Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

SAGETRACK

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
The Journal of Early Adolescence
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Lerner, R. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Dialectics, Developmental Contextualism, and the Further Enhancement of Theory about Puberty and Psychosocial Development

Richard M. Lerner

Michigan State University

Contemporary theory in the study of human development in general and of adolescence in particular emphasizes reciprocal and changing relations between the developing person and his or her changing context. This article analyzes the Adams et al dialectical model of the role of a key component of adolescent development-puberty-in such person-context relations. To interpret the model's meaning and critique its usefulness, the present article considers the place of this formulation within the recent history of theory development in the human developmental sciences. It is argued that dialectics is flawed as a means to understand variation in puberty-context relations because it involves an inherently teleological notion of change; as such, dialectics cannot be used successfully to model the multidirectionality and plasticity of adolescent development. A developmental contextual alternative formulation is presented.

The Journal of Early Adolescence, Vol. 12, No. 4, 366-388 (1992)
DOI: 10.1177/0272431692012004002
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 EvaluationHome page
A. J. Huebner and S. C. Betts
Examining Fourth Generation Evaluation: Application to Positive Youth Development
Evaluation, July 1, 1999; 5(3): 340 - 358.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Journal of Adolescent ResearchHome page
C. W. Ostrom, R. M. Lerner, and M. A. Freel
Building the Capacity of Youth and Families through University-Community Collaborations: The Development-In-Context Evaluation (DICE) Model
Journal of Adolescent Research, October 1, 1995; 10(4): 427 - 448.
[Abstract]

Home page
 The Journal of Early AdolescenceHome page
G. R. Adams, B. A. Ryan, J. Corville-Smith, A. Normore, and B. Turner
Dialectics, Organicism, and Contextualism: A Rejoinder to Lerner
The Journal of Early Adolescence, November 1, 1992; 12(4): 389 - 395.
[Abstract]