The second dimension Bee and Bjorklund (2004) describe in their conceptual scheme is the presence or absence of stages in each theory. Stage theories refer to “those that hypothesise sequences of experiences or events over time… more narrowly, stage imply systematic, sequential, qualitative changes in a skill or underlying psychological structure” (Bee & Bjorklund, 2004; p.33). Moreover, “each stage is thought of as being a structural whole, as having its own logic” (Bee & Bjorklund, 2004; p.33). Proponents of stage theories maintain that all people, at about the same time in their lives, experience the same events, problems, or challenges. Consequently, they propose that they are universal stages of change. Of the many prominent stage/phase theories (Erikson, 1959, 1963, 1968; Kohlberg, 1973; Levinson, 1986; Loevinger, 1976; Vaillant, 1977), those theories promulgated by Erikson and Levinson have probably had the greatest impact on the field of adult development. Both Erikson and Levinson maintain that stages of development are hierarchical in nature, that is, they build over time and occur in a fixed order. But Erikson, unlike Levinson, does not necessarily link development to specific ages in life. These slight developmental variations allows one to formally present here a discussion about the ideas and work of the classical stage/phase theorists of Erikson (1968) and Levinson (1986) in order to understand the concept of adult development.
Erik Erikson (1986) has contributed significantly to the understanding of adult development. Erikson is grounded in the psychoanalytic theory, but rejects the Freudian notion that personality is fixed alone by early childhood experiences and extends the stages of human development through the life-span (Slater, 2003). For Erikson, the key concept is the gradual, stepwise emergence of a sense of identity. According to his theory, an individual has a psychosocial task to master during each of the eight stages of life, three of which occur during adulthood. Because healthy identity development over the life course depends on movement in an invariant sequence through each stage, as well as resolution of the task associated with it, all stages add to and influence one another, a process Erikson terms “epigenetic”. Each stage in Erikson’s (1986) eight-stage model is identified by a pair of oppositional outcomes, one positive or healthy and the other of a less desirable outcome. By the successful resolution of the ‘crisis’ or dilemma associated with each stage, a strength can potentially be gained. For example, in the first stage of adulthood - intimacy versus isolation - the young adult must develop a sense of ‘we’ that transcends previous immersion with the self. This is accomplished by establishing one or more genuinely intimate relationships; ‘love’ is the strength to be attained. In the second stage of adulthood - generativity versus stagnation - the individual must find a way to support the next generation by redirecting attention from self to others. Successful mastery of this stage results in ‘care’. Resolution of the final stage of adulthood - integrity versus despair - culminates in ‘wisdom’. Erikson (1968) defines integrity as “the acceptance of one’s one and only life cycle and the people who have become significant to it as something that had to be and that, by necessity, permitted no substitutions” (Erikson, 1968; p. 139; as cited in Hoare, 2005); meaning, if all previous life stages have been addressed in a satisfactory way, those approaching the end of life are able to accept themselves as they are.
Unlike Erikson, Levinson (1986) identifies a relatively orderly sequence of periods during the adult years that are age-linked. He acknowledges a relationship between his periods and Erikson’s developmental stages, but emphasises change rather than development. For Levinson (1986), development consists of periods of relative stability (structure building) that are interwoven with periods of transition (structure changing). The life structure, “the underlying pattern or design of a person’s life at a given time” (p. 6) is the ‘pillar’ to Levinson’s conception of adult development. The primary component of the life structure is made up of an individual’s “relationships with various ‘others’ in the external world. The other may be a person, a group, institution and cultures, or a particular object or place” (p.6). These relationships give “shape and substance to the life course. They are the vehicle by which we live out - or bury - various aspects of ourselves and by which we participate, for better or worse, in the world around us” (p. 6). Periods in the life structure are defined in terms of developmental tasks, for example, establishing a niche in society and striving to “make it” rather than by concrete life events (for example, getting married). “Each stable period has certain developmental tasks and life issues crucial to the evolution of that period. A period ends when its tasks lose their primacy and new tasks emerge, initiating a new period” (Rice, 1992, p. 338). Periods of transition, which usually last about five years, provide time to “question and reappraise, to search for new possibilities in the self and the world” (p. 338).
Levinson (1986) organises the alternating periods of stability and transition throughout life into four eras, each with its own ‘biopsychosocial’ character; three of the four eras take place during adulthood. The first - early adulthood - lasts from age seventeen to forty-five and is characterised as the era of “greatest energy and abundance and of greatest contradiction and stress ... we are most buffeted by our passions and ambitions from within and by the demands of family, community, and society from without” (p. 5). The second era - middle adulthood - lasts from ages forty to sixty-five. The biological capacities of adults during this era, although diminished when compared with those in early adulthood, are “normally still sufficient for an energetic, personally satisfying and socially valuable life” (p. 6). It is during this time that most adults become “senior members” in their own worlds, responsible not only for their own work and “perhaps the work of others, but also for the development of the current generation of young adults who will soon enter the dominant generation” (p. 6). The era of late adulthood begins at age sixty. During this time, an individual confronts the self and makes peace with the world.
