Week 37
Sameroff (2010: a unified theory of development: A dialectic integration of
nature and nurture, child development, 81
Core idea: Sameroff proposes a dialectical model of development that integrates both nature
(biological factors) and nurture (environmental influences). Rather than viewing them as competing
forces, he emphasizes their interdependence, arguing that development arises from the dynamic
interaction between the individual and their context.
Key concepts:
Transactional models: development is shaped by continuous, reciprocal interactions between
the child and their environment.
Multilevel systems: influences range from genetic and neurological to familial, societal and
cultural levels
Regulation and representation: Development involves both behavioural regulation (e.g.
self-control) and internal representations (e.g. beliefs and expectations)
Contextual influence: social, economic, and cultural contexts are not just backdrops – they
actively shape developmental outcomes
Theoretical integration:
Sameroff critiques earlier models that favoured either biological determinism or environmental
conditioning. He instead advocates for a unified theory that:
Accounts for personal change over time
Recognizes the bidirectional influence between child and environment
Embraces complexity and variability in developmental trajectories
Implications:
Research: encourages interdisciplinary approaches across psychology, sociology, biology and
education
Policy: Supports holistic interventions that consider both individual and contextual factors
Practice: Promotes tailored strategies in education, parenting and clinical settings
Academic questions during the lesson:
Questions:
1. Sameroff poses that models to describe and understand development become more complex
over time. On p. 6, he states that the models develop “from linear to interactive to transactive
to multilevel dynamic systems”. Describe each of these four models and explain how each
model views development.
2. Can you explain Figure 7 in your own words? Specifically, why does the self (in the middle)
become broader, and why do we only see arrows where the breadth of the self-increases?
3. On top of p. 20 Sameroff’s call is most explicitly formulated: “The core element...(..)... from
anthropology.” Can you interpret this passage? What can sociology and anthropology
contribute to our understanding of human development, according to Sameroff
,Answers:
1
Linear: Linear models are often causal, A causes B, B causes C etcetera. A linear model often views
development as a result of influences. So for example, because someone is angry he yells at a person.
Interactive: There is a bidirectional influence. So A influences B and B influences A. So how someone
reacts on me, is caused by me, but also makes me react a certain way. Development in the interactive
model states that you’ll learn along the way and everything/everyone influence each other.
Transactive: There is a mutual interaction. In this model there is a reaction from a person to a
environmental situation. It all reacts as a response on something different.
Multilevel Dynamic systems: This model explains a situation/behaviour/etcetera as an outcome of
different systems (biological, social & psychological, is environmental Bronfenbrenner).
Development is a complex variable influenced by many different layers of influence.
2 Within all sorts of interaction, people develop. This can come through interactions with people who
think/act/respond differently, but it can also increase their own self-image. When you’ll learn, your
identity will grow, people often become more confident with themselves and therefore create a
broader version of themselves. Think about the model of Engel Biopsychosocial model, where all
these different systems influence each other and creates a greater self.
Well when the self grows, they become more aware of what they want to invest their time in.
Therefore, they probably choose which information they want etcetera.
3
Sociology often evaluate information/give insights about social life/structures. They are more/less
about people’s self, their identity and that within their social environment. Whereas Anthropology
often goes about integrating in a culture (Cultural purpose). It often is about habits, culture, norms and
values etcetera. These views are often bidirectional and so they influence each other, this is in my
opinion also how live works and gives a Holistic view. It also develops over time and is often
changed. It helps individuals in their development in life.
