Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Developmental Systems Approach and the Analysis of Behavior

  • Original Article
  • Published:
The Behavior Analyst Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The developmental systems approach is a perspective that has been adopted by increasing numbers of developmental scientists since it emerged in the twentieth century. The overview presented in this paper makes clear that proponents of this approach and proponents of modern behavior analysis should be natural allies. Despite some distinctions between the two schools of thought, the essential ideas associated with each are compatible with the other; in particular, scientists in both camps work to analyze the provenance of behavior and recognize the central role that contextual factors play in behavioral expression.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. It is certainly reasonable to distinguish between categories of behavior based on other factors, such as whether or not the behavior is species-typical (for instance). The point here is that a comprehensive understanding of any behavior—however, it might be categorized in another scheme—requires a developmental analysis of its emergence.

References

  • Alberts, J. R., & Ronca, A. E. (2012). The experience of being born: a natural context for learning to suckle. International Journal of Pediatrics, 2012, Article ID 129328. doi: 10.1155/2012/129328.

  • Blumberg, M. S. (2005). Basic instinct: the genesis of behavior. New York: Thunder’s Mouth Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borghol, N., Suderman, M., McArdle, W., Racine, A., Hallett, M., Pembrey, M., et al. (2012). Associations with early-life socio-economic position in adult DNA methylation. International Journal of Epidemiology, 41, 62–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Burt, C. H., & Simons, R. L. (2014). Pulling back the curtain on heritability studies: biosocial criminology in the postgenomic era. Criminology, 52, 223–262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chaufan, C., & Joseph, J. (2013). The ‘missing heritability’ of common disorders: should health researchers care? International Journal of Health Services, 43, 281–303.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cole, S. W., Hawkley, L. C., Arevalo, J. M., Sung, C. Y., Rose, R. M., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2007). Social regulation of gene expression in human leukocytes. Genome Biology, 8, R189.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Day, J. J., & Sweatt, J. D. (2010). DNA methylation and memory formation. Nature Neuroscience, 13, 1319–1323.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Day, J. J., & Sweatt, J. D. (2011). Epigenetic mechanisms in cognition. Neuron, 70, 813–829.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • DeCasper, A. J., & Fifer, W. P. (1980). Of human bonding: newborns prefer their mothers’ voices. Science, 208, 1174–1176.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • DeCasper, A. J., & Spence, M. J. (1986). Prenatal maternal speech influences newborns’ perception of speech sounds. Infant Behavior and Development, 9, 133–150.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Devlin, A. M., Brain, U., Austin, J., & Oberlander, T. F. (2010). Prenatal exposure to maternal depressed mood and the MTHFR C677T variant affect SLC6A4 methylation in infants at birth. PLoS ONE, 5(8), e12201. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0012201.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Ford, D. H., & Lerner, R. M. (1992). Developmental systems theory: an integrative approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galton, F. (1907). Inquiries into human faculty and its development. London/New York: J. M. Dent/E. P. Dutton (Originally published in 1883).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, S. F. (1992). Synthesizing embryology and human genetics: paradigms regained. American Journal of Human Genetics, 51, 211–215.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, S. F., & Sarkar, S. (2000). Embracing complexity: organicism for the 21st century. Developmental Dynamics, 219, 1–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Godfrey-Smith, P. (2001). On the status and explanatory structure of DST. In S. Oyama, P. E. Griffiths, & R. D. Gray (Eds.), Cycles of contingency: developmental systems and evolution (pp. 283–297). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldstein, M. H., King, A. P., & West, M. J. (2003). Social interaction shapes babbling: testing parallels between birdsong and speech. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 100, 8030–8035.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gomez-Pinilla, F., Zhuang, Y., Feng, J., Ying, Z., & Fan, G. (2011). Exercise impacts brain-derived neurotrophic factor plasticity by engaging mechanisms of epigenetic regulation. European Journal of Neuroscience, 33, 383–390.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gottlieb, G. (1991a). Experiential canalization of behavioral development: theory. Developmental Psychology, 27, 4–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gottlieb, G. (1991b). Experiential canalization of behavioral development: results. Developmental Psychology, 27, 35–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gottlieb, G. (1992). Individual development and evolution: the genesis of novel behavior. