Psychobiologists, psychologists, and sociologists often differ markedly in the method and substance of their developmental research. Yet fundamental similarities bridge these orientations in the form of concepts applicable to multiple levels of analysis. Many of these concepts were identified by Gottlieb (1991a), generalizing from research on the interplay between genes and experience in the canalization of behavior: “The principal ideas concern the epigenetic characterization of individual development as an emergent, coactional, hierarchical system’ (p. 7). In this chapter, we consider the transposability of these ideas to the psychology and sociology of human development. As such, our effort represents a crossdisciplinary comparison of developmental concepts, in keeping with Winegar's (Chapter 1, this volume) argument for research at all levels of scientific practice.

We begin by locating our comparisons in the metatheory of developmental studies. We then propose a series of “heuristic definitions” (Werner, 1957), statements not empirically testable in themselves but “valuable to developmental psychologists in leading to a determination of the actual range of applicability of developmental concepts” (p. 126). The heuristic definitions provide a basis for multi– and interdisciplinary communication. They can also be used to assess theoretical coverage — the specific ways in which a model addresses basic developmental issues. By example, the heuristic definitions are used to assess Fischer's theory of cognitive development and Sullivan's interpersonal theory of psychiatry.

Metatheoretical Strategies in Developmental Studies

Metatheory covers a broad range of reflexive strategies to examine one's discipline. Ritzer (1988) classifies metatheoretical studies along social–intellectual and external–internal dimensions.