Scientific inquiry, for the most part, can be described as parochial. Not only are there clear demarcations between broad disciplinary categories (i.e., anatomy, physiology, psychology), but subspecialties are common within disciplines. Modern technology has made possible a trend toward greater and greater specialization. In fact, there are now areas of scientific investigation that did not exist a few years ago. This increasing specialization and its concomitant reductionism is not without its pitfalls and problems. There is a tendency to move away from the basic evolutionary concept of living organisms as organized systems functioning and adapting within an ecosystem. The laboratory scientist often ignores the inherent organization of living systems in favor of an intense pursuit of his or her particular chosen bit of the biological puzzle. However, there are still disciplines that not only subscribe to the notion of living organisms as organized systems but have made a valiant attempt to bring this concept under laboratory scrutiny. Often, in order to identify these endeavors, a technique is used to combine two or three words into one. Thus, we have several flourishing disciplines described as psychoneuroimmunology, psychoneuroendocrinology, neurochemistry, physiosociology, and so on. For the investigator who attempts a more integrated approach to the broad biological and psychological universe, the demands are heavy. He or she is faced with the need to maintain credibility in several disciplines, each of which is advancing at an accelerated pace. However, we feel that the value of an integrated approach that crosses traditional disciplinary lines will be illustrated in a small way by this article and, we hope, by the series of articles presented in this symposium section of Child Development.