essay about bronfenbrenner's ecological theory

Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Systems Theory

Olivia Guy-Evans, MSc

Associate Editor for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MSc Psychology of Education

Olivia Guy-Evans is a writer and associate editor for Simply Psychology. She has previously worked in healthcare and educational sectors.

Learn about our Editorial Process

Saul Mcleod, PhD

Editor-in-Chief for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MRes, PhD, University of Manchester

Saul Mcleod, PhD., is a qualified psychology teacher with over 18 years of experience in further and higher education. He has been published in peer-reviewed journals, including the Journal of Clinical Psychology.

On This Page:

Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory posits that an individual’s development is influenced by a series of interconnected environmental systems, ranging from the immediate surroundings (e.g., family) to broad societal structures (e.g., culture).

These systems include the microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem, macrosystem, and chronosystem, each representing different levels of environmental influences on an individual’s growth and behavior.

Key Takeaways

• Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory views child development as a complex system of relationships affected by multiple levels of the surrounding environment, from immediate family and school settings to broad cultural values, laws, and customs.
• To study a child’s development, we must look at the child and their immediate environment and the interaction of the larger environment.
• Bronfenbrenner divided the person’s environment into five different systems: the microsystem, the mesosystem, the exosystem, the macrosystem, and the chronosystem.
• The microsystem is the most influential level of the ecological systems theory. This is the most immediate environmental setting containing the developing child, such as family and school.
• Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory has implications for educational practice.

The Five Ecological Systems

Bronfenbrenner (1977) suggested that the child’s environment is a nested arrangement of structures, each contained within the next. He organized them in order of how much of an impact they have on a child.

He named these structures the microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem, macrosystem and the chronosystem.

Because the five systems are interrelated, the influence of one system on a child’s development depends on its relationship with the others.

1. The Microsystem

The microsystem is the first level of Bronfenbrenner’s theory and is the things that have direct contact with the child in their immediate environment.

It includes the child’s most immediate relationships and environments. For example, a child’s parents, siblings, classmates, teachers, and neighbors would be part of their microsystem.

Relationships in a microsystem are bi-directional, meaning other people can influence the child in their environment and change other people’s beliefs and actions. The interactions the child has with these people and environments directly impact development.

For instance, supportive parents who read to their child and provide educational activities may positively influence cognitive and language skills. Or children with friends who bully them at school might develop self-esteem issues. The child is not just a passive recipient but an active contributor in these bidirectional interactions.

2. The Mesosystem

The mesosystem is where a person’s individual microsystems do not function independently but are interconnected and assert influence upon one another.

The mesosystem involves interactions between different microsystems in the child’s life. For example, open communication between a child’s parents and teachers provides consistency across both environments.

However, conflict between these microsystems, like parents and teachers blaming each other for a child’s poor grades, creates tension that negatively impacts the child.

The mesosystem can also involve interactions between peers and family. If a child’s friends use drugs, this may introduce substance use into the family microsystem. Or if siblings do not get along, this can spill over to peer relationships.

3. The Exosystem

The exosystem is a component of the ecological systems theory developed by Urie Bronfenbrenner in the 1970s.

It incorporates other formal and informal social structures. While not directly interacting with the child, the exosystem still influences the microsystems. 

For instance, a parent’s stressful job and work schedule affects their availability, resources, and mood at home with their child. Local school board decisions about funding and programs impact the quality of education the child receives.

Even broader influences like government policies, mass media, and community resources shape the child’s microsystems.

For example, cuts to arts funding at school could limit a child’s exposure to music and art enrichment. Or a library bond could improve educational resources in the child’s community. The child does not directly interact with these structures, but they shape their microsystems.

4. The Macrosystem

The macrosystem focuses on how cultural elements affect a child’s development, consisting of cultural ideologies, attitudes, and social conditions that children are immersed in.

The macrosystem differs from the previous ecosystems as it does not refer to the specific environments of one developing child but the already established society and culture in which the child is developing.

Beliefs about gender roles, individualism, family structures, and social issues establish norms and values that permeate a child’s microsystems. For example, boys raised in patriarchal cultures might be socialized to assume domineering masculine roles.

Socioeconomic status also exerts macro-level influence – children from affluent families will likely have more educational advantages versus children raised in poverty.

Even within a common macrosystem, interpretations of norms differ – not all families from the same culture hold the same values or norms.

5. The Chronosystem

The fifth and final level of Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory is known as the chronosystem.

The chronosystem relates to shifts and transitions over the child’s lifetime. These environmental changes can be predicted, like starting school, or unpredicted, like parental divorce or changing schools when parents relocate for work, which may cause stress.

Historical events also fall within the chronosystem, like how growing up during a recession may limit family resources or growing up during war versus peacetime also fall in this system.

As children get older and enter new environments, both physical and cognitive changes interact with shifting social expectations. For example, the challenges of puberty combined with transition to middle school impact self-esteem and academic performance.

Aging itself interacts with shifting social expectations over the lifespan within the chronosystem.

How children respond to expected and unexpected life transitions depends on the support of their ecological systems.

The Bioecological Model

It is important to note that Bronfenbrenner (1994) later revised his theory and instead named it the ‘Bioecological model’.

Bronfenbrenner became more concerned with the proximal development processes, meaning the enduring and persistent forms of interaction in the immediate environment.

His focus shifted from environmental influences to developmental processes individuals experience over time.

‘…development takes place through the process of progressively more complex reciprocal interactions between an active, evolving biopsychological human organism and the persons, objects, and symbols in its immediate external environment.’ (Bronfenbrenner, 1995).

Bronfenbrenner also suggested that to understand the effect of these proximal processes on development, we have to focus on the person, context, and developmental outcome, as these processes vary and affect people differently (Bronfenbrenner & Evans, 2000).

While his original ecological systems theory emphasized the role of environmental systems, his later bioecological model focused more closely on micro-level interactions.

The bioecological shift highlighted reciprocal processes between the actively evolving individual and their immediate settings. This represented an evolution in Bronfenbrenner’s thinking toward a more dynamic developmental process view.

However, the bioecological model still acknowledged the broader environmental systems from his original theory as an important contextual influence on proximal processes.

The bioecological focus on evolving person-environment interactions built upon the foundation of his ecological systems theory while bringing developmental processes to the forefront.

Classroom Application

The Ecological Systems Theory has been used to link psychological and educational theory to early educational curriculums and practice. The developing child is at the center of the theory, and all that occurs within and between the five ecological systems are done to benefit the child in the classroom.

• According to the theory, teachers and parents should maintain good communication with each other and work together to benefit the child and strengthen the development of the ecological systems in educational practice.
• Teachers should also be understanding of the situations their student’s families may be experiencing, including social and economic factors that are part of the various systems.
• According to the theory, if parents and teachers have a good relationship, this should positively shape the child’s development.
• Likewise, the child must be active in their learning, both academically and socially. They must collaborate with their peers and participate in meaningful learning experiences to enable positive development (Evans, 2012).

There are lots of studies that have investigated the effects of the school environment on students. Below are some examples:

Lippard, LA Paro, Rouse, and Crosby (2017) conducted a study to test Bronfenbrenner’s theory. They investigated the teacher-child relationships through teacher reports and classroom observations.

They found that these relationships were significantly related to children’s academic achievement and classroom behavior, suggesting that these relationships are important for children’s development and supports the Ecological Systems Theory.

Wilson et al. (2002) found that creating a positive school environment through a school ethos valuing diversity has a positive effect on students’ relationships within the school. Incorporating this kind of school ethos influences those within the developing child’s ecological systems.

Langford et al. (2014) found that whole-school approaches to the health curriculum can positively improve educational achievement and student well-being. Thus, the development of the students is being affected by the microsystems.

Critical Evaluation

Bronfenbrenner’s model quickly became very appealing and accepted as a useful framework for psychologists, sociologists, and teachers studying child development.

The Ecological Systems Theory provides a holistic approach that is inclusive of all the systems children and their families are involved in, accurately reflecting the dynamic nature of actual family relationships (Hayes & O’Toole, 2017).

Paat (2013) considers how Bronfenbrenner’s theory is useful when it comes to the development of immigrant children. They suggest that immigrant children’s experiences in the various ecological systems are likely to be shaped by their cultural differences. Understanding these children’s ecology can aid in strengthening social work service delivery for these children.

Limitations

A limitation of the Ecological Systems Theory is that there is limited research examining the mesosystems, mainly the interactions between neighborhoods and the family of the child (Leventhal & Brooks-Gunn, 2000). Therefore, the extent to which these systems can shape child development is unclear.

Another limitation of Bronfenbrenner’s theory is that it is difficult to empirically test the theory. The studies investigating the ecological systems may establish an effect, but they cannot establish whether the systems directly cause such effects.

Furthermore, this theory can lead to assumptions that those who do not have strong and positive ecological systems lack in development. Whilst this may be true in some cases, many people can still develop into well-rounded individuals without positive influences from their ecological systems.

For instance, it is not true to say that all people who grow up in poverty-stricken areas of the world will develop negatively. Similarly, if a child’s teachers and parents do not get along, some children may not experience any negative effects if it does not concern them.

As a result, people need to avoid making broad assumptions about individuals using this theory.

How Relevant is Bronfenbrenner’s Theory in the 21st Century?

The world has greatly changed since this theory was introduced, so it’s important to consider whether Bronfenbrenner’s theory is still relevant today. 

Kelly and Coughlan (2019) used constructivist grounded theory analysis to develop a theoretical framework for youth mental health recovery and found that there were many links to Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory in their own more recent theory.

Their theory suggested that the components of mental health recovery are embedded in the ‘ecological context of influential relationships,’ which fits in with Bronfenbrenner’s theory that the ecological systems of the young person, such as peers, family, and school, all help mental health development.

We should also consider whether Bronfenbrenner’s theory fits in with advanced technological advancements in the 21st century. It could be that the ecological systems are still valid but may expand over time to include new modern developments.

The exosystem of a child, for instance, could be expanded to consider influences from social media, video gaming, and other modern-day interactions within the ecological system.

Neo-ecological theory

Navarro & Tudge (2022) proposed the neo-ecological theory, an adaptation of the bioecological theory. Below are their main ideas for updating Bronfenbrenner’s theory to the technological age:

• Virtual microsystems should be added as a new type of microsystem to account for online interactions and activities. Virtual microsystems have unique features compared to physical microsystems, like availability, publicness, and asychnronicity.
• The macrosystem (cultural beliefs, values) is an important influence, as digital technology has enabled youth to participate more in creating youth culture and norms.
• Proximal processes, the engines of development, can now happen through complex interactions with both people and objects/symbols online. So, proximal processes in virtual microsystems need to be considered.

Urie Bronfenbrenner was born in Moscow, Russia, in 1917 and experienced turmoil in his home country as a child before immigrating to the United States at age 6.

Witnessing the difficulties faced by children during the unrest and rapid social change in Russia shaped his ideas about how environmental factors can influence child development.

Bronfenbrenner went on to earn a Ph.D. in developmental psychology from the University of Michigan in 1942.

At the time, most child psychology research involved lab experiments with children briefly interacting with strangers.

