Journal
CHILD DEVELOPMENT PERSPECTIVES
Volume 11, Issue 2, Pages 79-84Publisher
WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/cdep.12217
Keywords
naturalistic methods; experimental methods; developmental theory
Categories
Funding
- Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development [1R03HD077155-01]
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Much of developmental science aims to explain how or whether children's experiences influence their thoughts and actions. Developmental theories make assumptions and claims-what I call ecological commitments-about events outside research contexts. In this article, I argue that most developmental theories make ecological commitments about children's thoughts, actions, and experiences outside research contexts, and that these commitments sometimes go unstated and untested. I also argue that naturalistic methods can provide evidence for or against ecological commitments, and that naturalistic and experimental studies address unique yet complementary questions. Rather than argue for increasing the ecological validity of experiments or abandoning laboratory research, I propose reconsidering the relations among developmental theories, naturalistic methods, and laboratory experiments.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available