The classical conceptualisations of stage theories have been very influential in adult developmental psychology. As we have seen, although alike, they differ in some very important ways. The relative emphasis here can be summed up in three themes: (1) the role of maturation (nature) versus experience (2) the role of developmental stages (continuity versus discontinuity), and (3) the active versus passive role of the individual in development (Hoffnung, 1997). For Erikson, the individual is born with a number of basic instincts, that development occurs through stages, and that the order of these stages is influenced by biological maturation (Sigelman, and Shaffer 1995). However Erikson also stresses the importance of environmental influences which suggest Erikson views development as a mutual combination of nature and nurture. The idea of ‘discontinuity’ suggests that development occurs via a series of abrupt changes that develop from one stage to another. Erikson believes that an individual experiences periods of development which if actively engaged in will largely determine the outcome as being resolved or not.
Continuity theorists on the other hand, such as Levinson would argue that human development is a process that occurs in small steps, without sudden change. Levinson predominately emphasises change to be more age-linked then Erikson and also places more significances on a person social relationships with ‘others’ rather than biological maturation. Major criticisms, however, have been that they predominantly predicate “normal” psychological development on the lives of white, American, middle-class men - a small group whose experiences may not be representative of others in a diverse society. The issue of universality versus diversity becomes a major issue here due to the lack of generality. Gilligan (1982) notes that the desired outcomes in many of the developmental theories (for example, autonomy, independence, and separateness) typify the male experience and that the course of female development, with its emphasis on relationships, empathy, interdependence, and attachment, is rarely equated with healthy adulthood suggesting a pervasive gender bias in developmental theory (Gilligan, 1982). Although Levinson’s initial research was limited to middle-class American men, Levinson maintains that his theory also applies to women, different social classes, diverse cultures, and other periods of history (Levinson and Levinson, 1996). Other weaknesses of stage theories are the overemphasis on chronological age, which may mask variations in individual lives, for example, Neugarten (1968), in challenging the age-graded concept of adult development, noted that U.S. society is increasingly age irrelevant. She notes how participation in further education is no longer “from the ages of 18 years to 22 years” rather rooms are now populated with a much wider age range of people (Neugarten, 1968).
The need to understand adult development is essential for the development of scientific knowledge that focuses on the welfare of humankind in general. The contribution of expert psychologists in the field of adult development has been considered in the present essay. The approach of the essay was that of theoretical approach and the contributions on stage model were given priority for the discussion. We hereby conclude that understanding of development in adults has gained great insight by the contribution of stage model and is therefore exercising a prominent role of application with appreciation in the field of psychology.
Word Count: 2072.
References:
Baltes, P. B., Reese, H. W., and Lipsitt, L. P (1980). Life-span developmental psychology. Annual Review of Psychology, 31, 65–110.
Bee, H.L. (1996). Journey of adulthood (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, N.J.: Prentice Hall.
Bee, H., and Bjorkland, B. (2000). The Journey of Adulthood (4th ed). New York: Prentice-Hall.
Erikson, E. H. (1982). The life cycle completed: A review. New York: Norton.
Fowler, J. W. (1981) Stages of faith: The psychology of human development and the quest for meaning. New York: Harper & Row.
Gilligan, C. (1982). In a different voice: psychological theory and women’s development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Kohlberg, L. (1973). Continuities in childhood and adult moral development revisited. In P.B. Baltes and K.W. Schaie (Eds.), Life-span developmental psychology: Personality and socialisation (pp.179-204). New York: Academic Press.
Levinson, D.J. (1986). A conception of adult development. American Psychologist, 41,
3-13.
Levinson, D. J., and Levinson, J. D. (1996). The Seasons of a Woman's Life. New York- Ballantine.
Loevinger, J. (1976). Ego development: Conceptions and theories. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Merriam, S.B. and Caffarella, R.S. (1999). Learning in adulthood (2ed.). San Francisco: Jossey Bass.
Neugarten, B. L. (1968). Middle age and aging: A reader in social psychology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Passer, M. W., and Smith, R. E. (2001). Psychology: Frontiers and applications. Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Permutter, M. and Hall, E. (1992). Adult development and aging. New York: Wiley.
Rice, F. P. (1992) Human Development: A Life-Span Approach. New York: Macmilliam.
Schroeder, B. A. (1992). Human growth and development. St. Paul, MN: West Publishing.
Seifert, K. L., Hoffnung, R. J., and Hoffnung, M. (1997). Lifespan Development. Boston:
Houghton Mifflin Company.
Sigelman, C. and Shaffer, D. (1995). Life span human development. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks Cole Publishing Company.
Slater, C. L. (2003). Generativity versus stagnation: An elaboration of Erikson’s adult life stage of human development. Journal of Adult Development, 10, 53-65.