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gottlieb, G. (1997). Synthesizing nature-nurture: prenatal roots of instinctive behavior. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gottlieb, G. (1998). Normally occurring environmental and behavioral influences on gene activity: from central dogma to probabilistic epigenesis. Psychological Review, 105, 792–802.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gottlieb, G. (2007). Probabilistic epigenesis. Developmental Science, 10, 1–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Griffiths, P. E., & Gray, R. D. (1994). Developmental systems and evolutionary explanation. The Journal of Philosophy, 91, 277–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griffiths, P. E., & Gray, R. D. (2005). Discussion: three ways to misunderstand developmental systems theory. Biology & Philosophy, 20, 417–425.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griffiths, P. E., & Stotz, K. (2006). Genes in the postgenomic era. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics, 27, 499–521.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Griffiths, P. E., & Tabery, J. (2008). Behavioral genetics and development: historical and conceptual causes of controversy. New Ideas in Psychology, 26, 332–352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griffiths, P. E., & Tabery, J. (2013). Developmental systems theory: what does it explain, and how does it explain it? Advances in Child Development and Behavior, 44, 65–94.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Johnston, T. D. (1987). The persistence of dichotomies in the study of behavioral development. Developmental Review, 7, 149–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnston, T. D. (2010). Developmental systems theory. In M. S. Blumberg, J. H. Freeman, & S. R. Robinson (Eds.), Oxford handbook of developmental behavioral neuroscience (pp. 12–29). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnston, T. D., & Gottlieb, G. (1990). Neophenogenesis: a developmental theory of phenotypic evolution. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 147, 471–495.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Johnston, T. D., & Lickliter, R. (2009). A developmental systems theory perspective on psychological change. In J. P. Spencer, M. S. C. Thomas, & J. L. McClelland (Eds.), Toward a unified theory of development: connectionism and dynamic systems theory re-considered (pp. 285–296). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Joseph, J. (2015). The trouble with twin studies: a reassessment of twin research in the social and behavioral sciences. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kandel, E. R. (2001). The molecular biology of memory storage: a dialogue between genes and synapses. Science, 294, 1030–1038.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Keller, E. F. (2005). DDS: dynamics of developmental systems. Biology & Philosophy, 20, 409–416.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keller, E. F. (2014). From gene action to reactive genomes. Journal of Physiology, 592, 2423–2429.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Kelso, J. A. S. (2000). Principles of dynamic pattern formation and change for a science of human behavior. In L. R. Bergman, R. B. Cairns, L. Nilsson, & L. Nystedt (Eds.), Developmental science and the holistic approach (pp. 63–83). Mahwah, N.J.: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuo, Z. Y. (1967). The dynamics of behavior development: an epigenetic view. New York: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lehrman, D. S. (1953). A critique of Konrad Lorenz’s theory of instinctive behavior. The Quarterly Review of Biology, 28, 337–363.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lester, B. M., Tronick, E., Nestler, E., Abel, T., Kosofsky, B., Kuzawa, C. W., et al. (2011). Behavioral epigenetics. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1226, 14–33.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Levenson, J. M., & Sweatt, J. D. (2005). Epigenetic mechanisms in memory formation. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 6, 108–118.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lewkowicz, D. J. (2011). The biological implausibility of the nature–nurture dichotomy and what it means for the study of infancy. Infancy, 16, 331–367.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Lewontin, R. C. (2000). The triple helix: gene, organism, and environment. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lickliter, R. (2009). The fallacy of partitioning: epigenetics’ validation of the organism-environment system. Ecological Psychology, 21, 138–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lickliter, R. (2013). Biological development: theoretical approaches, techniques, and key findings. In P. D. Zelazo (Ed.), Oxford handbook of developmental psychology (pp. 65–90). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lickliter, R., & Berry, T. D. (1990). The phylogeny fallacy: developmental psychology’s misapplication of evolutionary theory. Developmental Review, 10, 348–364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lickliter, R., & Honeycutt, H. (2015). Biology, development, and human systems. In R. M. Lerner (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology and developmental science (Theory and method, Vol. 1, pp. 162–207). New York: John Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lillycrop, K. A., Phillips, E. S., Jackson, A. A., Hanson, M. A., & Burdge, G. C. (2005). Dietary protein restriction of pregnant rats induces and folic acid supplementation prevents epigenetic modification of hepatic gene expression in the offspring. Journal of Nutrition, 135, 1382–1386.