Moffitt: Adolescence-limited and life-course-persistent antisocial behaviour: a
developmental taxonomy, Psychological review, 100:
Core idea: A developmental Taxonomy of Antisocial behaviour: Moffitt introduces a dual
taxonomy to explain the puzzling patterns of antisocial behaviour across the lifespan. She argues that
what looks like a single phenomenon (delinquency) is actually two distinct developmental pathways:
1! Life-course-persistent (LCP) Antisocial behaviour:
Begins early in childhood and persists into adulthood
Rooter in neuropsychological deficits (e.g. cognitive impairments, temperament issues) that
interact with high-risk environments (e.g. poor parenting, socioeconomic disadvantage)
Individuals show consistent patterns of aggression, deceit, and rule-breaking across settings
and ages
Their behaviour tends to escalate over time, becoming more serious and entrenched
2! Adolescence Limited (AL) Antisocial behaviour:
Emerges only during adolescence and typically faces in early adulthood
Driven by the “maturity gap” (teens feel biologically mature but are still socially restricted)
, Antisocial acts (e.g. truancy, petty theft) are often temporary, peer-influenced and status-
seeking
These individuals usually have no prior history of conduct problems and return to normative
behaviour as adult roles become accessible.
Why this matters:
Moffitt’s taxonomy helps explain why antisocial behaviour spikes in adolescence but doesn’t
always predict future criminality
It challenges one-size-fits-all approaches to intervention, suggesting that LCP and AL
individuals need very different support strategies.
Analytical questions during the lesson:
Questions:
1. Moffitt’s theory on the development of antisocial behavior introduces a number of
important concepts. Please explain the following concepts:
• The age-crime curve
• The maturity gap
2. Please explain the following concepts, and provide a concrete example illustrating the
concepts:
◦ Evocative interaction
◦ Reactive interaction
◦ Proactive interaction
3. Moffitt introduced the difference between the Life Course Persistent (LCP) group and the
Adolescence-Limited (AL) group only in 1993. What do you think is the reason that this
difference was not discovered earlier?
5. How does Moffitt explain the lack of continuity of the antisocial behavior in the AL-group at the
end of adolescence (p. 686)?
6. Based on Moffitt’s theory, one might expect that almost every adolescent should become
delinquent. Why is this not the case? Why does not every adolescent show delinquent behavior,
according to Moffitt? (p. 689)
7. What does Moffitt mean when she states that AL antisocial behavior is “normative”?
8. If you were to examine the (neuro)psychological determinants of antisocial behavior, what
would you expect to find for the two groups based on Moffitt’s theory?
Answers
1
Sameroff (2010: a unified theory of development: A dialectic integration of
nature and nurture, child development, 81
Core idea: Sameroff proposes a dialectical model of development that integrates both nature
(biological factors) and nurture (environmental influences). Rather than viewing them as competing
forces, he emphasizes their interdependence, arguing that development arises from the dynamic
interaction between the individual and their context.
Key concepts:
Transactional models: development is shaped by continuous, reciprocal interactions between
the child and their environment.
Multilevel systems: influences range from genetic and neurological to familial, societal and
cultural levels
Regulation and representation: Development involves both behavioural regulation (e.g.
self-control) and internal representations (e.g. beliefs and expectations)
Contextual influence: social, economic, and cultural contexts are not just backdrops – they
actively shape developmental outcomes
Theoretical integration:
Sameroff critiques earlier models that favoured either biological determinism or environmental
conditioning. He instead advocates for a unified theory that:
Accounts for personal change over time
Recognizes the bidirectional influence between child and environment
Embraces complexity and variability in developmental trajectories
Implications:
Research: encourages interdisciplinary approaches across psychology, sociology, biology and
education
Policy: Supports holistic interventions that consider both individual and contextual factors
Practice: Promotes tailored strategies in education, parenting and clinical settings
Academic questions during the lesson:
Questions:
1. Sameroff poses that models to describe and understand development become more complex
over time. On p. 6, he states that the models develop “from linear to interactive to transactive
to multilevel dynamic systems”. Describe each of these four models and explain how each
model views development.
2. Can you explain Figure 7 in your own words? Specifically, why does the self (in the middle)
become broader, and why do we only see arrows where the breadth of the self-increases?
3. On top of p. 20 Sameroff’s call is most explicitly formulated: “The core element...(..)... from
anthropology.” Can you interpret this passage? What can sociology and anthropology
contribute to our understanding of human development, according to Sameroff
,Answers:
1
Linear: Linear models are often causal, A causes B, B causes C etcetera. A linear model often views
development as a result of influences. So for example, because someone is angry he yells at a person.
