Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Arnold gesell and the maturation controversy

  • Published:
Integrative Physiological & Behavioral Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article examines the work of Arnold Lucius Gesell and argues that he not only paved the way for contemporary research in motor development, but that he and colleagues anticipated fundamental issues about growth that must be addressed by psychologists and neuroscientists who are committed to the advancement of developmental science. Arnold Lucius Gesell was a pioneer in developmental psychology when the field was in its infancy. He worked diligently for the rights of physically and mentally handicapped children to receive special education that would enable them to find gainful employment. Gesell’s writings in books and popular magazines increased public awareness of and support for preschool education and better foster care for orphans. Despite these achievements, many of his successors have questioned his views about infant development. Developmental psychologists have criticized Gesell for proposing a stage theory of infant growth that has fallen into disfavor among contemporary researchers. His conception of development as a maturational process has been challenged for allegedly reducing complex behavioral, perceptual, and learning processes to genetic factors. The author rejects this overly simplistic interpretation and contends that Gesell’s work continues to stand the test of time.

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

References

  • Baldwin, J. M. (1894).Mental development in the child and the race: Methods and processes. New York and London: Macmilian.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cairns, R. (1998). The making of developmental psychology. In R. M. Lerner, (Ed.), The handbook of child psychology. 5th ed. (pp. 25–106). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carmichael, L. (1933). Origin and prenatal growth of behavior. In C. Murchison (Ed.),A Handbook of Child Psychology, 2nd ed. rev. (pp. 31–159). Worcester, MA: Clark University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clarke, J. E., Truly, T. L., and Phillips, S. J. (1993). On the development of walking as a limit-cycle system. In Thelen, E. and Smith L. B. (Eds.),A dynamic systems approach to development: Applications. (pp. 71–94). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coghill, G. E. (1926). The mechanism of integration in Amblystoma punctatum.Journal of Comparative Neurology, 41, 95–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coghill, G. E. (1929).Anatomy and the problem of behavior. New York: Hafner.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coghill, G. E. (1930). The structural basis of the integration of behavior.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 16, 637–643.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coghill, G. E. (1930a). The structural basis of the integration of behavior.National Academy of Sciences Proceedings, 16, 637–643.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coghill, G. E. (1930b). Individuation versus integration in the development of behavior.Journal of Genetic Psychology, 3, 431–435.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coghill, G. E. (1933a). The neuroembryonic study of behavior: principles, perspectives and aims.Science, 78, 131–138.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Coghill, G. E. (1933b, October 27). Letter to C. J. Herrick. Neurology Collection, C.Judson Herrick Papers, Spencer Research Library, University of Kansas, Lawrence, KN.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coghill, G. E. (1934, April 23). Letter to A. Gesell, 1. General Correspondence, Arnold Gesell Papers, Manuscript Division, Library of Congress, Washington, DC.

  • Coghill, G. E. (1936). Integration and the motivation of behavior.The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 48, 3–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coghill, G. E. (1938, May 25). Letter to A. Gesell. General Correspondence, Arnold Gesell Papers, Manuscript Division, Library of Congress Washington, DC.

  • Coghill, G. E. (1939, June 30). Letter to A. Gesell. General Correspondence, Arnold Gesell Papers, Manuscript Division, Library of Congress Washington, DC.

  • Conel, L. (1939).The Post-Natal Development of the Human Cerebral Cortex. Vol. 1: Cortex of the Newborn. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dalton, T. C. (1996). Was McGraw a maturationist?American Psychologist, 51, 551–552.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dalton, T. C. (1998). Myrtle McGraw’s neurobehavioral theory of development.Developmental Review, 18, 428–436

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dalton, T. C. (1999). The ontogeny of consciousness: John Dewey and Myrtle McGraw’s contribution to a science of mind.Journal of Consciousness Studies, 6, 3–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dalton, T. C. (1995). McGraw’s alternative to Gesell’s Maturationism. In T. C. Dalton and V. W. Bergenn, (Eds.),Beyond heredity and environment: Myrtle Mcgraw and the maturation controversy. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dalton, T. C. and Bergenn, V. W. (1996). John Dewey, Myrtle McGraw andLogic: An unusual collaboration in the 1930s.Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 27, 775–881.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenberg, N., I. Guthrie, B. Murphy; S. Shepard, A. Cumberland and G. Carlo, (1999). Consistency and development of prosocial dispositions: A longitudinal study.Child Development, 70, 1360–1372.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fagan, T. K. (1987a). Gesell: The first school psychologist. Part I. The road to Connecticut.School Psychology Review, 16, 103–107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fagan, T. K. (1987). Gesell: The first school psychologist. Part II. Practice and significance.School Psychology Review, 16, 399–409.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, G. S. (1912, September 7). Letter to Gesell, 1–2. Arnold Gesell Papers, Manuscript Division, Library of Congress, Washington, DC.

