Erikson’s Theory 1

Erikson’s Theory

In a 1996 study appearing in the American Psychological Society, Robert Siegler and

Shari Ellis review the impact of Swiss psychologist Jean Piaget’s contribution to an important

aspect of psychology that is cognitive development, specifically childhood development. The

authors also point out how Piaget’s ideas have shaped research and theories in the particular

area (1996). The study focuses on three aspects of Piaget’s theory: constructivism,

essentialism and dynamism (1996). Enumerating various studies, the authors explain how

Piaget’s research basic tenets continue to be the foundation of researches (1996). However,

they also note that recent researches address the role of variability, which is not mapped out

in Piaget’s cognitive development.

The study does not strengthen or weaken Erikson’s Stages of Personality

Development precisely because Piaget’s Stages of Cognitive Development and Erikson’s

Stages of Personality Development tackle two different aspects of human development:

cognitive (level of intelligence) for Piaget and psychosocial for Erikson. However, with

regard to essentialism, it is safe to assume that both Piaget and Erikson adhere to

essentialism. Both theorists aver that there are stages in each development and that each stage

has specific features. In the discussion, Siegler and Ellis describe studies which debunk

some concepts ascribed by Piaget and recommend the abandonment of searching for essences

and instead focus on pinpointing characteristic tendencies (1996). The same goes with

Erikson’s concepts. Some of the ideas are supposed to be universal, however, studies abound

showing that is not the case. Sometimes, the generalization is dependent on the context,

which is clearly not what Erikson and Piaget were attributing to. To both theorists, the

concept explains it all. There are no rooms for changes, even slight modification. The role of

variability is underplayed when it could have explained the changes that occur in

development, whether cognitive or in the case of Erikson, psycho-social and this would have
 Erikson’s Theory 2

lessened the criticisms given to both concepts. On the other hand, if Piaget and Erikson’s

theories appeared without certain ambiguities, and were accepted wholeheartedly by

everyone, it would not have resulted in further researches and studies, to prove or disprove

them.
 Erikson’s Theory 3

Reference

Siegler, R. and Ellis, S. (1996). Piaget on Childhood. Retrieved from University of Toledo

Department of Psychology Web site: http://psychology.utoledo.edu/images/users/1/

kami-week2/puagetpart5.pdf