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Masataka, N. (1993). Effects of experience with live insects on the development of fear of snakes in squirrel monkeys, Saimiri sciureus. Animal Behaviour, 46, 741–746.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maze, I., & Nestler, E. J. (2011). The epigenetic landscape of addiction. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1216, 99–113.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • McGowan, P. O., Sasaki, A., D’Alessio, A. C., Dymov, S., Labonté, B., Szyf, M., et al. (2009). Epigenetic regulation of the glucocorticoid receptor in human brain associates with childhood abuse. Nature Neuroscience, 12, 342–348.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Meaney, M. J. (2010). Epigenetics and the biological definition of gene × environment interactions. Child Development, 81, 41–79.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Meaney, M. J., & Szyf, M. (2005). Maternal care as a model for experience-dependent chromatin plasticity? Trends in Neurosciences, 28, 456–463.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Michel, G. F., & Moore, C. L. (1995). Developmental psychobiology: an interdisciplinary science. Cambridge, MA: MIT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Midgley, B. D., & Morris, E. K. (1992). Nature = f(tnurture). A review of Oyama’s the ontogeny of information. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 58, 229–240.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, D. S. (2002). The dependent gene: the fallacy of nature vs. nurture. New York: W.H. Freeman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, D. S. (2006). A very little bit of knowledge: re-evaluating the meaning of the heritability of IQ. Human Development, 49, 347–353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, D. S. (2008). Individuals and populations: how biology’s theory and data have interfered with the integration of development and evolution. New Ideas in Psychology, 26, 370–386.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, D. S. (2009). Probing predispositions: the pragmatism of a process perspective. Child Development Perspectives, 3, 91–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, D. S. (2013a). Behavioral genetics, genetics, & epigenetics. In P. D. Zelazo (Ed.), Oxford handbook of developmental psychology (pp. 91–128). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, D. S. (2013b). Current thinking about nature and nurture. In K. Kampourakis (Ed.), The philosophy of biology: a companion for educators (pp. 629–652). New York: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, D. S. (2015a). The asymmetrical bridge: book review of James Tabery’s “Beyond versus.”. Acta Biotheoretica, 63, 413–427. doi:10.1007/s10441-015-9270-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, D. S. (2015b). The developing genome: an introduction to behavioral epigenetics. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, D. S., & Shenk, D. (2016). The heritability fallacy [Individual development & behavior collection]. WIREs Cognitive Science. doi:10.1002/wcs.1400.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morris, E. K., Lazo, J. F., & Smith, N. G. (2004). Whether, when, and why Skinner published on biological participation in behavior. The Behavior Analyst, 27, 153–169.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Murgatroyd, C., Patchev, A. V., Wu, Y., Micale, V., Bockmühl, Y., Fischer, D., et al. (2009). Dynamic DNA methylation programs persistent adverse effects of early-life stress. Nature Neuroscience, 12, 1559–1566.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nijhout, H. F. (1990). Metaphors and the role of genes in development. BioEssays, 12, 441–446.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Noble, D. (2006). The music of life: biology beyond genes. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Overton, W. F. (2006). Developmental psychology: philosophy, concepts, methodology. In R. Lerner (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology (Theoretical models of human development, Vol. 1, pp. 18–88). New York: John Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Overton, W. F., & Lerner, R. M. (2012). Relational-developmental-systems: paradigm for developmental science in the postgenomic era. Brain and Behavioral Science, 35, 375–376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oyama, S. (1985). The ontogeny of information. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oyama, S., Griffiths, P. E., & Gray, R. D. (2001). Cycles of contingency: developmental systems and evolution. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plomin, R., DeFries, J. C., McClearn, G. E., & McGuffin, P. (2008). Behavioral genetics (5th ed.). New York: Worth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pradeu, T. (2010). The organism in developmental systems theory. Biological Theory, 5, 216–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pradeu, T. (2015). Toolbox murders: putting genes in their epigenetic and ecological contexts. Biology & Philosophy. doi:10.1007/s10539-014-9471-x. Advance online publication.