  • Hall, G. S. (1914, June 18). Letter to Gesell, 1. Arnold Gesell Papers, Manuscript Division, Library of Congress, Washington, DC.

  • Gesell, A. (1906). Jealousy.Journal of Psychology, 17, 337–496.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gesell, A. (1914, June 14). Letter to Lewis Terman, 1–3. Arnold Gesell Papers, Manuscript Division, Library of Congress, Washington, DC.

  • Gesell, A. (1925).The mental growth of the preschool child. New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gesell, A. (1933). Maturation and the patterning of behavior. In C. Murchison (Ed.),A handbook of child psychology, 2nd ed. rev. (pp. 209–235). Worcester, MA: Clark University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gesell, A. (1934, March 22). Letter to G. E.Coghill, 1. Arnold Gesell Papers, Manuscript Division, Library of Congress, Washington, DC.

  • Gesell, A. (1938, May 17). Letter to G.E. Coghill. Arnold Gesell Papers, Manuscript Division, Library of Congress, Washington, DC.

  • Gesell, A. (1939a). Reciprocal interweaving in neuromotor development.The Journal of Comparative Neurology, 10, 161–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gesell, A. (1939b, October 28). Letter to J. LeRoy Conel, 1–3. Arnold Gesell Papers, Manuscript Division, Library of Congress, Washington, DC.

  • Gesell, A. (1945).The Embryology of Behavior. New York: Harper Brothers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gesell, A. and Thompson, H. (1934).Infant Behavior: Its Genesis and Growth. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gesell, A. and Amatruda, C. (1947).Developmental diagnosis: Normal and abnormal child development. New York: Paul Hoeber.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gesell, A. and Ilg, F. (1949).Child development: An introduction to the study of human growth. New York: Harper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gesell, A. (1952). Autobiography. In E. G. Boring, H. S. Langfield, H. Werner and R. M. Yerkes (Eds.),A history of psychology in autobiography, Vol. 4 (pp. 123–142). Worcester, MA: Clark University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Gottlieb, G. (1997).Synthesizing Nature/ Nurture: Prenatal roots of instinctive behavior. Mahwah, NJ; Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gottlieb, G. (1998). Myrtle McGraw’s unrecognized conceptual contribution to developmental psychology.Developmental Review, 18, 337–448.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gottlieb, G. (2000). Zing-Yang Kuo: Personal recollections and intimations of developmental science.From Past to Future: Clark Papers on the History of Psychology 2, 1–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenough, W. T., Black, J. E. and Wallace, C. (1993). Experience and brain development. In M. H. Johnson (Ed.),Brain development and cognition (pp. 319–322). Cambridge, MA: Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, G. S. (1912, September 7). Letter to Gesell. Arnold Gesell Papers, Manuscript Division, Library of Congress, Washington, DC.

  • Hall, G. S. (1914, June 18). Letter to Gesell. Arnold Gesell Papers, Manuscript Division, Library of Congress, Washington, DC.

  • Hooker, D. (1943). Reflex Activities in the human fetus. In R. Barker, J. S. Kounin and H. F. Wright, (Eds.), Child behavior and development (pp. 120–192). New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuo, Z. Y. (1932). Ontogeny of embryonic behavior in Aves. The chronology and general nature of the behavior of the chick embryo.Journal of Experimental Zoology, 61, 395–430.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGraw, M. B. (1926, March 19). Letter to Gesell, 1. Arnold Gesell Papers, Manuscript Division, Library of Congress, Washington, DC.

  • McGraw, M. B. (1927), March 2). Letter to Gesell. Arnold Gesell Papers, Manuscript Division, Library of Congress, Washington, DC.