Interactive: There is a bidirectional influence. So A influences B and B influences A. So how someone
reacts on me, is caused by me, but also makes me react a certain way. Development in the interactive
model states that you’ll learn along the way and everything/everyone influence each other.
Transactive: There is a mutual interaction. In this model there is a reaction from a person to a
environmental situation. It all reacts as a response on something different.
Multilevel Dynamic systems: This model explains a situation/behaviour/etcetera as an outcome of
different systems (biological, social & psychological, is environmental Bronfenbrenner).
Development is a complex variable influenced by many different layers of influence.
2 Within all sorts of interaction, people develop. This can come through interactions with people who
think/act/respond differently, but it can also increase their own self-image. When you’ll learn, your
identity will grow, people often become more confident with themselves and therefore create a
broader version of themselves. Think about the model of Engel Biopsychosocial model, where all
these different systems influence each other and creates a greater self.
Well when the self grows, they become more aware of what they want to invest their time in.
Therefore, they probably choose which information they want etcetera.
3
Sociology often evaluate information/give insights about social life/structures. They are more/less
about people’s self, their identity and that within their social environment. Whereas Anthropology
often goes about integrating in a culture (Cultural purpose). It often is about habits, culture, norms and
values etcetera. These views are often bidirectional and so they influence each other, this is in my
opinion also how live works and gives a Holistic view. It also develops over time and is often
changed. It helps individuals in their development in life.
Moffitt: Adolescence-limited and life-course-persistent antisocial behaviour: a
developmental taxonomy, Psychological review, 100:
Core idea: A developmental Taxonomy of Antisocial behaviour: Moffitt introduces a dual
taxonomy to explain the puzzling patterns of antisocial behaviour across the lifespan. She argues that
what looks like a single phenomenon (delinquency) is actually two distinct developmental pathways:
1! Life-course-persistent (LCP) Antisocial behaviour:
Begins early in childhood and persists into adulthood
Rooter in neuropsychological deficits (e.g. cognitive impairments, temperament issues) that
interact with high-risk environments (e.g. poor parenting, socioeconomic disadvantage)
Individuals show consistent patterns of aggression, deceit, and rule-breaking across settings
and ages
Their behaviour tends to escalate over time, becoming more serious and entrenched
2! Adolescence Limited (AL) Antisocial behaviour:
Emerges only during adolescence and typically faces in early adulthood
Driven by the “maturity gap” (teens feel biologically mature but are still socially restricted)
, Antisocial acts (e.g. truancy, petty theft) are often temporary, peer-influenced and status-
seeking
These individuals usually have no prior history of conduct problems and return to normative
behaviour as adult roles become accessible.
Why this matters:
Moffitt’s taxonomy helps explain why antisocial behaviour spikes in adolescence but doesn’t
always predict future criminality
It challenges one-size-fits-all approaches to intervention, suggesting that LCP and AL
individuals need very different support strategies.
Analytical questions during the lesson:
Questions:
1. Moffitt’s theory on the development of antisocial behavior introduces a number of
important concepts. Please explain the following concepts:
• The age-crime curve
• The maturity gap
2. Please explain the following concepts, and provide a concrete example illustrating the
concepts:
◦ Evocative interaction
◦ Reactive interaction
◦ Proactive interaction
3. Moffitt introduced the difference between the Life Course Persistent (LCP) group and the
Adolescence-Limited (AL) group only in 1993. What do you think is the reason that this
difference was not discovered earlier?
5. How does Moffitt explain the lack of continuity of the antisocial behavior in the AL-group at the
end of adolescence (p. 686)?
6. Based on Moffitt’s theory, one might expect that almost every adolescent should become
delinquent. Why is this not the case? Why does not every adolescent show delinquent behavior,
according to Moffitt? (p. 689)
7. What does Moffitt mean when she states that AL antisocial behavior is “normative”?
8. If you were to examine the (neuro)psychological determinants of antisocial behavior, what
would you expect to find for the two groups based on Moffitt’s theory?
Answers
1