Bronfenbrenner criticized this approach as lacking ecological validity compared to real-world settings where children live and grow. For example, he cited Mary Ainsworth’s 1970 “Strange Situation” study , which observed infants with caregivers in a laboratory.

Bronfenbrenner argued that these unilateral lab studies failed to account for reciprocal influence between variables or the impact of broader environmental forces.

His work challenged the prevailing views by proposing that multiple aspects of a child’s life interact to influence development.

In the 1970s, drawing on foundations from theories by Vygotsky, Bandura, and others acknowledging environmental impact, Bronfenbrenner articulated his groundbreaking Ecological Systems Theory.

This framework mapped children’s development across layered environmental systems ranging from immediate settings like family to broad cultural values and historical context.

Bronfenbrenner’s ecological perspective represented a major shift in developmental psychology by emphasizing the role of environmental systems and broader social structures in human development.

The theory sparked enduring influence across many fields, including psychology, education, and social policy.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the main contribution of bronfenbrenner’s theory.

The Ecological Systems Theory has contributed to our understanding that multiple levels influence an individual’s development rather than just individual traits or characteristics.

Bronfenbrenner contributed to the understanding that parent-child relationships do not occur in a vacuum but are embedded in larger structures.

Ultimately, this theory has contributed to a more holistic understanding of human development, and has influenced fields such as psychology, sociology, and education.

What could happen if a child’s microsystem breaks down?

If a child experiences conflict or neglect within their family, or bullying or rejection by their peers, their microsystem may break down. This can lead to a range of negative outcomes, such as decreased academic achievement, social isolation, and mental health issues.

Additionally, if the microsystem is not providing the necessary support and resources for the child’s development, it can hinder their ability to thrive and reach their full potential.

How can the Ecological System’s Theory explain peer pressure?

The ecological systems theory explains peer pressure as a result of the microsystem (immediate environment) and mesosystem (connections between environments) levels.

Peers provide a sense of belonging and validation in the microsystem, and when they engage in certain behaviors or hold certain beliefs, they may exert pressure on the child to conform. The mesosystem can also influence peer pressure, as conflicting messages and expectations from different environments can create pressure to conform.

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1974). Developmental research, public policy, and the ecology of childhood . Child development, 45 (1), 1-5.

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1977). Toward an experimental ecology of human development . American psychologist, 32 (7), 513.

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1995). Developmental ecology through space and time: A future perspective .

Bronfenbrenner, U., & Evans, G. W. (2000). Developmental science in the 21st century: Emerging questions, theoretical models, research designs and empirical findings . Social development, 9 (1), 115-125.

Bronfenbrenner, U., & Ceci, S. J. (1994). Nature-nurture reconceptualised: A bio-ecological model . Psychological Review, 10 (4), 568–586.

Hayes, N., O’Toole, L., & Halpenny, A. M. (2017). Introducing Bronfenbrenner: A guide for practitioners and students in early years education . Taylor & Francis.

Kelly, M., & Coughlan, B. (2019). A theory of youth mental health recovery from a parental perspective . Child and Adolescent Mental Health, 24 (2), 161-169.

Langford, R., Bonell, C. P., Jones, H. E., Pouliou, T., Murphy, S. M., Waters, E., Komro, A. A., Gibbs, L. F., Magnus, D. & Campbell, R. (2014). The WHO Health Promoting School framework for improving the health and well‐being of students and their academic achievement . Cochrane database of systematic reviews, (4) .

Leventhal, T., & Brooks-Gunn, J. (2000). The neighborhoods they live in: the effects of neighborhood residence on child and adolescent outcomes . Psychological Bulletin, 126 (2), 309.

Lippard, C. N., La Paro, K. M., Rouse, H. L., & Crosby, D. A. (2018, February). A closer look at teacher–child relationships and classroom emotional context in preschool . In Child & Youth Care Forum 47 (1), 1-21.

Navarro, J. L., & Tudge, J. R. (2022). Technologizing Bronfenbrenner: neo-ecological theory.  Current Psychology , 1-17.

Paat, Y. F. (2013). Working with immigrant children and their families: An application of Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory . Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment, 23 (8), 954-966.

Rhodes, S. (2013).  Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Theory  [PDF]. Retrieved from http://uoit.blackboard.com

Wilson, P., Atkinson, M., Hornby, G., Thompson, M., Cooper, M., Hooper, C. M., & Southall, A. (2002). Young minds in our schools-a guide for teachers and others working in schools . Year: YoungMinds (Jan 2004).

Further Information

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1974). Developmental research, public policy, and the ecology of childhood. Child Development, 45.

• Bipolar Disorder
• Therapy Center
• When To See a Therapist
• Types of Therapy
• Best Online Therapy
• Best Couples Therapy
• Best Family Therapy
• Managing Stress
• Sleep and Dreaming
• Understanding Emotions
• Self-Improvement
• Healthy Relationships
• Student Resources
• Personality Types
• Verywell Mind Insights
• 2023 Verywell Mind 25
• Mental Health in the Classroom
• Editorial Process
• Meet Our Review Board
• Crisis Support

A Comprehensive Guide to the Bronfenbrenner Ecological Model

Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

d3sign/Moment/Getty images

• Five Ecological Systems
• Interactions

Bronfenbrenner's ecological model is a framework that can be utilized to understand the complex systems that influence human development . In particular, this model emphasizes the importance of environmental factors and social influences in shaping development and behavior.

The model takes a holistic approach, suggesting that child development involves a dynamic interaction between environment, societal, biological, and psychological factors. In Bronfenbrenner's model, there is a reciprocal interplay between the individual and the various levels of influence that affect development.   

Introduction to the Bronfenbrenner Ecological Model

The theory suggests that a child's development is affected by the different environments that they encounter during their life, including biological, interpersonal, societal, and cultural factors.

What Does Bronfenbrenner's Ecological Model Describe?

This model describes the interactions between individuals and their environments and how these complex relationships affect development over time. According to this model, many interconnected systems make up a person's environment that all interact to influence and shape how people grow and respond.

The factors that influence development include a person's immediate setting and the broader culture in which they live.

The theory stresses the interdependency and interaction between people and their environments. Bronfenbrenner suggested that more nurturing and encouraging environments led to better developmental outcomes.

History and Development of the Model

This model, also known as the ecological systems theory, was introduced by Russian-American psychologist Urie Bronfenbrenner. Bronfenbrenner was born in Russia and immigrated to the United States when he was six. His early experiences shaped his ideas about how children adjust to new environments and how factors such as environment, language, and culture can play a part in how children learn and grow.

Bronfenbrenner earned his PhD in developmental psychology from the University of Michigan in 1942. He began developing his influential theory during the 1970s and presented his ideas in his 1979 book "The Ecology of Human Development: Experiments by Nature and Design." The book elaborated the key aspects of his theory.

Over time, Bronfenbrenner continued refining his ideas. In addition to emphasizing the importance of understanding how humans develop within their environmental contexts, he also stressed that this influence is bidirectional; humans also actively shape their surroundings.

Ecological systems theory has gained widespread acceptance, significantly influencing developmental psychology and related disciplines. The theory has also been applied in many different contexts, including family therapy , education, political policy, and social work .

Bronfenbrenner died in 2005, but his theory continues to profoundly influence our understanding of the dynamic interactions that affect how humans develop and change during childhood and throughout their lives.

Five Ecological Systems in Bronfenbrenner’s Model

Bronfenbrenner's theory is organized into a series of five nested systems or levels. The five main elements of Bronfenbrenner’s theory are the microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem, macrosystem, and chronosystem.

You can visualize the framework by imagining the individual at the center of a circle, surrounded by five concentric rings starting with the first circle (the microsystem) and expanding outward to the outermost circle (the chronosystem).

Microsystem

The microsystem is the innermost level, composed of an individual's immediate environment. It includes the people the person interacts with daily, including their family members, friends, classmates, teachers, and others.

The microsystem has the most direct, immediate impact on the individual.

The relationships and interactions within the microsystem are also bidirectional; people are influenced by their close contacts, but they also affect the people and environments around them. Because of these relationships' close, direct nature, they have a powerful effect on shaping an individual’s development and behavior.

Personal characteristics, including mental abilities, physical attributes, temperament, and personality , also impact a person's development.

A proposed update to Bronfenbrenner's theory suggests two types of microsystems: physical and virtual. Given the importance of digital influences on young people today, it is essential to recognize how virtual environments may influence child development.

The microsystem accounts for the experiences that directly involve and affect the individual and shape their behavior, learning, values, and beliefs.

The mesosystem is the next level of the model, comprised of all the relationships and interactions between the microsystems. Examples of mesosystems in a child’s life include the interactions between their family and school or between their friends and family. 

Like the microsystem, the mesosystem has a direct effect on the individual.

The different microsystems are connected at this level. This means that changes in one microsystem can then impact other microsystems. 

In other words, how these elements interact can influence how a child develops. For example, a child's family and school interaction can impact learning and academic performance. 

The exosystem refers to environments in which the individual is not an active participant but still impacts development. This level encompasses the social context in which a person lives and other aspects of the environment, including government policies, social services, community resources, and mass media.

The individual does not have direct contact with these influences, but they still shape how a child develops.

For example, government policies and community resources impact a child's access to healthcare, quality child care, and education. 

Macrosystem

The macrosystem involves the broader society and cultural forces that contribute to individual development. Important components of this level of Bronfenbrenner's theory include values, social norms, customs, traditions, ideology, and cultural beliefs.

These cultural beliefs are often shared by groups of people with a similar history or identity. Such beliefs can also shift over time. Such beliefs can also vary based on geographic location and socioeconomic status.

Chronosystem

The chronosystem is the outermost level of the model, accounting for the role that time plays in influencing individual development. This includes personal experiences that occur over the course of life, the various life transitions that people experience, historical events, and societal changes.

Challenges and transitions that can affect development, including the birth of siblings, moving to a new place, parental divorce, and the death of family members, can affect the family's dynamic or structure.

The model recognizes that environments are not static; they change over time, and these changes can have a significant effect on how people develop.

Interactions Among the Systems: A Dynamic View

The interactions between different systems in Bronfenbrenner's theory interact in intricate, bidirectional ways. The changes in one level can have a resounding impact on the other levels. 

Examples of Bronfenbrenner's Ecological Model

You can better understand the different levels of Bronfenbrenner’s model by looking at examples of influences at each level:

Each system within the model interacts with other systems in complex ways. A child's family (microsystem), for example, can impact how they interact with others at school (microsystem). The relationship between these microsystems (the mesosystem), can then impact a child's behavior and academic success.

These systems don't just interact with the levels that proceed or follow them. And interactions that occur at one level can have cascading effects on other levels of influence

For example, workplace stress can impact how parents interact with their children at home. And economic changes that occur in a society (chronosystem) can influence the type of resources that are available in communities (exosystem), which can then play a role in the dynamics within individual families (microsystem).

By examining these influences more closely, we can gain a better appreciation of the dynamic interactions and interdependencies between the different levels of Bronfenbrenner's theory.

The Relevance of the Model Today

Bronfenbrenner's theory significantly impacted how researchers, psychologists, and educators view human development.  The ecological model continues to inform our understanding of how children develop and how different aspects of their environment may positively or negatively impact their growth. 

The framework’s holistic approach emphasizes the need to understand all aspects of a person's environment to appreciate the complex, interrelated factors that influence their development.

Some of the ways in which Bronfenbrenner's model has influenced our understanding of human development include:

The theory has been applied extensively within the field of education to help design effective learning environments that emphasize the classroom experience and focus on the influence of families, communities, societies, and the broader culture.

The early childhood education program, Head Start, is an example of an intervention informed by Bronfenbrenner's model. First introduced in 1965, Urie Bronfennbrenner served as a government advisor for the development of the program. The program takes a holistic approach and supports infants, toddlers, and preschoolers to promote school readiness.

Research suggests the program has numerous benefits, including the long-term effects of increased high school completion, college enrollment, and college completion.

Mental Health Care

The ecological model also plays a role in informing mental health care. Mental health treatments that take a holistic approach often lead to better outcomes. And looking at the community, societal, and cultural influences that affect a person's development and well-being can help mental health professionals understand the issues people face.

The framework has also affected approaches to mental health, both in terms of treatment and public policy. For example, it has contributed to the development of the ecological approach to counseling , which focuses on understanding personal and environmental factors when treating mental health issues.

Cultural Sensitivity

Because the model stresses how cultural factors can influence development, it can support greater cultural sensitivity among therapists , educators, and others.

Understanding ecological factors, for example, can produce greater cultural competency among therapists who work with diverse populations.

Bronfenbrenner's ecological model offers a comprehensive framework for understanding the many factors that affect development. In addiction to describing the different levels of influence, the ecological model also describes the dynamic interaction that occurs between the different levels, from the direct relationships at the microsystem level through the broader societal, cultural, and temporal factors that play a role.

Understanding these influences and their complex connections is important. By doing so, parents, educators, social program developers, and policy makers can gain greater insight and create supportive interventions that foster healthy development.

Tudge J, Maria Rosa E. Bronfenbrenner's ecological theory . In: Hupp S, Jewell J, eds. The Encyclopedia of Child and Adolescent Development . 1st ed. Wiley; 2020. doi:10.1002/9781119171492.wecad251

Haleemunnissa S, Didel S, Swami MK, Singh K, Vyas V. Children and COVID19: Understanding impact on the growth trajectory of an evolving generation . Child Youth Serv Rev . 2021;120:105754. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105754

Ceci SJ. Urie Bronfenbrenner (1917-2005) . Am Psychol . 2006;61(2):173-174. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.61.2.173

Hyde LW, Gard AM, Tomlinson RC, Burt SA, Mitchell C, Monk CS. An ecological approach to understanding the developing brain: Examples linking poverty, parenting, neighborhoods, and the brain . Am Psychol . 2020;75(9):1245-1259. doi:10.1037/amp0000741

Navarro JL, Tudge JRH. Technologizing Bronfenbrenner: Neo-ecological Theory [published online ahead of print, 2022 Jan 21]. Curr Psychol . 2022;1-17. doi:10.1007/s12144-022-02738-3

Backonja U, Hall AK, Thielke S. Older adults' current and potential uses of information technologies in a changing world: A theoretical perspective . Int J Aging Hum Dev . 2014;80(1):41-63. doi:10.1177/0091415015591109

Zwemer E, Chen F, Beck Dallaghan GL, et al. Reinvigorating an academy of medical educators using ecological systems theory . Cureus . 2022;14(1):e21640. doi:10.7759/cureus.21640

Bailey MJ, Sun S, Timpe B. Prep school for poor kids: The long-run impacts of Head Start on human capital and economic self-sufficiency . Am Econ Rev . 2021;111(12):3963-4001. doi:10.1257/aer.20181801

Shafran R, Bennett SD, McKenzie Smith M. Interventions to support integrated psychological care and holistic health outcomes in paediatrics .  Healthcare (Basel) . 2017;5(3):44. Published 2017 Aug 16. doi:10.3390/healthcare5030044

Eriksson M, Ghazinour M, Hammarström A. Different uses of Bronfenbrenner’s ecological theory in public mental health research: what is their value for guiding public mental health policy and practice ? Soc Theory Health . 2018;16(4):414-433. doi:10.1057/s41285-018-0065-6

Counseling Today. Using an ecological perspective .

Paat YF. Working with immigrant children and their families: an application of bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory . Journal of Human Behavior in the Social Environment . 2013;23(8):954-966. doi:10.1080/10911359.2013.800007

By Kendra Cherry, MSEd Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Front Psychol
• PMC10801006

Review of studies applying Bronfenbrenner's bioecological theory in international and intercultural education research

1 School of International Education, Wuhan University, Wuhan, China

Irene Shidong An

2 Discipline of Chinese Studies, School of Languages and Cultures, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia

Rebeca Lima, University of Fortaleza, Brazil

The Russian-born American psychologist Bronfenbrenner's bioecological perspective on human development is an ideal framework for understanding how individuals negotiate the dynamic environment and their own identities in international and intercultural education settings. However, a review of the current literature shows that most studies either adopted the earlier version of the theory (i.e., the ecological systems theory) or inadequately presented the most recent developments of the bioecological model (i.e., the process-person-context-time model). The construct of proximal processes—the primary mechanisms producing human development according to Bronfenbrenner—has seldom been explored in depth, which means the true value of bioecological theory is largely underrepresented in international and intercultural education research. This article first presents a review of studies that adopt Bronfenbrenner's theory and then offers future directions for the scope and design of international and intercultural education research.

1 Introduction

Bronfenbrenner's ecological theory on human development 1 is one of the most influential and widely cited theories in the fields of human development and educational psychology (Weisner, 2008 ). Dissatisfied with the lack of child development research directly addressing how development is impacted by wider environments, Bronfenbrenner proposed an ecological model that can provide a framework and common language for conceptualizing the environment and identifying how the interactions and relationships among the components of the ecosystem may affect children's development (Shelton, 2019 ). A popular visual representation of Bronfenbrenner's ecological systems model is a diagram of the ecological system within which a toddler sits at the center, surrounded by a series of concentric circles demonstrating micro-, meso-, exo-, and macrosystems (Darling, 2007 ). An arrow representing the chronosystem (the influence of time) (Bronfenbrenner, 1994 ) 2 is also added in some diagrams (e.g., Porter and Porter, 2020 ). Although Bronfenbrenner initially formulated the framework to delineate these ecological systems, he later refined it into the Process-Person-Context-Time (PPCT) model (Bronfenbrenner, 1994 , 1999 ; Bronfenbrenner and Morris, 1998 , 2006 ) to comprehensively consider interactions among developmental processes, contextual and individual biological characteristics, and temporal aspects.

This theory, although originated in the field of developmental psychology, is also useful for educational studies since it informs practical applications for the construction of better educational environments. In one of his earlier works, Bronfenbrenner ( 1977 ) introduced an ecological approach to education, emphasizing the dynamic relationships between learners and their environments. He challenged the traditional view of relying solely on laboratory experiments in educational research and advocated for a more holistic and ecologically valid approach to studying educational systems and processes. His focus was on the significance of real-life settings and the dynamic interactions between learners and their environments. Bronfenbrenner emphasized that understanding how individuals learn within educational settings is contingent upon the interplay between the characteristics of learners and the contexts they engage with, highlighting the intricate connections among these environments. His later article (1994), titled Ecological Models of Human Development , published in the International Encyclopedia of Education , demonstrates his considerable influence in educational research. While Bronfenbrenner's theory is most applied in child development and parental education research, it has also found use in various education-related studies, such as educational accountability (Johnson, 2008 ), educational transition (O'Toole et al., 2014 ), computer-assisted language learning (Blin, 2016 ), early childhood education (Tudge et al., 2017 ), and higher education (Mulisa, 2019 ). For instance, Mulisa ( 2019 ) drew inspiration from Bronfenbrenner's theory and advocated for a holistic approach that emphasizes the proximal and active interplay between students and their environments. This approach emphasizes that students' learning should not be disconnected from the social ecology of higher education. Furthermore, educational outcomes should not be attributed solely to students' competence and curriculum quality. Educators and practitioners should employ comprehensive strategies to effectively manage multilevel socioecological factors that impact students' learning.

Specifically for the field of international and intercultural education, the merits of an ecological perspective are elucidated by Elliot and Kobayashi ( 2019 , p. 913):

[A] beautifully complex co-existence of two ecological systems develops once international students move away from their original (home country) ecological system to pursue an education in a new (host country) ecological system. Reciprocally interacting elements from various systems that affect personal, social and learning practices in particular are arguably crucial for these educational sojourners as they can lead to valuable learning opportunities as well as potential conflicts arising from competing influences emanating from the original and the new ecological systems.

Therefore, Bronfenbrenner's theory offers a nuanced and holistic framework that aids educators and policymakers in understanding, respecting, and effectively responding to the environmental complexities inherent in international and intercultural education. It helps educators appreciate the significance of diverse cultural contexts, values, and norms that influence learners, identify the crucial interactions and relationships in the intercultural settings that contribute to a student's adaptation and learning, and encourages students to engage with diverse environments for the development of intercultural competence.

This study aims to review and evaluate the application of Bronfenbrenner's developmental theory, as represented in empirical work on international and intercultural education. As noted in some critical reviews (Darling, 2007 ; Tudge et al., 2009 , 2016 ; Tudge, 2016 ; Jaeger, 2017 ), the ecological theory was evolving as Bronfenbrenner continuously revised, tested and expanded his understanding of development throughout his long career (Shelton, 2019 ), whereas not all studies are aware of its mature version, that is, the bioecological model. Therefore, it is crucial for researchers to recognize the updated version of the theory, which reflects the most recent advance of such a powerful framework. Our objectives are threefold: First, to provide a brief overview of the evolution of the ecological theory and its historical evolution. Second, to evaluate whether the researchers in the fields of international and intercultural education adequately represented the theory in their empirical research. Third, to clarify the value of the updated version of the theory and direct future research.

We will first explain the evolution of Bronfenbrenner's ecological theory and then present some scholars' critics of its misuse in the literature. This is followed by a review and evaluation of the international/intercultural education research that has applied different versions of the theory. It will reveal that the theory is underrepresented in the current international/intercultural education literature. The paper concludes with a discussion of future directions for international and intercultural research.

2 The evolution and different versions of Bronfenbrenner's theory

Several scholars have provided extensive discussion on how Bronfenbrenner's ecological theory of development changed over time, from one that appears to focus primarily on contexts of development to one in which proximal processes are foregrounded (e.g., Rosa and Tudge, 2013 ).

In brief, Bronfenbrenner's early work in the 1970s initially spotlighted environmental contexts in human development due to the prevailing lack of attention to contextual influences within developmental psychology. Therefore, his original ecological perspective “offers a foundation for integrating context into the research model” (Bronfenbrenner, 1979 , p. 21) and provides a theoretical framework that allows for the observation of a wide range of contextual influences on development (Bronfenbrenner, 1979 ). However, Bronfenbrenner was dissatisfied with the fact that the studies applying the model had a pervasive focus solely on contextual elements, resulting in an imbalanced focus on “context without development” (Bronfenbrenner, 1986b , p. 288). This overemphasis on context prompted a pivotal shift in the 1980s toward the integration of person, process, and time variables within the framework (Jaeger, 2017 ). Bronfenbrenner reformulated his model into the bioecological model by the late 1990s. This revised model positioned “proximal processes,” defined as “progressively more complex reciprocal interaction between an active, evolving biopsychological human organism and the persons, objects, and symbols in its immediate external environment” (Bronfenbrenner and Morris, 1998 , p. 996), at its core. This evolution culminated in the process-person-context-time (PPCT) model, a refined iteration that accentuated the interplay of proximal processes, individual characteristics, environmental contexts, and temporal dimensions in human development (Bronfenbrenner and Morris, 1998 , 2006 ).

While the earlier ecological model predominantly focused on environmental contexts, its emphasis on context may have led to a narrow perspective, overlooking the dynamic interplay between individuals and their immediate environment. This approach often merely compared individuals in various social or geographical contexts without delving into the developing mechanisms behind observed outcomes, assuming that all individuals in a given environment undergo the same developmental trajectory. Such an approach may, as Bronfenbrenner ( 1988 ) notes, “yield results that are not only likely to be redundant but also highly susceptible to misleading interpretations” (p. 27–28). One of the significant theoretical advancements in the bioecological model is the introduction of a critical distinction between environment and process, absent in the original ecological framework (Bronfenbrenner, 1999 ). While the former (environment) encompasses phenomena like mother-infant interaction and the behavior of others toward the developing person, the latter (process) is defined by its functional relationship both to the environment and to the characteristics of the developing person. The bioecological model proposes that the effects of proximal processes are more influential than those of the environmental contexts in which they occur. The evolution toward the bioecological model integrated the multifaceted interrelationships between developmental processes, individuals, contexts, and time, thereby offering a more comprehensive framework to comprehend the complexities of human development.

Bronfenbrenner ( 1995 ) highlighted Drillien ( 1964 )'s research to exemplify the nature and scientific promise of the updated version of the bioecological model. This longitudinal study assessed factors affecting the development of children with low birth weight compared to those with normal birth weight, across different social classes over 2 years. It found that a proximal process, in this case, mother-infant interaction over time, emerges as a significant predictor of developmental outcomes, as positive maternal interaction significantly reduces behavioral issues observed in the child. The study reveals that the power of this process varies systematically based on environmental context (i.e., social class) and individual characteristics (i.e., birth weight). It highlights that the moderating effects of person and context on the proximal process of mother-infant interaction are not symmetrical. In disadvantaged environments, this interaction has the most significant effect, especially benefiting infants with normal birth weight. Conversely, in more privileged social class settings, it is low-birth-weight infants who derive the greatest advantage from maternal attention during this interaction. Therefore, one should not over- or underestimate the power of any of these factors without considering their interaction with each other. Bronfenbrenner ( 1999 ) suggests that one distinct advantage of the bioecological model, compared to other analytic designs used for analyzing environmental influences on development, lies in its recognition of the interdependency and contextual variations among influencing factors. Thus, it can address the limitations of linear multiple regression models commonly used in psychological research, which assume additive effects, and offer a more differentiated understanding of how these factors contribute to developmental outcomes by considering their synergistic effects.

The upcoming sections will outline the key elements in both the earlier and updated versions of Bronfenbrenner's theory. This will serve as a groundwork for our subsequent analysis of existing studies utilizing these distinct versions of the theory. Many studies adopting the early model of concentric circles of environments use the name ecological systems theory (EST) (e.g., Porter and Porter, 2020 ; Trevor-Roper, 2021 ; Tong et al., 2022 ), which is an outmoded version and a facile representation of Bronfenbrenner's theory (Tudge et al., 2009 , 2016 ). Navarro et al. ( 2022 ) suggest that unless there are justified reasons for utilizing the earlier version, researchers should employ the latest version of the theory—the bioecological theory of human development along with the PPCT research model—and any modifications should be explicitly outlined. A summary of the key constructs in EST and the PPCT model is provided below.

2.1 The EST model

According to Bronfenbrenner ( 1986a , 1989 , 1994 ), the ecological environment of development encompasses the four layered systems detailed in his 1979 monograph and the concept of the chronosystem introduced in his later works. Several studies (e.g., Porter and Porter, 2020 ; Trevor-Roper, 2021 ; Tong et al., 2022 ) examining the influence of these ecological systems on development have referred to Bronfenbrenner ( 1989 )'s theory as EST. Although in a subsequent chapter titled “Ecological Systems Theory”, Bronfenbrenner re-evaluated his ideas from the 1979 monograph, shifting focus from context to person and process, studies using a model named after EST predominantly rely on his earlier conceptualization of ecological systems as developmental contexts. To accurately represent Bronfenbrenner's theory in the articles reviewed in this study, we use EST to denote his earlier attempt to define distinct ecological systems, namely the earlier version of his ecological theory. However, we will cite his definitions from the 1994 entry, as this is where the chronosystem was introduced as the fifth system, providing a comprehensive understanding of all five contextual influences on development as envisioned by Bronfenbrenner.

In the EST model, the development of an individual is influenced by four environmental forces, represented by nested circles (micro-, meso-, exo-, and macrosystem) and the flow of time (chronosystem). The innermost circle is the Microsystem , which is “a pattern of activities, social roles, and interpersonal relations experienced by the developing person in a given face-to-face setting with particular physical, social, and symbolic features that invite, permit, or inhibit engagement in sustained, progressively more complex interaction with, and activity in, the immediate environment” (Bronfenbrenner, 1994 , p. 39). Settings such as family, school, peer group and workplace are all regarded as microsystems. The next layer of the circle is the Mesosystem , which “comprises the linkages and processes taking place between two or more settings containing the developing person” (Bronfenbrenner, 1994 , p. 40), representing a system of microsystems. For instance, the linkage between school and family may affect a child's development. Then, there is the Exosystem , consisting of the “linkages and processes taking place between two or more settings, at least one of which does not contain the developing person, but in which events occur that indirectly influence” (Bronfenbrenner, 1994 , p. 40) the person's development. One example is the relationship between a child's home and their parents' workplace. The outermost circle is the Macrosystem , or “the overarching pattern of micro-, meso-, and exosystems characteristic of a given culture or subculture” (Bronfenbrenner, 1994 , p. 40). Finally, the Chronosystem “encompasses change or consistency over time not only in the characteristics of the person but also of the environments in which the person lives” (Bronfenbrenner, 1994 , p. 40).

As Bronfenbrenner's thinking progressed, he called into question the overemphasis on the central role of the environment in human development and gradually made the “marked shift” to a focus on processes and a more prominent role of the developing person, reconceptualizing his theory as a bioecological model (Bronfenbrenner and Ceci, 1994 ). He later labeled his work a PPCT (Process-Person-Context-Time) model of development (Bronfenbrenner and Morris, 1998 , p. 996). Each element of this newly evolving framework is outlined below.

2.2 The PPCT model

The PPCT model comprises the four defining properties of the bioecological model, emphasizing a simultaneous investigation of all these elements (Bronfenbrenner and Morris, 2006 ).

Process in the model, specifically encompassing proximal processes , refers to the “progressively more complex reciprocal interaction between an active, evolving biopsychological human organism and the persons, objects, and symbols in its immediate external environment” (Bronfenbrenner and Morris, 1998 , p. 996) over time. Notably, the sense in which Bronfenbrenner used the term “process” (e.g., Bronfenbrenner, 1986a , b ) in his earlier writings was different from the later concept of proximal process (Merçon-Vargas et al., 2020 ). The later formulations of proximal process illustrate the uniqueness of the concept and its importance to the theory. What is emphasized here is the joint function, involving complex interactions rather than simply the additive effects, of both human traits and the environment. It comprises the “primary mechanisms producing human development” (Bronfenbrenner and Morris, 2006 , p. 795). It is crucial to clarify the distinctiveness of this concept to grasp its meaning fully and prevent confusion with related concepts such as interaction. In the context of international and intercultural education, proximal processes may involve student-teacher interactions, peer relationships, and engagement with culturally relevant learning materials. However, to qualify as proximal processes, these interactions must adhere to the criteria outlined in Bronfenbrenner and Morris ( 2006 , p. 798). In simple terms, their measurement should encompass: (a) increasing complexity leading to either competence or dysfunction, (b) duration and frequency, and (c) reciprocal interaction (Navarro et al., 2022 , p. 236).

The Person in PPCT model is in contrast to most developmental studies' treatment of the cognitive and socioemotional characteristics of the person as measures of developmental outcomes. It is featured both as an initial factor influencing proximal processes and as a result shaped by the interplay between person, context, and proximal processes across time. It attempts to identify process-relevant person characteristics, which was labeled person forces/disposition (differences of temperament, motivation, persistence, etc.), resources (relate to mental and emotional resources such as past experiences, skills and intelligence and to social and material resources) and demands (personal stimulus such as age, gender, skin color and physical appearance) (Bronfenbrenner and Morris, 2006 ). These have the “capacity to influence the emergence and operation of proximal processes” (Bronfenbrenner and Morris, 2006 , p. 810). While Context includes the micro-, meso-, exo-, and macrosystems in the earlier EST model, the macrosystem was addressed more implicitly in writings about bioecological theory and the PPCT model (Navarro et al., 2022 ). The emphasis is on introducing a more significant domain within the microsystem structure, highlighting the unique impact of proximal processes involving interaction with objects and symbols, rather than solely with individuals (Bronfenbrenner and Morris, 2006 ). Finally, Time extends the original chronosystem (macro-time) to include another two levels: micro-time (what is occurring during some specific activity or interaction) and meso-time (the extent to which activities and interactions occur with some consistency in the developing person's environment) (Bronfenbrenner and Morris, 2006 ; Tudge et al., 2009 ).

All these elements in the PPCT model work interdependently and synergistically. Synergy is a key concept in the PPCT model, which refers to the cooperative action of these four elements, such that the total effect is greater than the sum of their individual effects (Navarro et al., 2022 ). To operationalize synergy in research, Bronfenbrenner and Morris ( 2006 ) suggest studying interactions between person and context, using multigroup models to analyze differences in developmental trajectories and outcomes across time. Navarro et al. ( 2022 ) demonstrate that the PPCT model has a minimum of four comparison groups by choosing two levels of a person characteristic and two levels of a contextual influence. These groups allow for an analysis to identify significant differences in developmental paths and outcomes among different person/context combinations over time.

Bronfenbrenner's bioecological model is no doubt a complex theory (see a summary of its constructs in Table 1 ). Bronfenbrenner ( 1986a ; 1988 ; 1999 ) acknowledged the complexity and ambition of such a comprehensive paradigm, recognizing that very few researchers can address all its components simultaneously in one comprehensive analysis. It is more feasible for researchers to break down these components into smaller combinations that work together cohesively (Bronfenbrenner, 1999 ). He also emphasizes that the purpose of presenting this ambitious design is not to set rigid criteria for all researchers but to offer promising paradigms that generate different research questions. The goal is to alert researchers to the complexities and potential interpretative ambiguities arising from the omission of crucial elements in their selected research designs. Many scholars agree that it is not necessary to include all the factors of the PPCT model in a single study (e.g., Tudge et al., 2016 ; Jaeger, 2017 ). However, Tudge et al. ( 2009 ) asserted that to employ bioecological theory to guide a study, all four elements of the model should be present, or it should be clearly acknowledged why one or more of the elements are not adequately assessed in a research design, so as to preserve the integrity of the theory.

Four constructs and their components in Bronfenbrenner's PPCT model [based on Bronfenbrenner and Morris ( 1998 ) and Tudge et al. ( 2009 )].

2.3 Critics of the misuse of Bronfenbrenner's theory

Some review articles found that the bioecological model had been misused in many studies. These studies either cited the outmoded version or inadequately explored its components while claiming to employ the PPCT model, disregarding the resulting ambiguity due to the omission of certain constructs. For instance, Tudge et al. ( 2009 ) reviewed 25 papers published between 2001 and 2009 and showed that all but four adopted the outmoded version of the theory, which resulted in conceptual confusion and inadequate testing of the theory. After 5 years, Tudge et al. ( 2016 ) conducted a reevaluation of 20 more recent publications. The study found that although 18 of them cited the mature version (after the mid-1990s) of Bronfenbrenner's theory, only two appropriately described, tested, and evaluated the four constructs of the PPCT model. In another commentary, Tudge ( 2016 ) indicates that there are explicit and implicit ways of using Bronfenbrenner's bioecological theory: the former explicitly links research variables and methods to bioecological theory, while the latter only examines person–context interactions over time without explicitly connecting these observations to the theory's constructs. This emphasizes the necessity for the appropriate application of Bronfenbrenner's updated theory, requiring explicit recognition of its constructs as influential variables for development, as detailed in Table 1 .

These reviews collectively underscore the persistent issue of inadequate adoption and exploration of the updated bioecological model, especially the nuanced constructs within the PPCT framework. The gaps identified in the literature necessitate a more thorough examination and explicit utilization of the updated theory to advance a comprehensive understanding of human development within international and intercultural education settings.

Their reviews included research up to 2016, when the model was not yet often extended to fields other than developmental science. In fact, the publications included in their reviews are mostly in the realms of family studies and child development. Therefore, this paper will review the current literature on international and intercultural education and evaluate how Bronfenbrenner's theory has been adopted in this research field.

3 Status of employing Bronfenbrenner in international and intercultural education: a review of current studies

The papers to be reviewed in this section are empirical studies in the fields of international and intercultural education that claim to adopt Bronfenbrenner's ecological theory. We followed the PRISMA guidelines (Page et al., 2021 ) to identify and screen the papers in the databases. The PRISMA flow chart is presented in Figure 1 .

PRISMA flow diagram for searching, identifying, screening, and evaluating studies [adapted from Page et al. ( 2021 )].

The terms used for searching studies using Bronfenbrenner's theory followed Tudge et al. ( 2009 ) and Jaeger ( 2017 ): Bronfenbrenner/bioecological/ecological systems theory/process–person–context–time/PPCT. We also used the keywords international/intercultural/study abroad/exchange/mobility/overseas to constrain the research field to international or intercultural education. We searched the Web of Science (WoS) databases (SSCI/SCI-Expanded/ESCI/A&HCI) (up until 12 September 2023) to ensure that the articles obtained were of good quality. We also conducted searches using a specialized database, EBSCO-ERIC (Educational Resource Information Center), up until September 12, 2023, to identify any additional studies specifically relevant to education. The following inclusion criteria were applied to the initial searches in both databases: (a) studies published in peer-reviewed academic journals, (b) studies published in English, and (c) empirically designed studies, excluding other types such as editorials and review articles. Additionally, we limited the WoS Categories to psychology, education, and related fields like linguistics and social sciences. We also included multidisciplinary categories to retrieve potential studies. Detailed search strategies, including filters and limits used for both databases, are specified in the Appendix . These searches yielded 182 results in the WoS databases and 130 in the ERIC database, totaling 283 after discarding duplicates.

The two researchers screened these records, encompassing titles, abstracts, and keywords, to determine their eligibility for further evaluation. Initially, they conducted independent screenings, resolving disagreements through collaboration. Subsequently, studies were manually eliminated if they: (a) were non-empirical, (b) did not pertain to intercultural or international education (for example, studies merely containing the keyword “international” but not related to international education), and (c) did not apply Bronfenbrenner's theory (for instance, studies related to ecological and environmental education containing the keyword “ecological” but not employing an ecological perspective to investigate educational issues). Studies with uncertainties regarding their article type, research scope, or theoretical perspective were reserved for further examination. Following this screening, 37 reports were initially considered for retrieval, although the authoritative versions of one article could not be retrieved. The researchers then thoroughly examined the full papers of the remaining 36 studies, discarding ten articles based on the aforementioned criteria. Consequently, 26 studies remained for inclusion in this review, as summarized in Table 2 .

Studies on international and intercultural education employing Bronfenbrenner's ecological theory reviewed in this study.

* Most recent Bronfenbrenner work cited by the author(s). ** Although there is a citation of Bronfenbrenner's work in 2009, the original publication dates back to 1979, so the most recent work cited is Bronfenbrenner's publication in 1993.

Some initial observations can be made from Table 2 . First, although we did not set the starting year for our search period, most eligible studies were published in the recent decade, suggesting that Bronfenbrenner's theory has been applied only to the field of international and intercultural education quite recently. Second, 18 studies cited Bronfenbrenner's work before the mid-1990s or named the theory EST or ecological model/theory; thus, they did not use the mature version. Another seven studies cited his work after 2000 and used the term “bioecological” (Bronfenbrenner and Morris, 1998 ; Bronfenbrenner, 2005 ), demonstrating the researchers' awareness of the recent update on the framework. The remaining study (Bhowmik et al., 2018 ), although cited Bronfenbrenner and Morris's ( 2006 ) work, did not use the term “bioecological” (instead, they named the theory “a socioecological model”) 3 . Third, most studies relied solely on qualitative methods to collect and analyze data.

The studies can be grouped into several categories according to how Bronfenbrenner's theory is used: loosely connected to Bronfenbrenner's theory, EST-based, and based on the updated version of the bioecological model (see detailed categorization in Table 3 ). Recognizing that the application of Bronfenbrenner's theory is still in its infancy in international and intercultural education research, our objective is not to critique individual articles but to understand the extent to which the empirical studies we reviewed reflect the recent development of the theory.

Categorization of the studies reviewed.

3.1 Studies loosely connected to Bronfenbrenner's theory

Four studies (Suárez-Orozco et al., 2010 ; Bhowmik et al., 2018 ; Elliot and Kobayashi, 2019 ; Trevor-Roper, 2021 ) are only loosely connected to Bronfenbrenner's theory, although they cite his work, either the early or the mature version. These studies only mention Bronfenbrenner in their papers but have not systematically applied his theory. Bhowmik et al. ( 2018 ) cite Bronfenbrenner's work without using the constructs of his theory for data analysis. Elliot and Kobayashi ( 2019 ) only mention the coexistence of two ecosystems of international students but have not specified the components in each layer of the ecosystem. Suárez-Orozco et al. ( 2010 ) reference Bronfenbrenner's early work (Bronfenbrenner, 1977 ) to highlight the significance of contexts and characteristics affecting students' performance. However, while their research explores the influences of school, family, and individual characteristics on immigrant children's academic trajectories, it lacks a systematic foundation based on Bronfenbrenner's theory. Moreover, the study findings are not explicitly interpreted in connection with Bronfenbrenner's framework. Similarly, Trevor-Roper ( 2021 ) only briefly discusses that the EST model is helpful in appreciating the complexity of higher education environments in international education but does not follow the model's constructs to frame the data analysis.

In other words, Bronfenbrenner's theory only serves as an overarching philosophical perspective rather than an operational model that guides detailed data analysis procedures in these studies. Such an approach partially overlaps with Tudge ( 2016 ) description of the “implicit way” of using Bronfenbrenner's theory, which only examines person–environment interactions and the complexity of the environment. This can be problematic since it oversimplifies the richness of Bronfenbrenner's theory and does not sufficiently demonstrate its value for international and intercultural education.

3.2 Studies based on EST

Twenty studies (McBrien, 2011 ; Jessup-Anger and Aragones, 2013 ; Elliot et al., 2016a , b ; Li and Que, 2016 ; Taylor and Ali, 2017 ; Vardanyan et al., 2018 ; Zhang, 2018 ; Emery et al., 2020 ; Merchant et al., 2020 ; Porter and Porter, 2020 ; Conceição et al., 2021 ; Winer et al., 2021 ; Chkaif et al., 2022 ; Ngo et al., 2022a , b ; Tong et al., 2022 ; Xu and Tran, 2022 ; Marangell, 2023 ; Rokita-Jaśkow et al., 2023 ) are based on the early version, that is, the EST model, although some of them cite Bronfenbrenner's later work and use the term “bioecological.” Three sub-categories can be identified: partial adoption, full adoption, and extended adoption of EST.

3.2.1 Partial adoption of EST

Ten of the 20 studies, including Jessup-Anger and Aragones ( 2013 ), Elliot et al. ( 2016b ), Li and Que ( 2016 ), Taylor and Ali ( 2017 ), Vardanyan et al. ( 2018 ), Emery et al. ( 2020 ), Merchant et al. ( 2020 ), Porter and Porter ( 2020 ), Winer et al. ( 2021 ), and Rokita-Jaśkow et al. ( 2023 ) are all classified as partial adoption.

Elliot et al. ( 2016b )'s study on international students' academic acculturation focuses exclusively on the chronosystem in the EST model. They identify different forms of personal transition, societal transition, and academic transition of international students. Conversely, Emery et al. ( 2020 )'s study explores the experiences of internationally adopted youths across various systems (micro-, meso-, exo-, and macrosystems), with a specific focus on the mesosystem, where schools are pivotal in providing support. Their study does not address the chronosystem.

Jessup-Anger and Aragones ( 2013 ) primarily delve into the influence of developmentally instigative characteristics (Bronfenbrenner, 1993 ) on interactions of study abroad students in host countries, discussing micro- and mesosystems. In Merchant et al. ( 2020 )'s work on refugee students, they highlight the mesosystem (interactions between families, peers, and schools) and exosystem (neighborhood and community organizations) as influential in shaping students' wellbeing. Li and Que ( 2016 )'s study focuses on integration challenges faced by newcomer youths in a Canadian city, emphasizing themes related to the exosystem (public transportation), microsystem (family support, social interaction), and individual factors like language barriers and job pressures. Porter and Porter ( 2020 ) analyze factors influencing Japanese college students' decisions to study abroad, considering various ecosystem layers (micro- and mesosystems as immediate environments, and exo-, macro-, and chronosystems as distant environments). They omit the mesosystem due to limited participant input. Conversely, Taylor and Ali ( 2017 ) incorporate the mesosystem while excluding the exosystem in their examination of international students' adjustment to studying in the UK. They do not distinctly explain the rationale for excluding the exosystem, potentially due to data limitations.

Rokita-Jaśkow et al. ( 2023 )'s study on the school socialization of bi/multilingual children examines the microsystem (teachers), mesosystem (classmates and parents), and exosystem (representatives of the education system). However, it omits the macro- and chronosystems within the EST framework without providing an explanation. Vardanyan et al. ( 2018 ) employ Bronfenbrenner's EST concepts in their data analysis, emphasizing the micro- and mesosystems, with limited focus on the chronosystem. In contrast, Winer et al. ( 2021 ) explore immigrants' children's sense of belonging within the microsystem (their rooms in their homes), mesosystem (a shared living building), and macrosystem (their neighborhood). However, they do not introduce or investigate the exo- and chronosystems.

These studies collectively illustrate that the EST is a multifaceted model, demanding multiple investigations to comprehensively explore the entire ecological system (Elliot et al., 2016b ). However, there is a need for more explicit justification when certain constructs within the model are excluded from analysis, as this exclusion affects the overall comprehensiveness of the theory.

3.2.2 Full adoption of EST

Four studies investigate all the components of EST. McBrien ( 2011 ) delves into the challenges encountered by refugee mothers as they adapt to settled lives and explores their children's schooling experiences in the context of all the components within the EST. Ngo et al. ( 2022b ) investigate the impact of contextual factors on the professional development experiences of Vietnamese English as a foreign language lecturers across different contextual levels within the EST model. Tong et al. ( 2022 ) use the EST model to offer a visual metaphorical illustration of the major themes at each level of an Australian–Chinese student's developmental ecosystem in Hong Kong and tease out the risk and protective elements in this ecosystem that influenced the student's developmental trajectory. Zhang ( 2018 ) examines how academic advising with international students was shaped by individual backgrounds and multiple layers of environmental influences.

These studies meticulously examine each construct of EST within the context of international and intercultural education and demonstrate the relevance of the model in fostering positive interactions in intercultural settings.

3.2.3 Extended adoption of EST

Six articles extend the model to some degree. Chkaif et al. ( 2022 ) combine EST with Yu et al. ( 2021 ) to generate a refined model for international education, with the macrosystem being revised to include the global dimension. Conceição et al. ( 2021 ) expand upon the investigation of the chronosystem within the EST by integrating transformative learning theory to illustrate the personal growth and development of study abroad students over time. Elliot et al. ( 2016a ) propose an academic acculturation model illustrating the transition between two ecosystems of a study-abroad sojourn. Marangell ( 2023 )'s study on students' experiences at an internationalized university applies a person-in-context (PiC) model (Volet, 2001 ), which adapts Bronfenbrenner's EST. The PiC model centers on the “experiential interface,' where individual and environmental dimensions interact, and explores how congruence between these dimensions fosters motivated and productive learning. Ngo et al. ( 2022a ) incorporate EST into an integrated framework for effective professional development, encompassing three dimensions: context, content, and process. Finally, Xu and Tran ( 2022 ) extend the investigation of the person at the center of EST by employing the needs–response agency theory.

These studies provide nuanced perspectives that enhance EST's applicability in international and intercultural education and underscore the importance of the continuous evolution of the theory to address the complexities of educational systems in an increasingly interconnected world. However, the expansion of the theory also introduces extra complexity and challenges in operationalizing and measuring the constructs, and care should be taken to disentangle various factors.

The EST-based studies reviewed above offer valuable insights into international and intercultural education within Bronfenbrenner's early EST model by discussing various aspects, such as the impact of cultural contexts, policy frameworks, academic transitions, peers, and advisors, all of which are crucial in understanding educational experiences in diverse cultural settings. Nevertheless, the absence of the PPCT model in these studies limits the exploration of the dynamic processes and interactions between individuals, their contexts, and the outcomes of international and intercultural education.

3.3 Studies based on the updated version of the bioecological model

The final two studies (Xu et al., 2021 ; Liu et al., 2022 ) was more pertinent to the bioecological model, although they do not mention the PPCT model. They differ from other studies reviewed above in that they not only recognize the existence of the mature version of Bronfenbrenner's theory but also employ it to guide their data analysis. For instance, Liu et al. ( 2022 ) state that while they acknowledge the influence of ecological systems in Bronfenbrenner's early model, they further embrace his later theoretical development of the bioecological system, which considers the individual as an active agent in proximal processes. Xu et al. ( 2021 ) also comment in their article that previous studies applying Bronfenbrenner's theory to address academic acculturation neglect a thorough identification of individual and contextual forces and fail to delineate the dynamic interactions between them. Therefore, both studies employ the updated version of the theory by highlighting how the “person” constructs (dispositions, demands, and resources) interact with environmental contexts to shape development. Liu et al. ( 2022 ) investigate the academic career development of Chinese returnees with overseas PhDs. (CROPs) and find that preferences for stability (dispositions), social networking establishment and maintenance (demands), and a lack of experience with local academic and publication cultures (resources) are important factors. Xu et al. ( 2021 ) examine Chinese doctoral students' international education experiences in Australia and suggest that personal characteristics, such as inward management practices (dispositions), social networking maintenance (demands), research outputs, and health status (resources), are the engine of development.

These two studies contribute to the field of international and intercultural education by recognizing and utilizing this updated version of Bronfenbrenner's theory. However, both studies only briefly mention the concept of “proximal processes”—the core of the mature version of the bioecological model—without identifying what they were and how they contributed to development. For instance, Xu et al. ( 2021 ) acknowledge that the core driving force in the bioecological system relies on PhD students' ability to initiate their autonomy as they negotiate, utilize, and create resources for their development in both their home and host environments. However, they state that “a fine-grained elaboration of these practices is neither the focus of this study nor possible to accomplish in a piece of this length” (p. 1354). Notably, these practices embody potential proximal processes of interest in the bioecological model. Furthermore, neither study adopts a PPCT design. Despite acknowledging the interplay between Person and Context factors in development, the absence of specifying the proximal processes mediating these effects limits the studies from achieving the synergistic design envisioned in Bronfenbrenner's bioecological theory.

3.4 Summary

This review indicates that the application of Bronfenbrenner's bioecological theory in international and intercultural education research is still in its infancy. Most studies have adopted the elements of EST to explain international and intercultural contexts for education, while the updated version of PPCT has been inadequately explored. In the study where PPCT is referenced (Emery et al., 2020 ), it is mentioned as background information rather than being utilized as a framework for interpreting empirical findings. Proximal processes, crucial in the PPCT model and critical to international and intercultural education, have seldom been explored in depth, which means that the true value of Bronfenbrenner's theory is largely underrepresented.

4 Conclusions and future directions

Bronfenbrenner's theory has undergone continuous refinements and reformulations over time and has evolved from an ecological to a bioecological theory, incorporating a four-element model (PPCT), in which the proximal process is given pride of place (Tudge et al., 2016 ). Previous reviews have criticized the misuse or partial representation of Bronfenbrenner's theory in the field of developmental science, especially in family studies and child development (Tudge et al., 2009 , 2016 ; Tudge, 2016 ). However, as Bronfenbrenner's theory has become influential in other fields in recent years, how the theory has been employed in these fields is a compelling question. This review addresses this issue and provides new insights for scholars in the field of international and intercultural education who are interested in applying Bronfenbrenner's bioecological theory.

In international and intercultural education, students experience a collide of at least two ecosystems consisting of complex elements and relationships. Therefore, Bronfenbrenner's bioecological perspective on human development is an ideal framework for understanding how an individual negotiates the dynamic environment and their own identity in these intercultural settings (Elliot and Kobayashi, 2019 ; Xu et al., 2021 ; Xu and Tran, 2022 ). The theoretical merit of the PPCT model is that it allows researchers to capture the dynamics and relationships between organisms and environments rather than presenting the developing person and influencing contextual factors discretely. Although the fields of education and development have benefited from a focus on contextual influences on human development situated within the early ecological model of Bronfenbrenner ( 1979 ), the PPCT model can inspire new ways of thinking about contextual influences (Bronfenbrenner, 1999 ). Firstly, this model refines the concept of microsystem by emphasizing proximal processes within these microsystems, identifying them as pivotal mechanisms through which development occurs. Secondly, the PPCT model posits that these proximal processes act as moderators, shaping the impact of contextual influences. Bronfenbrenner's work underlines that while contexts exert significant influence, the quality and nature of proximal processes within these contexts can moderate or amplify their effects on individual development. This model thereby deepens our understanding by emphasizing the interactive and dynamic nature of contextual influences.

However, a review of the existing literature indicates that when Bronfenbrenner's theory is applied to international and intercultural education research, either the earlier version of EST is used or the mature version is only partially applied, without paying the due attention to proximal processes and how they are jointly influenced by the personal characteristics, various levels of contexts and time variables. Based on this review, we propose the following future directions for international and intercultural education research regarding theoretical perspectives and methodological designs.

4.1 Future directions for theoretical perspectives

For scholars seeking to apply Bronfenbrenner's theory in their empirical studies, we propose two recommendations.

First, consistent with other scholars' previous reminders (e.g., Tudge et al., 2009 ; Rosa and Tudge, 2013 ; Navarro et al., 2022 ), we also emphasize on the importance for studies to clearly specify which version of the theory they are adopting and to provide a rationale for their choices. This clarity will help avoid the “two-fold disservice” pointed out by Tudge et al. ( 2009 , p. 198) and thus allow for an accurate understanding of the theoretical framework, enhance the comparability and consistency of research findings, contribute to the cumulative knowledge in the field, and facilitate the comparison and synthesis of findings across studies. Scholars may choose to adopt the early version of the theory, the EST model, if their study primarily focuses on environmental factors, or they may opt for the mature version of the theory, the PPCT model, if they aim to highlight the crucial impact of proximal processes, and their dynamic interplay with individuals, their characteristics, and their immediate and remote environmental contexts and historical time. However, it is misleading if a study claims to use Bronfenbrenner's “bioecological” theory and only refers to the EST model without acknowledging the updated PPCT model or if a study only partially adopts some constructs in either model without explaining the rationale. Researchers should carefully consider whether a theory is appropriately represented to ensure the credibility and robustness of the research.

Second, to advance the field of international and intercultural education research, we suggest employing the mature version of Bronfenbrenner's bioecological theory, which emphasizes the significance of proximal processes. This shift in emphasis can contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of how individuals actively engage with their educational environments. In child development research, a study involving the PPCT model may examine how regularly occurring parent–child interactions, such as joint storybook reading (e.g., Barnyak, 2011 ), are influenced by important characteristics of the child and some relevant aspects of the context (Tudge et al., 2009 ). Similarly, in international and intercultural education, researchers can gain deeper insights into the everyday activities that shape individuals' development in diverse cultural contexts by focusing on proximal processes. For example, interactions with local people and peers are two different types of proximal processes that an international student may encounter in the host country, which may have either positive or reverse effects on their development. Merçon-Vargas et al. ( 2020 ) further propose the notion of inverse proximal processes to expand the conceptual framework of proximal processes and to address the potential negative impact of certain interactions and activities on human development, particularly in disadvantaged environments. This concept suggests that in disadvantaged environments, detrimental or dysfunctional interactions occurring regularly over extended periods of time are linked to higher levels of dysfunction and lower competency. The notion of inverse proximal processes allows for a more inclusive and expansive use of Bronfenbrenner's bioecological theory.