  • McGraw, M. B. (1935/1975). Growth: A study of Johnny and Jimmy. New York: Appleton Century. Reprint, New York: Arno Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGraw, M. B. (1939). Swimming behavior of the human infant.Journal of Pediatrics, 15, 485–490.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGraw, M. B. (1941). Development of neuromuscular mechanisms as reflected in the crawling and creeping behavior of the human infant.Journal of Genetic Psychology, 58, 83–111.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGraw, M. B. (1943).The neuromuscular maturation of the human infant. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGraw, M. B. (1946). Maturation of behavior. In L. Carmichael, (Ed.),Manual of Child Development. (pp. 332–369). New York: Wiley.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • McGraw, M. B. (1979, December 31). Letter to R. Oppenheim, 1–2. Myrtle B. McGraw Papers, Special Collections, Millbank Memorial Library, Teachers College, Columbia University, New York.

  • Merzenich, M., Recanzone, G., Jenkins, W., Allard, T. and Nudo, R. (1988). Cortical representational plasticity. In P. Rakic and W. Singer (Eds.),Neurobiology of the neocortex (pp. 41–67). New York: John Wiley and Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Minkowski, M. Neurobiologische studien am menschlichen foetus,Abderhaldens Handbuch d. biologischen Arbeitsmethoden, Lief, 253 S. 511–563.

  • Miles, W. R. (1964). Arnold Lucius Gesell, 1880–1961: A biographical memior.National Academy of Sciences, Biographical memiors, Vo. 37 (pp. 55–96). New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Needham, J. (1942).Biochemistry and morphogenesis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oppenheim, R. W. (1978). G. E. Coghill (1872–1941): Pioneer neuroembryologist and developmental psychobiologist.Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, 22, 45–64.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Oppenheim, R. W. (1995). Myrtle McGraw’s nascent and pioneering use of embryology to understand human development. In T. C. Dalton and V. W. Bergenn, (Eds.),Beyond Heredity and environment: myrtle McGraw and the Maturation Controversy. (pp. ix-xv). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberton, M. A. (1993). New ways to think about old questions. In Thelen, E. and Smith L. B. (Eds.),A dynamic systems approach to development: Applications. (pp. 95–118). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swift, E. J. (1905a, May 1). Letter to Gesell, 1–3. Arnold Gesell Papers. Manuscript Division, Library of Congress, Washington, DC.

  • Swift, E. J. (1905b, February 25). Letter to Gesell, 1. Arnold Gesell Papers. Manuscript Division, Library of Congress, Washington, DC.

  • Terman, L. (1918, March 22). Letter to Gesell, 1–3. Arnold Gesell Papers. Manuscript Division, Library of Congress, Washington, DC.

  • Thelen, E. (1987). The role of motor development in developmental psychology: A view of the past and an agenda for the future. In N. Eisenberg (Ed.),Contemporary topics in developmental psychology. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thelen, E. and Adolfs, K. (1994). Arnold L. Gesell: The paradox of nature and nurture. In R. D. Parke, P. A. Ornstein, J. J. Rieser and C. Zahn-Waxler, (Eds.),A century of developmental psychology. (pp. 357–388). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Thelen, E. (2000). Motor development as foundation and future of developmental psychology.International journal of behavioral development, 24, 385–397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Touwen, B. C. L. (1995). Epilogue: A Neurologist’s “Homage”. In T. C. Dalton and V. W. Bergenn, (Eds.),Beyond Heredity and environment: Myrtle McGraw and the Maturation Controversy. (pp. 271–283). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Touwen, B. C. L. (1998). The brain and the development of function.Developmental Review, 18, 504–526.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wellman, H. M. (1990). The Child’s Theory of Mind. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Windle, W. F. (1940).Physiology of the fetus: Origin and extend of function in prenatal life. Philadelphia, PA: W. B. Saunders.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zelazo, P. R. (1998). McGraw and the development of unaided walking.Developmental Review, 18, 449–472.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Liberal Arts at California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo

    Thomas C. Dalton (Senior Research Associate with the Office)

Authors
  1. Thomas C. Dalton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

Reprinted from Jaan Valsiner (ed.).Thinking in Psychological Science: Ideas and Their Makers. Transaction Publishers.

Previously published inFrom Past to Future, Vol. 3(2), Beyond Observing Human Nature: Theoretical Contributions of Arnold Gesell to Developmental Science, pp. 7–31. @ 2001 Frances L. Hiatt School of Psychology, Clark University. Author: Thomas C. Dalton, Cal Poly State University, San Luis Obispo, CA.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Dalton, T.C. Arnold gesell and the maturation controversy. Integrative Physiological & Behavioral Science 40, 182–204 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02915215

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02915215

Keywords

Search

Navigation