Scanning For Keypoints And Summarizing

INTRODUCTION AND DEFINITION It was a happy circumstance that the decision to invite the first review chapter on life-span developmental psychology coincided very closely with the bicentennial anniversary of this field. It was in 1777 when J. N. Tetens, a German philosopher-psychologist, published the first major work on human development from a life-span developmental perspective (Groffmann 1970, Reinert 1979). Although Tetens referred to no empirical research in the strict sense, he stated with fair precision many of the basic propositions of a life-span approach to the study of behavior. Moreover, his work and that of Carus (1808) present a lucid introspection and commonsense-based account of many behavioral changes associated with individual ontogeny from birth to death. Another important publication, marking the birth of an empirically founded account of life-span human development, is Quetelet's book, A Treatise on Man and the Development of his Faculties, published in 1835 in French and 1842 in English. Quetelet's book is a remarkable accomplishment deserving much attention because of its substantive comprehensiveness and methodological quality (Baltes 1979, Hofstatter 1938). Life-span developmental psychology is concerned with the description, explanation, and modification (optimization) of developmental processes in the human life course from conception to death. Like other developmental specialties such as child development or gerontology, life-span developmental psychology is not a theory but an orientation. It implies a certain conceptual and methodological framework for the study of behavioral development (Baltes, Reese & Nesselroade 1977, Lern�r 1976, Runyan 1978, WohlwillI973). Whether the study of behavior necessitates a short-span or life-span developmental orientation-or indeed any kind of developmental orientation-is largely a function of the questions asked. In our view, a developmental orientation is needed whenever the behavior identified involves a change process and is better understood if placed in the context of chains and patterns of antecedent and subsequent events. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 1980.31:65-110. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org by Fordham University on 04/10/13. For personal use only. [.......]