    Google Scholar 

  • Provençal, N., Suderman, M. J., Guillemin, C., Massart, R., Ruggiero, A., Wang, D., et al. (2012). The signature of maternal rearing in the methylome in rhesus macaque prefrontal cortex and T cells. Journal of Neuroscience, 32, 15626–15642.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, K., & Norgate, S. H. (2005). The equal environments assumption of classical twin studies may not hold. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 75, 339–350.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Roth, T. L., Lubin, F. D., Funk, A. J., & Sweatt, J. D. (2009). Lasting epigenetic influence of early-life adversity on the BDNF gene. Biological Psychiatry, 65, 760–769.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, S. M. (2003). Evolution, behavior principles, and developmental systems: a review of Gottlieb’s Synthesizing nature-nurture: prenatal roots of instinctive behavior. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 79, 137–152.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, S. M. (2007). The tangled tale of genes and environment: Moore’s The dependent gene: the fallacy of “nature vs. nurture.”. The Behavior Analyst, 30, 91–105.

    PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, S. M. (2012). The science of consequences: how they affect genes, change the brain, and impact our world. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneirla, T. C. (1957). The concept of development in comparative psychology. In D. B. Harris (Ed.), The concept of development: an issue in the study of human behavior (pp. 78–108). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shultziner, D. (2013a). Genes and politics: a new explanation and evaluation of twin study results and association studies in political science. Political Analysis, 21, 350–367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shultziner, D. (2013b). Fatal flaws in the twin study paradigm: a reply to Hatemi and Verhulst. Political Analysis, 21, 390–392.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sinclair, K. D., Allegrucci, C., Singh, R., Gardner, D. S., Sebastian, S., Bispham, J., et al. (2007). DNA methylation, insulin resistance, and blood pressure in offspring determined by maternal periconceptional B vitamin and methionine status. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 104, 19351–19356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skinner, B. F. (1980). In response: the species-specific behavior of ethologists. The Behavior Analyst, 3, 51.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Spencer, J. P., Blumberg, M. S., McMurray, B., Robinson, S. R., Samuelson, L. K., & Tomblin, J. B. (2009). Short arms and talking eggs: why we should no longer abide the nativist–empiricist debate. Child Development Perspectives, 3, 79–87.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Stewart, I. (1989). Does god play dice? The mathematics of chaos. Cambridge: Basil Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stotz, K. (2006). With ‘genes’ like that, who needs an environment? Postgenomics’s argument for the “ontogeny of information,”. Philosophy of Science, 73, 905–917.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stotz, K. (2012). Murder on the development express: who killed nature/nurture? Biology & Philosophy, 27, 919–929.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Szyf, M., & Bick, J. (2013). DNA methylation: a mechanism for embedding early life experiences in the genome. Child Development, 84, 49–57.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tabery, J. (2014). Beyond versus: the struggle to understand the interaction of nature and nurture. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Thelen, E., & Smith, L. B. (1994). A dynamic systems approach to the development of cognition and action. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Todd, J. T. (1987). The great power of steady misrepresentation: behaviorism’s presumed denial of instinct. The Behavior Analyst, 10, 117–118.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Van IJzendoorn, M. H., Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J., & Ebstein, R. P. (2011). Methylation matters in child development: toward developmental behavioral epigenetics. Child Development Perspectives, 5, 305–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wallman, J. (1979). A minimal visual restriction experiment: preventing chicks from seeing their feet affects later responses to mealworms. Developmental Psychobiology, 12, 391–397.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Weaver, I. C. G. (2007). Epigenetic programming by maternal behavior and pharmacological intervention: nature versus nurture: let’s call the whole thing off. Epigenetics, 2, 22–28.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Weaver, I. C. G., Cervoni, N., Champagne, F. A., D’Alessio, A. C., Sharma, S., Seckl, J. R., et al. (2004). Epigenetic programming by maternal behavior. Nature Neuroscience, 7, 847–854.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Weaver, I. C. G., Meaney, M. J., & Szyf, M. (2006). Maternal care effects on the hippocampal transcriptome and anxiety-mediated behaviors in the offspring that are reversible in adulthood. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 103, 3480–3485.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wereha, T. J., & Racine, T. P. (2012). Evolution, development, and human social cognition. Review of Philosophy and Psychology, 3, 559–579.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • West, M. J., & King, A. P. (1987). Settling nature and nurture into an ontogenetic niche. Developmental Psychobiology, 20, 549–562.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Witherington, D. C., & Lickliter, R. (2016). Integrating development and evolution in psychological science: evolutionary developmental psychology, developmental systems, and explanatory pluralism. Manuscript submitted for publication.

  • Zhang, T.-Y., & Meaney, M. J. (2010). Epigenetics and the environmental regulation of the genome and its function. Annual Review of Psychology, 61, 439–466.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Pitzer College, 1050 N. Mills Avenue, Claremont, CA, 91711, USA

    David S. Moore

  2. Claremont Graduate University, Claremont, CA, USA

    David S. Moore

Authors
  1. David S. Moore
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to David S. Moore.

Ethics declarations

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Conflicts of interest

David S. Moore declares that he has no conflicts of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Moore, D.S. The Developmental Systems Approach and the Analysis of Behavior. BEHAV ANALYST 39, 243–258 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40614-016-0068-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40614-016-0068-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation