Integrative Literature Review

Resources for the Integrative Literature Review

PSY 699

March 31,2020

Introduction

Scientists in the recent past have been marveled at the human brain and how it is shaping so many spheres in the human life. Further proper understanding of how the human brains influences our behavior under any context or experience has made psychology one of the most fascinating field of study. According to Jean Piaget a renowned psychologist he argued that the person we are today is basically a compilation of various small habits, beliefs and even thoughts that go through in our mind. This analogy has further been expounded by Sigmund Freud who argued that the four major domains of psychology which are cognitive domain, biological domain, developmental domain and social and personality domain are all interlinked in one way or the other. Some of the theories in the four domains of psychology include a rational motive behavior therapy theory developed by Albert Elli, also Aron Beck’s theory on cognitive therapy. Other theories which have gained recognition in this field of psychology include the trait or perspective theory, evolutionary theory, psychodynamic theory and lastly social identity theory. In addition, there exist a connection between some of the domains for instance the biological domain which basically analyses how human biology influences virtually all the mental process and even our own behaviors.

This domain of psychology closely relates to cognitive domain of psychology which focuses majorly on the study of emotions, behavior, cognitions and even our relationship with the society and other people in general. Further the connection between the two domains is that cognitive domain relies on the biological domain to understand how our biology in terms of neuroscience influences our emotions, relationships, thoughts and behavior.

The same connection is true for developmental domain which relies on cognitive domain to understand what could be the factors that influences human being development. It is also worth noting that not all points from the four domains agree with each other since there are some points with competing views across the four domains. Some of these competing points include biological domain arguing that neuroscience controls largely all the other domain of psychology a point which is disputed by social and personality domain. It therefore means that integration of these domains is pertinent in providing a holistic understanding in the field of psychology. Also, the four domains have a long history spanning to even ten centuries since the field of psychology began immediately with the creation of human beings and its curiosity of trying to understand how its brain or mind works and further its relationship with the environment in which man exist in (Prada, Garrison, Camilo, & Rodrigues, 2018).

Findings have indicated that providing a conclusive line of thought or reasons as to how the human brain or mind works cannot be easy since it requires integration of so many fields to try providing any connection that might exist. Also choosing this literature was very crucial in trying to enumerate that there is a tangible existence or relationship that exist among the four domains which can help in arriving at a body of knowledge that can lead the field of psychology into a consensus in its substantive diverging theories. Consequently, integration of the four domains of psychology and critically evaluating research findings from all the four domains can offer the much-needed insight into how the various domains are interlinked and contribute to a pool of knowledge which can guide rising scholars in this field.

Biological Domain

This psychological domain argues that human behavior, emotions and even how the stricture of human nervous systems influences other domains of psychology. For instance, it is argued that biological domain have various sub-fields such as cognitive neuroscience, behavioral neuroscience and further explains that human being manifestation is as a result of neuron-networks that control virtually everything that goes around the human brain (Erickson, Kiel, & Lockhart, 2010). Also, evolutionary psychology argues that the human mind and brain is under constant change due to the evolution in the environment in which man exists in. In addition scientist have argued that through experimental analysis of the brain stimuli it is possible to relate the observations currently exhibited in this domain to the expectation of how the biology of the mind is likely to change in the future (Schaerbeek, Behan, & Denver, 2017). And from the connection between sensation and perception it can be possible to understand better how biological domain can be used to answer some of the questions rose by other domains for example how certain problems like depression can be dealt with.

Cognitive Domain

A section of psychologist has argued that this domain relates more with biological domain since it has focused on how the mind works and the connection of the mental processes to the behavior. This topic has been very useful especially in developing curriculum for early childhood learning since authors of such books have been forced to understand what affects children learning process and how they think, reason and even process information (Doris, Espied, Knott, & Salt, 2004). That explains why children can be twins but have different cognitive capability and even behave differently. Moreover, cognitive domain has been applied in a wide range of fields like intelligence and how it is influenced by other psychological domains.

Developmental Domain

Developmental domain of psychology focusses more on the developmental process of a human been during his or her entire lifespan. This developmental domain has been regarded one of the major domains particularly with the growing interest in how the developmental stages of a human being can be improved to eliminate certain problems that continue to face humanity (Quack, & Finkbeiner, 2013). Ivan Pavlov focused on how primary developmental in a human being is linked to the adulthood and how young children do not develop object of permanence until later in their adulthood (Schick, De Villiers, & Hoffmeister, 2007). Where object of permanence has been referred to as the acknowledgement that objects or things which are physical continue to be inexistence even when they are not clear to our understanding. Equally many psychologists in early development. Some people have wondered why other people developmental process in terms of social maturity and even cognitive capability vary greatly from one person to the next (Quek, & Finkbeiner, 2013). And this is clearly explained in developmental domain that links other domain of psychology for instance cognitive domain to explain how the developmental stage of a human being to become more intelligent happens.

