Persistence of primitive reflexes in developmental disorders. Current Developmental Disorders Reports, 8(2), 98-105.
[https://doi.org/10.1007/s40474-021-00232-2](https://doi.org/10.1007/s40474-021-00232-2)
**Classmate two: (Jeffrey)**
Transactional, bioecological, and relational developmental systems models are all theoretical frameworks within developmental psychology that emphasize the dynamic interplay between an individual and their environment. These systems highlight in their own way how individuals actively shape and are shaped by their surroundings over time. The key difference being the specific focus on the nature of these interactions and the levels of environmental influence considered. Transactional models focus on the bidirectional influence between an individual and their environment. Bioecological models provide a nested system of environmental factors, while relational developmental systems models specifically emphasize the importance of positive relationships in development. Developmental psychology has evolved because of these models and through the work of influential theorists like Urie Bronfenbrenner, Arnold Sameroff, and Richard Lerner. They are shaping its trajectory through their innovative models. Their work has challenged traditional views of development by emphasizing the complex, dynamic, and interconnected nature of human growth.
Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological model (1979) focuses on the multiple layers of environmental influence on an individual’s development. His framework highlights how factors such as family, school, community, and broader societal contexts interact to shape developmental outcomes. Over time, this model has led to an increased emphasis on the importance of environmental contexts in shaping an individual’s life course (Tudge et al., 2021). Sameroff’s transactional model (1975) also builds on the idea that development is shaped by ongoing, bidirectional interactions between individuals and their environments. Rather than seeing development as a linear progression, Sameroff emphasized that these interactions are dynamic and change over time. This has led to a more nuanced understanding of how environmental factors and personal characteristics coalesce to influence developmental outcomes (Sameroff, 2020). Lerner’s relational developmental systems model (2006) further extends this thinking by positing that development occurs through ongoing relationships between an individual’s biological, social, and psychological systems. Lerner argued that development is a process of adaptation, with individuals constantly responding to, and influencing, their environments in complex ways. His work has deepened our understanding of the role of personal agency and contextual factors in human development, making the field more interdisciplinary and dynamic (Lerner, 2020).
These models have collectively shifted developmental psychology from focusing on isolated developmental stages to understanding development as an ongoing, multidimensional process. Over the past several decades, developmental psychology has become more integrative, with a stronger focus on the role of culture, environment, and individual agency in shaping development. There has been growing recognition that development is not merely a matter of biological maturation but also involves complex interactions between an individual and their environment (Sameroff, 2020). As researchers continue to explore the intricate web of factors influencing development, these theories remain foundational in broadening the scope of developmental science. These models align with the understanding that individuals are shaped by both God and their surroundings. Scripture teaches that humans are fearfully and wonderfully made (Psalm 139:14), acknowledging both the intrinsic qualities and external factors that influence personal growth.
References
King James Bible. (2008). Psalm 139:14. Thomas Nelson, Inc. (Original work published 1769)
Lerner, R. M. (2020). Relational developmental systems and the concept of development. International Journal of Developmental Science, 14(3), 45-57.
[https://doi.org/10.3233/DEV-210100](https://doi.org/10.3233/DEV-210100)
Sameroff, A. J. (2020). Transactional model of development: How children and contexts shape each other
_._ Psychological Science, 31(1), 103-118.
[https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797620909310](https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797620909310)
Tudge, J. R. H., Liang, L. J., & Govedarica, B. (2021). Bronfenbrenner's bioecological model and its relevance to developmental psychology. Developmental Psychology, 57(4), 597-608.
[https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0001065](https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0001065)