One question concerns the identification and measurement of proximal processes for investigation, and there is no straightforward answer as Bronfenbrenner did not provide a definitive guideline. In Drillien ( 1964 ) study, Bronfenbrenner identified mother-infant interaction as a proximal process, measured by maternal responsiveness through family observations and interviews. He highlighted that a more comprehensive understanding of proximal processes should also encompass the infant's responsiveness to changes in the mother's behavior, reflecting the reciprocal nature of proximal processes. For Small and Luster ( 1990 )'s study, parental monitoring was identified as a proximal process, assessed through a questionnaire on adolescents' perceptions of parental efforts to stay informed and set limits on their activities outside the home. These examples indicate that diverse tools such as observations, interviews, and questionnaires can measure proximal processes, provided they align with the concept's definition. Therefore, we concur with Navarro et al.'s ( 2022 ) guideline that measures of proximal processes should consider: (a) increasing complexity over time (either inverse or positive); (b) reciprocity between the developing individual and the interacting person(s)/object(s); and (c) duration (i.e., microtime) and frequency (i.e., mesotime) to ensure regular occurrence over an extended period. We also regard it appropriate to design measurement methods tailored to specific research questions.

Previous literature in international and intercultural education has identified key processes contributing to student development, such as interacting with native speakers (Campbell, 2011 ), engaging in cultural activities (Isabelli-García, 2006 ), and attending international courses (Jiang et al., 2023 ). Therefore, studies aiming to investigate these as proximal processes need to examine the level of complexity, mutual engagement, and regularity of these activities and their changes over time. For instance, a study on interacting with native speakers might scrutinize conversation topics for complexity, native speakers' responses for reciprocity, and the duration and frequency of these conversations for regularity. Meanwhile, research on cultural activities might explore the complexity and regularity of different tasks within these activities and how they stimulate subjects' “attention, exploration, manipulation, elaboration, and imagination” (Bronfenbrenner and Morris, 2006 , p. 798).

By following these recommendations, scholars can enhance the applicability and relevance of Bronfenbrenner's theory in the context of international and intercultural education and contribute to the advancement of the empirical field.

4.2 Future directions for methodological designs

Future research in international and intercultural education can benefit from several key methodological considerations. First, studies framed by the bioecological perspective should aim to meet the requirements of a PPCT study design. Bronfenbrenner did not conduct his own research using the PPCT model; instead, he referenced other scholars' work to showcase his concepts. Therefore, interpreting and applying the PPCT model can pose challenges. Navarro et al. ( 2022 ) provide a detailed guideline of how a study should address all the PPCT components to ensure that its design enables a “Bronfenbrenerian synergistic analysis” (p. 240). For instance, the guidelines highlight that PPCT studies must be longitudinal, as the outcome must be measured at a developmentally relevant time point after the proximal process(es), which, as another requirement, should be examined regarding increasing complexity, reciprocity, and duration and frequency. They also note that when applying the bioecological theory and the PPCT model, it is crucial to carefully choose the pertinent elements of person, context, process, and time by thoroughly reviewing empirical studies and pertinent theoretical perspectives. Meanwhile, the synergy among these components should be elaborated, which means the “cooperative action of discrete agencies such that the total effect is greater than the sum of two or more effects—taken independently” (Bronfenbrenner and Morris, 2006 , p. 800), suggesting the use of multigroup models (Navarro et al., 2022 ). Navarro et al. ( 2022 ) demonstrate that the PPCT model allows for the comparison of at least four groups based on different person/context combinations. Quantitative research can use mediational models to assess developmental differences over time, while qualitative researchers will also need to ensure their individual participant selection meets these criteria.

By aligning the research design with the principles and guidelines outlined, researchers can ensure a comprehensive and systematic examination of the four components in the PPCT model. Let us consider how the studies based on the updated version of the bioecological model reviewed above can be redesigned to more closely approximate the PPCT design. For instance, consider Liu et al. ( 2022 )'s research where they identify several factors influencing CROPs' career development, including: (a) the lack of recent experience and familiarity with local academic and publication cultures hindered career development, (b) interactions in the microsystem with senior leaders, line managers, and colleagues had negative impacts, leading to academic pressure and mental health concerns, and (c) the macrosystem of Chinese higher education, driven by the ambition to establish world-class universities, shaped the microsystem's interactional hostility due to marketization and globalization influences in international higher education. Building on these findings, a research approach based on the PPCT model might explore the relationships between these factors using a longitudinal design. Subjects could be categorized along two dimensions: CROPs' familiarity with local academic publication cultures (a Person factor) and the type of university they are working in (a Context factor). This differentiation might involve a national funded university aiming for higher rankings in the Chinese higher education system, reflecting a specific macrosystem, and Sino-Foreign Joint Venture Universities, which mirror a distinct macrosystem akin to Western educational culture. Interactions with senior leaders might serve as a proximal process, varying in positivity or negativity. Developmental outcomes could encompass academic competence (e.g., publications, grants, self-efficacy) and dysfunction (e.g., stress, mental health issues). One potential outcome of such a design might reveal that positive interactions with senior leaders foster academic competence among those familiar with local academic cultures and alleviate academic stress among those less acquainted. However, these interaction effects may differ between national funded universities and Sino-Foreign Joint Venture Universities. This assumption draws from Liu et al. ( 2022 )'s evidence highlighting that in the Chinese culture, “Big Figures” (Da Lao in Chinese) impact resource allocation, potentially influencing the culture of national funded university more significantly. Such insights would deepen our understanding of the intricacies within intercultural settings in higher education.

The PPCT model also offers a means to address conflicting research findings in international and intercultural education research. In the sphere of study abroad research, for instance, there has been extensive exploration of outcomes and influencing factors such as living conditions (Allen et al., 2006 ), social networks (Magnan and Lafford, 2012 ), and duration of stay (Dwyer, 2004 ). However, this body of work often yields conflicting or overly generalized conclusions (Pinar, 2016 ). Take living condition as an example, while some studies emphasize the positive influence of living with host families on language and intercultural competence development (Allen et al., 2006 ), others, such as those by Isabelli-García ( 2006 ) and Jackson ( 2009 ), highlight potential negative effects if interaction with the family is troubled or almost non-existent. Critiques by Coleman ( 2013 ) emphasize the oversight of contextual uniqueness and individual variables in demonstrating study abroad benefits, echoed by Ushioda ( 2009 ) emphasis on the varied impact of social or individual factors. In considering the bioecological model, the study abroad setting does not predict learning outcomes in isolation; rather, it is the activities (proximal processes) in which the students engage that wield greater influence. Therefore, employing a PPCT design could effectively address these controversies by illuminating how varied proximal processes produce differed developmental outcomes as a joint effect of individual characteristics and contextual factors.

Let us envision a hypothetical study that utilizes the PPCT design to navigate the controversial outcomes regarding the influence of host family contexts on students' development of intercultural communication competence. Previous research has demonstrated that the experience of residing with host families may yield positive or negative outcomes contingent upon the established relationships, influencing the shared time and dynamics of interactions between family members and students (Lafford and Collentine, 2006 ). Extensive evidence has indicated that cooperative roles adopted by host families facilitate high-quality interactions, allowing students to practice language skills, receive corrective feedback, and acquire new insights, thereby positively impacting linguistic and cultural knowledge (Knight and Schmidt-Rinehart, 2002 ; Schmidt-Rinehart and Knight, 2004 ; McMeekin, 2006 ). Conversely, Magnan and Lafford ( 2012 ) highlight factors such as limited patience to communicate with students having lower language proficiency, time constraints due to schedule disparities, interpersonal incompatibility, or stressful coexistence, negatively affecting the learning process. In these studies, individual factors such as language proficiency and personality, along with contextual elements encompassing host family dynamics, are often considered as working independently on students' development of intercultural competence. However, the PPCT design seeks to surpass this simplistic additive effect by investigating the synergistic impact of diverse individual and contextual factors. Within this design, subjects can be concurrently stratified across both personal and contextual dimensions. For instance, different levels of student language proficiency could be matched with variations in host family dynamics, including experiences in intercultural encounters, cultural exchange opportunities, and family routines. Proximal process, in this context, delineates the interaction between students and host families, gauged not solely by the depth and degree of mutual engagement in conversations but also by their frequency and consistency, thereby embedding a Time factor. Furthermore, employing a pre-test and post-test design would allow for the observation of development over time.

The bioecological model can provide hypothetical outcomes of implementing such a design. According to the bioecological model, the potency of proximal processes is intricately tied to the characteristics of the developing individual, the environment, and the specific developmental outcome under scrutiny. Building on Small and Luster ( 1990 ) findings, Bronfenbrenner and Morris ( 2006 ) posited a hypothesis: for developmental outcomes of competence 4 , proximal processes exert the strongest influence within the most advantageous ecological niches. Therefore, a speculative outcome from the proposed research design suggests that student-host interaction might yield the greatest positive impact within favorable host family dynamics, particularly among students displaying the highest language proficiency. This proposition underscores the notion that same levels of host family dynamics may not yield identical effects across all students. Neglecting this distinction disregards the potential for students with superior language skills to benefit more from high-quality student-host interaction, perhaps due to their ability to utilize richer language resources during such interactions. Practically, these hypothetical findings imply diverse intervention strategies tailored to students with varying language proficiency levels to optimally allocate resources within study abroad programs. For instance, interventions targeting students with higher language proficiency might emphasize engaging in proximal processes that demand advanced language skills. Conversely, students with lower language proficiency could benefit from focused support to match them with host families known for patience and assistance in language development. This approach would ensure maximum benefit from proximal processes aligned with their proficiency levels.

These hypothetical implications derived from the PPCT model in the two examples above await empirical validation through future research endeavors. Nonetheless, this illustration posits that the PPCT framework presents distinct advantages in both international and intercultural research and practical application domains. Firstly, it helps enhance predictive precision. By comprehensively analyzing the intricate interactions between multiple factors, the PPCT model offers greater predictive accuracy regarding the effectiveness of interventions or strategies across diverse scenarios or individuals. Secondly, it offers a holistic understanding of development. Embracing personal attributes, contextual elements, and developmental processes across time, the implications derived from the PPCT model encourages holistic approaches to educational interventions. Thirdly, it can inform tailored interventions. The PPCT model facilitates the identification of synergistic relationships among variables, enabling researchers to craft interventions precisely tailored to specific contexts or individuals. Finally, it can also help optimize resource allocation for maximum positive outcomes.

