Welcome to this presentation "Understanding development from the synapse to the society." This presentation will begin by addressing the question, "What is development?" You will observe that there is substantial debate regarding this intricate problem.

Next, I shall explain the development from a developmental systems perspective. This methodology will be implemented throughout the presentation. I will illustrate this methodology by referencing two famous beliefs. I discuss these theories because they can help you organise your thoughts regarding how numerous interacting elements might influence growth at multiple organisational levels, from the synaptic level to the societal level. Therefore, let us begin by asking, "What is development?"

Most developmental experts believe that development requires sequential and systematic change. Unfortunately, there is no consensus beyond this point. Throughout history, several development-related questions have been contested and have significantly impacted thought.

Here, I will concentrate on one topic that has influenced thoughts on development for more than two millennia: How much development is determined by nature, our genes, nurture, and the environment.

According to the developmental systems theory, nature and nurture interact continuously and contribute to growth through this interaction. Nature never directly influences growth; it always functions within the framework of internal and external conditions. Similarly, the influence of the environment on an organism will depend on its genetic traits.

It is essential to recognise that it is futile to enquire about the proportional contributions of nature and nurture to a specific behaviour. Nature and nurture are not distinct and cumulative entities. They are intrinsically united.

The concept that the trajectory of development is not predetermined (or determined by our genes), but dependent on continual interaction with the environment, has important practical implications: If you do not believe that the environment can influence development, it makes little sense to design interventions to encourage it.

 The developmental systems concept asserts that development is susceptible to manipulation. This also suggests that there is more than one path to development. Children grow up in distinct contexts, which are distinct mixes of personal and environmental situations that might result in distinct paths of transformation. Therefore, the difficulty is determining how, where, and when to intervene most effectively.

The developmental systems approach accounts for all this complexity. This method assumes that development is driven by factors interacting at different organisational levels. Now that we've covered the broad concept of what development is according to the developmental systems approach, let's delve into more depth. I shall now review two influential ideas of developmental systems.

These theories are relevant because they can help you arrange your thoughts regarding how various levels of the organisation are influenced by the interaction of multiple causes. The first idea I shall address was proposed by Russian-born American developmental psychologist Uri Bronfenbrenner. Bronfenbrenner referred to his theory as the bioecological model. It discusses how a child's development is shaped by the interaction of biologically driven dispositions and ecological circumstances.

According to this view, the environment is a multilayered, nested system that influences development.

The model separates five subsystems, which I shall now address briefly.

The microsystem is the initial system. This is the innermost level of the environment and is comprised of the child's activities and interactions with its immediate surroundings. The interactions between the youngster and his parents at home and the child and a teacher at school are examples. It is essential to recognise that the biopsychosocial traits of the individuals involved in such interactions are part of the microsystem. For instance, interactions between a youngster and a teacher will depend on the features of both the child and the teacher. Individual differences or developmental alterations in these features affect the nature of the activities and interactions in a certain microsystem and vice versa. In daily life, individuals traverse several microsystems.

Mesosystem is the second system. This system comprises links between all microsystems associated with an individual at a given time in his or her life. When parents participate in school life and share their experiences and knowledge with the school, for instance, growth in both settings can benefit. Academic learning can be transferred to the home, and teacher-child contact may be enhanced if the teacher is aware of what is occurring at home. The mesosystem also incorporates consistent characteristics of persons in the child's local environment, such as their socioeconomic status.

 The ecosystem is the third system. This system refers to non-child-containing social situations that influence children's experiences in immediate surroundings. Examples include parents' workplaces and community health and welfare agencies. The fact that parents work, for example, may permit special leave when children are ill, but it can also produce stress that affects the way parents respond to their children at home. A second example is the social network of parents, which provides advice and social companionship. All these variables impact the child indirectly.

The macrosystem is the fourth system. This system includes cultural values, laws, traditions, and resources. The importance given by the macro system to a child's requirements influences the assistance they receive at the more immediate levels of their environment. For instance, a country's paternity and parental leave legislation or childcare standards may have an impact on the lives of individual children in that country.

The chronosystem is the last system. This system refers to the recurrent impact of time on all other subsystems and their relationships. Change over time is, in fact, the defining feature of development. Time affects the physical, intellectual, and personality qualities of children on an individual level. Time also affects the developmental obstacles and opportunities that children face in various environmental settings. For example, the introduction of a new sibling has vastly different effects on a toddler confined to the house vs a school-aged youngster with numerous interactions and activities outside the home. In this instance, the timing of an environmental change influences its consequences.

How therefore may Bronfenbrenner's theory assist you to arrange your thoughts regarding development? It achieves this by offering a clear framework for organising and categorising the vast number of factors that can influence growth. This can help you maintain your perspective. The power of Bronfenbrenner's theory, however, lies mostly in its description of how environmental effects might be arranged at multiple levels. Therefore, I will also describe a theory that places greater emphasis on the individual's levels.

Another American developmental psychologist, Gilbert Gottlieb, established this hypothesis, which is known as the Probabilistic epigenesis model. This model describes the bidirectional relationships between genetic activity, brain activity, behaviour, and the environment. The term "epigenesis" describes a shift in genetic expression caused by environmental factors. Gottlieb suggested that the emergent outcomes of development are genetic and epigenetic. Although this concept is now universally recognised, when Gottlieb initially proposed it, it was exceedingly controversial. He put the term "probabilistic" in the name of his model to suggest that the developmental result of some effects is frequently uncertain due to the substantial number of variables involved. Thus, certain gene-environment interactions may raise or decrease the likelihood of certain development.

The most fundamental level of organisation in his approach is gene activity. Genes serve as the blueprint from which proteins are created in the cells of an organism. Thus, genetic activity refers to the type and quantity of proteins produced. Proteins are essential for the structure, function, and regulation of the body's tissues and organs and perform most of the work within cells. Thus, genetic activity produces the brain and other structures that enable us to function and interact with the environment.

In contrast, genetic activity is regulated by brain activity, behaviour, and the environment. Therefore, the model offers bidirectional linkages between and within the four organisational levels. In addition, it is considered that these interactions are dynamic; they may undergo ongoing change throughout time. Gottlieb claimed that to adequately relate genes and neurological systems to behavioural outcomes, it is necessary to account for the dynamic bidirectionality of interactions between levels.

Two instances of developmental systems theories have been explored previously. There are numerous additional theories that emphasise the need for multiple levels of description while attempting to comprehend growth. And because of the associated complexity, all of these theories emphasise the importance of interdisciplinary collaborations in order to achieve meaningful knowledge of development.

The most important result is that it is beneficial to explore for qualities of individuals and their environments that, when taken together, might affect the creation of policies and programmes supporting healthy development. This endeavour transcends the realm of science and is relevant to anyone interested in or involved in encouraging the optimal development of children in any way.



This presentation explains how development can be understood from the standpoint of developmental systems. In addition, I described two ideas that offer systematic methods for composing many impacts on an individual's development at multiple organisational levels within and without the individual.