We propose an adaptation of Urie Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological theory,
neo-ecological theory
. As bioecological theory was developed in the 20
th
century, it requires significant modifications to reflect some of the most ubiquitous contexts in which adolescents learn, play, and grow—the technological and virtual ones. Although several scholars have developed laudable theories related to youth development in virtual contexts, the field lacks an overarching theory to address the intersection of development and technology. In developing neo-ecological theory, we hold true to the tenets of bioecological theory, but suggest key modifications to reflect our technologized world. We delineate a key alteration to the microsystem, namely the existence of two types of microsystems—physical and virtual. In addition, we emphasize the importance of macrosystemic influences (i.e., the influences of culture and within-society subcultural variation) in understanding development in the digital age. The implications of these modifications cascade across the Process-Person-Context-Time (PPCT) model; proximal processes, person characteristics, context, and time are all reexamined. In the digital age, virtual microsystems are central contexts in which youth engage in proximal processes. As such, we believe that all scholars of development, regardless of their specific research interests, should consider the ways digital contexts influence their outcomes of interest. Without it, practitioners, policy makers, parents, and technologists will be in the dark about how best to support adolescents.
Bronfenbrenner's ecological (and later bioecological) theory has been a mainstay in the theoretical wheelhouse of developmental and family sciences since its inception in the 1970s. However, few studies accurately operationalize Bronfenbrenner's process‐person‐context‐time (PPCT) research model. The aim of this paper is to provide a practical guide to the design, implementation, and analysis of PPCT research studies. Using recent qualitative and quantitative publications from developmental and family science journals, we illustrate how his theory can be operationalized simply and effectively in 21st‐century research. The eight studies, three qualitative and five quantitative, feature participants from Chile, China, South Africa, Turkey, and the United States.
Current scholarship on “gratitude” has largely ignored its opposite – ingratitude. As a result, gratitude is no longer distinguishable from constructs such as appreciation and happiness. This was not the case over previous centuries – ingratitude was viewed as something monstrous, a failure to reciprocate would loosen the bonds holding society together. The opposite, gratitude, was seen as a virtue. Reciprocity has come under attack because “obligation” has been understood in only one of two possible senses. The first relates to contracts and justice – one has a heteronomous obligation to pay off a debt or fulfill a contract. The second is a sense of obligation that comes from within, autonomously – the desire to help those that have helped us. Here, we argue, is where gratitude and ingratitude are situated. This view has two important consequences; one relates to the measurement of gratitude and the other to raising youth to be grateful people.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.