Despite scientist’s rigorous research and experiments on how a clear line of knowledge can be provided into how human physical developmental process can be manipulated to achieve desired results the progress has been slowly (Ostler, 2016). This slag in the progress can be attributed to the fact that scientists and even many psychologists have not embraced integration of literature and findings from various fields to determine how knowledge from different domains can be used to improve understanding of the developmental process of the human beings (Robertson, 2018). Since the developmental process relies heavily on other domains of psychology. Therefore, for proper understanding of the human development process to be arrived at it is prudent for certain sub-domains like behavioral psychology to be linked with other domains like biological domain and integrated literature developed from the combined findings.

Personality Social and domain

This domain of psychology relates how human beings’ emotions, behavior, thoughts and even feelings are likely to be influenced of impacted by presence of other people in our lives. Just to reemphasize the important claim raised in the introduction social and personality domain relies and borrows closely from all the domains of psychology (Bardi, & Zentner, 2017). This is because for one to understand how individuals are likely to react the presence of other social beings in terms of emotion, behavior and feelings then knowledge and arguments from other domains like biological, developmental, and cognitive are necessary in informing this domain (Gurung et al. 2016). Social psychology alone is a very broad topic which encompasses a wide range of fields for example what makes other people to prefer been lonely while others to constantly be in contact with people? Why it is that many people find it hard to establish a social connection despite them been exceptional in other fields? Why it is that depression cases are associated to individuals finding it hard to open up to friends or even family? All these questions deeply dissect the social domain of psychology and how developmental, neuroscience and even cognitive domains all contribute to proper understanding of these questions (Marques et al. 2020). This questions and even arguments apply closely to personality domain because people don’t just wake up and find themselves having a certain personality but rather it is developed over time with interaction from various domains and also environmental contribution.

Critique of the literature

Reliability and validity of some of the claims raised by the four domains seems reasonable for instance the human developmental domain research findings denotes closer linkage between cognitive and biological domain to the developmental process of a person. And this can be validated since the adult person we are today is a manifestation and modification of the younger self we were then (Erickson, Keil, & Lockhart, 2010). This is to mean that some of the traits, beliefs and even habits have been instilled into our minds by interaction of various domains of psychology. Also, for one to understand why individual behave or think the way they do one needs to understand their cognitive and even biology behind human behavior and development of beliefs (Hambrick, & Engle, 2002). Also, the literature presents the issues across the four domains in a manner to depict that there is a strong linkage of one domain from the other since you need knowledge of another field for example biological domain to adequately explain various occurrences and claims in other domains.

One of the strengths and contribution of this literature is that it has clearly indicated that all the four domains in psychology are very interlinked and if they are integrated together more clarity on the field of psychology can be provided that is more reliable and informing. Also, the key contribution of this literature includes clearly establishing connection and psychological examples which borrow directly from other domains (Sroufe, & Rutter, 2014). And this helps in driving the point home that all the four psychological domains rely on each other to adequately explain themselves (Marques et al. 2020). Some of the deficiencies which exist in the literature include strategies or proposition on how each domain can be used to collaborative better research in other fields (Humphry, 2019). And this has been attributed to the authors omitting or disregarding to the importance of acknowledging and using information and research findings from other psychological domains in their specific domain of research. Some of the ethical issues have been highlighted in the practice of psychology where either total or partial disregard to the research findings of various domains leading to misguided perception towards psychology. Although the ethical issues highlighted were similarly across the four domains their recurrence was minimal.

Synthesis

From the research findings people’s behavior, emotions and even feelings are dictated by their biological makeup, developmental stage and social contact they establish along their lifespan. It is also important to note that despite the all the four psychological domains giving little attention to the contribution of the environment in psychology, it does play a pivotal role in modifying the knowledge from all the domains (Halpern, 2000). Also, controversies have been reported around the neuron science contribution in terms of giving ideal conditions of how the human mind works rather than providing the actual and relatable information which can be easily identified with (Sweller, 2016). But despite these controversies in the neuron science scientist have repeatedly argue that the human body is basically controlled by neuron-networks and disputing it is just misguiding. Therefore, for there to be a consensus in the field of psychology integration of knowledge from all the four domains and recommendations from those findings incorporated in coming up with a clear cut through body of knowledge to guide other scholars.

Conclusion

In summary further research should be conducted into how exactly the four domains of psychology can be merge into one comprehensive and informing domain that will highlight and provide a united kind of approach to psychology. Also, from the arguments raised above it is very clear that the four domains in psychology have an arguable dependency to each other. And this dependency should be used to come up with a body of knowledge that will act as unifying front of all the four domains. The possible implication of my arguments to the existing theories would mean that some theories like psychodynamic, humanistic and even behavioral will have to be revisited and a connection determined between/among the theories so that a new pool of information be established. Since the current theories are more selective in their arguments towards the four domains of psychology.

References for Biological domain

Erickson, J. E., Keil, F. C., & Lockhart, K. L. (2010). Sensing the coherence of biology in contrast to psychology: Young children’s use of causal relations to distinguish two foundational domains. Child development, 81(1), 390-409.

Harmon-Jones, E., & Inzlicht, M. (Eds.). (2016). Social neuroscience: Biological approaches to social psychology. Psychology Press.

Humphry, S. M. (2019). A theoretical parallel between cognitive and biological development with potential implications for measurement in psychology. Theory & Psychology, 29(3), 417-438.

Scherbak, V. E., Bihun, J. T., & Denver, M. M. H. (2017). Student Perceptions of Their Psychology Department's Learning Objectives for the Major. Psi Chi Journal of Psychological Research, 22(1).

Erickson, J. E., Keil, F. C., & Lockhart, K. L. (2015). Sensing the coherence of biology in contrast to psychology: Young children’s use of causal relations to distinguish two foundational domains. Child development, 81(1), 390-409.

Marques, N. M., Belizario, G. O., de Almeida Rocca, C. C., Saffi, F., de Barros, D. M., & de Pádua Serafim, A. (2020). Psychological evaluation of children victims of sexual abuse: development of a protocol. Heliyon, 6(3), e03552.

References for Cognitive Domain

Dorris, L., Espie, C. A. E., Knott, F., & Salt, J. (2004). Mind‐reading difficulties in the siblings of people with Asperger's syndrome: evidence for a genetic influence in the abnormal development of a specific cognitive domain. Journal of child psychology and psychiatry, 45(2), 412-418.

Halpern, D. F. (2000). Sex differences in cognitive abilities. Psychology press.

Hambrick, D. Z., & Engle, R. W. (2002). Effects of domain knowledge, working memory capacity, and age on cognitive performance: An investigation of the knowledge-is-power hypothesis. Cognitive psychology, 44(4), 339-387.

Keil, F. C. (1992). Concepts, kinds, and cognitive development. mit Press.

Prada, M., Garrido, M. V., Camilo, C., & Rodrigues, D. L. (2018). Subjective ratings and emotional recognition of children’s facial expressions from the CAFE set. PloS one, 13(12).

Quek, G. L., & Finkbeiner, M. (2013). Spatial and Temporal Attention Modulate the Early Stages of Face Processing: Behavioural Evidence from a Reaching.

References for Developmental Domain

Feldman, R. (1971). A Resource and Reference Bibliography in Early Childhood Education and Developmental Psychology: The Affective Domain.

Ostler, T. (2016). Heinz Werner: His Life, Ideas, and Contributions to Developmental Psychology in the First Half of the 20th Century. The Journal of genetic psychology, 177(6), 231-243.

Schick, B., De Villiers, P., De Villiers, J., & Hoffmeister, R. (2007). Language and theory of mind: A study of deaf children. Child development, 78(2), 376-396.

Sweller, J. (2016). Cognitive load theory, evolutionary educational psychology, and instructional design. In Evolutionary perspectives on child development and education (pp. 291-306). Springer, Cham.

Sroufe, L. A., & Rutter, M. (2014). The domain of developmental psychopathology. Child development, 17-29.

Robertson, P. J. (2018). Positive psychology and career development. British Journal of Guidance & Counselling, 46(2), 241-254.

Young, R. A., & Lalande, V. (2011). Canadian counselling psychology: From defining moments to ways forward. Canadian Psychology/psychologie canadienne, 52(4), 248.

References for Social and Personality Domain

Bardi, A., & Zentner, M. (2017). Grand challenges for personality and social psychology: moving beyond the replication crisis. Frontiers in psychology, 8, 2068.

Gurung, R. A., Hackathorn, J., Enns, C., Frantz, S., Cacioppo, J. T., Loop, T., & Freeman, J. E. (2016). Strengthening introductory psychology: A new model for teaching the introductory course. American Psychologist, 71(2), 112.

Larsen, R., & Buss, D. M. (2009). Personality psychology. McGraw-Hill Publishing.

Rudman, L. A. (2011). Implicit measures for social and personality psychology. SAGE Publications Ltd.

Sullivan, D. (2019). Social Psychological Theory as History: Outlining the Critical-Historical Approach to Theory. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 1088868319883174.

Abrams, M. (2009). Author Motivation: An Interview Examining Personality Theory. Journal of Evidence-Based Psychotherapies, 9(1), 107.