While environmental factors play a huge role in determining how a child feels, thinks, and behaves, child development is a multifactorial construct influenced by environmental, socioeconomic, and biological factors. Contrary to John B. Watson’s ideas of child development, previous studies and personal experiences suggest that a child is not a passive recipient in his or her upbringing; they are not clueless characters that passively and unthinkingly react to any environmental stimuli. Children’s behaviors and developments are internally motivated through cognitive development and adaptations. Therefore, aside from the environmental aspects affecting development, biological factors, particularly brain development and chemistry, influence cognitive development, and thus, how children react to environmental stimuli. Furthermore, additional biological factors, such as genetic influence and hormone level, affects child development. Be that as it may, environmental variables play a bigger role in child development compared to biological aspects, which mainly affect child growth.
Early behaviorism, as used to explain child development, was based on Ivan Petrovich Pavlov’s theory of learning- classical conditioning, and Thorndike’s law of effect- the probability of actions being repeated is high if it leads to rewarding, and low if it results in punishment (Slater et al., 2017). This kind of behaviorism ignores the role of the mind and reduces all behaviors to series of environmental stimuli and resulting reactions. Based on Watson’s account of child development, an infant is born with the machinery of conditioning that facilitates the subsequent warping and molding under the pressure of the environment during infancy and childhood. According to behaviorism’s early school of thought, a child is passive and receptive throughout his or her development, making it possible for them to be shaped in any direction through manipulating the environment (Slater et al., 2017). Based on early behaviorism, even the simplest behavior, like language, is a result of the repeated connection between a stimulus and its response. Contrary to early behaviorism, Skinner’s behaviorism gave a child a more active role in their development. Unlike classical conditioning, in operant conditioning, which is the core concept in Skinner’s behaviorism, a child operates on his or her environment (Slater et al., 2017). Nonetheless, a child’s development is still dominated by the environment. The argument presented by behaviorists ignores the role of the mind in children’s interaction with their environment.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Behaviorism in Albert Bandura’s social learning theory was less mechanical compared to Watson’s and Skinner’s behaviorism. The social learning theory is built on observational learning. In observational learning, a child has to be mentally engaged to take up behaviors from their environments (Slater et al., 2017). In other words, a child has to observe and imitate the actions of others based on perceived reinforcement. Thus, while aspects of behaviorism- that children learn by reinforcement and punishment of behaviors- were maintained by Bandura, he added a vital dimension of learning by observation, which acknowledges the role of the brain in child development. Thus, since the mental activity is affected by brain chemistry, biological factors influence development in social learning theory to some extent.
Away from behaviorism, Piaget’s approach also reinforces the interaction between a child’s mind and the environment throughout his or her development. Piaget outlines four stages of cognitive development: sensorimotor, preoperational, concrete operations, and formal operations stages ( Babakr et al., 2019 ). According to Piaget’s children learn to adapt to their environment through cognitive adaptations- children develop a better understanding of their surroundings through adaptation ( Babakr et al., 2019 ). They are active in developing their surroundings through assimilation and accommodation. Since the process of assimilation and accommodation does not change, children only change their cognitive structure to allow them to conceptualize the world at a progressively higher level of understanding ( Babakr et al., 2019 ). The different level of cognitive understanding that moves children from sensorimotor function during infancy to abstract levels in early adulthood is limited by their brain development. The cognitive development evident in Piaget’s developmental stages are improvements on the achievements of the previous stages, which is facilitated by the improved brain capacity and capability that facilitates more complex interaction with the environment.
Elsewhere, the social-cognitive development, as presented in Vygotsky’s theory, outlines the importance of the social environment in child development. According to Vygotsky, social interaction plays a vital role in cognitive development ( Smagorinsky, 2018 ). At any developmental level, a child possesses a temporary maximum level of understanding. However, slight beyond the temporary maximum is the zone of proximal development, where a child is presented with new problems and ideas that they cannot comprehend on their own ( Smagorinsky, 2018 ). Nonetheless, with the help of an adult, a child can explore and understand these new problems and ideas. Therefore, adults act as guides to these children because they have a better understanding of the more complex thinking.
Based on the evaluation of the theories above and my personal experience, I would argue that Watson’s statement is not entirely true. From the theory, it is evident that environmental factors play a huge role in children’s development- whether if it is the role of environmental stimuli in triggering responses, the presentation of necessary tools to facilitate cognitive development in Piaget’s approach, or the vital role of social interaction in Vygotsky’s zone of proximal development. Despite the huge role played by environmental factors, these theories also recognize the limits that can be set by biological factors, particularly brain development. Unlike Watson’s behaviorism, where a child is passive and receptive throughout their development, social learning theory, Piaget’s approach, and Vygotsky’s social-cognitive development theory pinpoints the role of the mind in facilitating the interaction between a child and his or her environment. Besides, from my personal observation, Watson’s statement does not hold when dealing with a child whose brain development is affected, leading to improper brain chemistry or hormone level. Nonetheless, environmental factors are the main contributors to children’s behavior and way of thinking.
References
Babakr, Z. H., Mohamedamin, P., & Kakamad, K. (2019). Piaget’s Cognitive Developmental Theory: Critical Review. Education Quarterly Reviews , 2 (3), 517-524.
Slater, A. E, & Bremmer, G. E. (2017). An introduction to developmental psychology (3 rd ed.). Wiley.
Smagorinsky, P. (2018). Deconflating the ZPD and instructional scaffolding: Retranslating and reconceiving the zone of proximal development as the zone of next development. Learning, culture and social interaction , 16 , 70-75.