Another methodological implication is that to enhance the depth and richness of insights, future studies can diversify their data collection and analysis methods by incorporating both quantitative and qualitative approaches. Table 2 shows that the research reviewed in this study relies largely on qualitative approaches. However, Navarro et al. ( 2022 ) provide some useful illustrative examples of how both quantitative and qualitative researchers can utilize bioecological theory and PPCT. Jaeger ( 2017 ) recommends that a hierarchical linear modeling analysis might best approximate Bronfenbrenner's preference for research since it considers a wide range of complex variables for development. In addition to traditional qualitative methods, researchers can also consider employing the qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) method, which offers a systematic approach to analyzing complex causal relationships by identifying configurations of conditions that lead to specific outcomes. It is particularly appropriate for capturing the complexity of Bronfenbrenner's theory and allows researchers to identify patterns and combinations of conditions that are necessary or sufficient for certain educational outcomes. For example, they can examine how different combinations of individual characteristics, environmental factors, and developmental processes interact to influence educational experiences in diverse cultural settings.

Furthermore, to foster innovation in methodological design, researchers can draw inspiration from other disciplines to expand the methodological toolbox in the field of international and intercultural education. For instance, employing biomarkers as a measure of physiological responses (Yrttiaho et al., 2021 ) within the bioecological framework offers interesting possibilities for future research (Navarro et al., 2022 ) and could provide valuable insights into the biological underpinnings of individuals' adaptation and development within diverse cultural contexts. Such innovative approaches can offer unique perspectives and contribute to a more holistic understanding of the complex interplay between individual, culture, and education. These methodological considerations can inform researchers to advance the field, deepen our understanding of educational experiences in diverse cultural settings, and contribute to evidence-based practices that promote positive educational outcomes for individuals in intercultural contexts.

In conclusion, this article has reviewed studies utilizing Bronfenbrenner's ecological theory in the context of international and intercultural education. These studies have demonstrated the value of employing this theoretical framework to understand the complex interactions between individuals and their environments in diverse cultural contexts. While some studies have focused on the early version of the theory, others have recognized the more recent bioecological model. Moving forward, it is crucial for researchers to specify the version of the theory they are adopting and to consider incorporating the mature version of the PPCT model. Additionally, future research should explore innovative methodological approaches to gain a comprehensive understanding of the intricate dynamics at play in international and intercultural education.

Author contributions

PT and IA designed the study and discussed the findings collaboratively. PT was the main contributor for drafting the manuscript. IA contributed extensively to the revised version. All authors agreed on the final version of the manuscript.

Search strategy for WoS and ERIC databases

Search strategy for wos databases.

Boolean: (TS=(Bronfenbrenner OR bioecological OR ecological systems theory OR process–person–context–time OR PPCT)) AND TS=(international OR intercultural OR study abroad OR exchange OR mobility OR overseas).

• Document Types: Article
• NOT Document Types: Proceeding Paper or Book Chapters
• Languages: English
• Web of Science Index: Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI); Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI); Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED); Arts and Humanities Citation Index (AandHCI)
• Web of Science Categories: Development Studies; Education Educational Research; Education Scientific Disciplines; Education Special; Psychology Education; International Relations; Language Linguistics; Linguistics; Multidisciplinary Sciences; Psychology; Psychology Applied; Psychology Biological; Psychology Clinical; Psychology Developmental; Psychology Educational; Psychology Experimental; Psychology Multidisciplinary; Psychology Social; Social Issues; Social Sciences Biomedical; Social Sciences Interdisciplinary; Social Work; Sociology.

Search strategy for the ERIC database

Boolean: (Bronfenbrenner OR bioecological OR ecological systems theory OR process–person–context–time OR PPCT) AND (international OR intercultural OR study abroad OR exchange OR mobility OR overseas).

• Peer Reviewed
• Journal or Document: Journal Article (EJ)
• Publication Type: Journal Articles
• Language: English.

Funding Statement

This study is supported by World Languages and Cultures Research Fund granted by China Center for Language Planning and Policy Studies (Project No. WYZL2022HB0010), Wuhan University Office of International Affairs Research Fund (Project No. 600405502), and Wuhan University- Duke Kunshan University Joint Research Platform Seed Fund (Project No. XXWHUDKUZZJJ202301).

1 As will be elucidated in more detail in this paper, Bronfenbrenner's theory evolved from an early version of the ecological systems theory to a bioecological model. The general term “ecological theory” is used to encompass both the early version and its recent reformulation of the bioecological paradigm.

2 In Bronfenbrenner ( 1986a , 1989 )'s earlier theorization, the chronosystem represents a particular type of research design, which should not be confused with the various environmental systems differentiated in his 1979 monograph. However, in his 1994 work, chronosystems are treated as a fifth systems parameter that “extends the environment into a third dimension” (p. 40). Thus, a full representation of Bronfenbrenner's theorization of ecological systems as contexts of development encompasses the four-layered systems conceptualized in 1979, as well as the chronosystem in his subsequent works.

3 Bhowmik et al. ( 2018 ) did not explain why they chose “socioecological model” over more established terms. This lack of clarification leaves room for various interpretations. It might suggest a focus on social aspects within the ecological framework or a departure from the strict bioecological perspective. However, without the authors' explicit explanation, it is hard to determine their intent or whether it is a misapplication. Therefore, clear terminological justifications are crucial, especially when diverging from recognized theoretical labels. This absence of clarification might lead to misunderstandings or ambiguities in understanding Bronfenbrenner's theory and its adaptations.

4 Development, as per the bioecological model, serves as a neutral term encompassing both positive changes ( competence ) and negative changes ( dysfunction ) (Bronfenbrenner and Morris, 2006 ). The hypothesis regarding the developmental outcome of dysfunction differs from that concerning competence. For instance, in Drillien's study, proximal processes had their greatest buffering effect on development of problematic behaviors of infants in the most disadvantaged environment but on the healthiest infants (Bronfenbrenner and Morris, 2006 ).

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Publisher's note

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

• Allen H., Dristas V., Mills N. (2006). “Cultural learning outcomes and summer study abroad,” in Identity and Second Language Learning: Culture, Inquiry, And Dialogic Activity In Educational Contexts , ed M. Mantero (Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing; ), 189–215. [ Google Scholar ]
• Barnyak N. C. (2011). A qualitative study in a rural community: investigating the attitudes, beliefs, and interactions of young children and their parents regarding storybook read alouds . Early Childh. Educ. J. 39 , 149–159. 10.1007/s10643-011-0445-1 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bhowmik M. K., Cheung R. Y. M., Hue M. T. (2018). Acculturative stress and coping strategies among mainland Chinese university students in Hong Kong: a qualitative inquiry . Am. J. Orthopsych. 88 , 550–562. 10.1037/ort0000338 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Blin F. (2016). “Towards an 'ecological' CALL theory,” in The Routledge Handbook of Language Learning and Technology , eds F. Farr and L. Murray (Routledge), 39–54. 10.4324/9781315657899.ch3 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bronfenbrenner U. (1977). Toward an experimental ecology of human development . Am. Psychol. 32 , 513–531. 10.1037/0003-066X.32.7.513 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bronfenbrenner U. (1979). The Ecology of Human Development: Experiments by Nature and Design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bronfenbrenner U. (1986a). “Recent advances in research on the ecology of human development,” in Development as Action Context: Problem Behavior and Normal Youth Development , eds. R. K. Silbereisen, K. Eyferth, and G. Rudinger (New York, NY: Springer; ), 286–309. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bronfenbrenner U. (1986b). Ecology of the family as a context for human development: research perspectives . Dev. Psychol. 22 , 723–742. 10.1037/0012-1649.22.6.723 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bronfenbrenner U. (1988). “Interacting systems in human development: Research paradigms present and future,” in Persons in context: Developmental processes , eds. N. Bolger, A. Caspi, G. Downey, and M. Moorhouse (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press). 25–49. 10.1017/CBO9780511663949.003 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bronfenbrenner U. (1989). Ecological systems theory . Ann. Child Dev. 6 , 187–249. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bronfenbrenner U. (1993). “The ecology of cognitive development: research models and fugitive findings,” in Development in context: Acting and thinking in specific environments , eds. R. H. Wozniak and K. W. Fischer (Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum; ), 3–44. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bronfenbrenner U. (1994). “Ecological models of human development,” in International encyclopedia of education , eds. M. Gauvain, and M. Cole (New York, NY: Freeman) 37–43. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bronfenbrenner U. (1995). “Developmental ecology through space and time: a future perspective,” in eds Examining Lives in Context: Perspectives on the Ecology of Human Development , P. Moen, G. H. J. Elder, and K. Luscher (American Psychological Association), 619–647. 10.1037/10176-018 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bronfenbrenner U. (1999). “Environments in developmental perspective: theoretical and operational models,” in Measuring Environment Across the Life Span: Emerging Methods and Concepts , eds S. L. Friedman and T. D. Wachs (American Psychological Association), 3–28. 10.1037/10317-001 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bronfenbrenner U. (2005). Making Human Beings Human: Bioecological Perspectives on Human Development . New York: Sage. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bronfenbrenner U., Ceci S. (1994). Nature–nurture reconceptualized in developmental perspective: a bioecological model . Psychol. Rev. 101 , 568–586. 10.1037/0033-295X.101.4.568 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Bronfenbrenner U., Morris P. A. (1998). “The bioecological model of human development,” in Handbook of Child Psychology , ed. R. M. Lerner (Hoboken, NJ: Wiley and Sons; ), 993–1027. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bronfenbrenner U., Morris P. A. (2006). “The bioecological model of human development,” in Handbook of Child Psychology , ed. R. M. Lerner (Hoboken, NJ, USA: John Wiley \& Sons, Inc.), 793–828. 10.1002/9780470147658.chpsy0114 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Campbell R. (2011). The impact of study abroad on Japanese language learners' social networks . New Voices 5 , 25–63. 10.21159/nv.05.02 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Chkaif B., Sallam M. H., Xu M. H., Thamik H. (2022). African students' mobility to China: an ecological systematic perspective . Trames-J. Human. Soc. Sci. 26 , 185–206. 10.3176/tr.2022.2.05 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Coleman J. A. (2013). “Researching whole people and whole lives” , in Social and Cultural Aspects of Language Learning in Study Abroad , ed. C. Kinginger (Amsterdam: John Benjamins), 17–44. 10.1075/lllt.37.02col [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Conceição S. C. O., Mina L., Southern T. (2021). Brazilian students studying in the United States: perceptions of their lived experiences 6 months after returning home . J. Transfor. Educ. 19 , 127–146. 10.1177/1541344620944640 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Darling N. (2007). Ecological systems theory: The person in the center of the circles . Res. Hum. Dev . 4 , 203–217. 10.1080/15427600701663023 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Drillien C. M. (1964). Growth and Development of the Prematurely Born Infant . E. & S. Livingston. [ Google Scholar ]
• Dwyer M. (2004). More is better: the impact of study abroad program duration . J. Study Abroad 10 , 151–163. 10.36366/frontiers.v10i1.139 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Elliot D. L., Baumfield V., Reid K. (2016a). Searching for 'a third space': a creative pathway towards international PhD students' academic acculturation . High. Educ. Res. Dev. 35 , 1180–1195. 10.1080/07294360.2016.1144575 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Elliot D. L., Kobayashi S. (2019). How can PhD supervisors play a role in bridging academic cultures? Teach. High. Educ. 24 , 911–929. 10.1080/13562517.2018.1517305 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Elliot D. L., Reid K., Baumfield V. (2016b). Beyond the amusement, puzzlement and challenges: an enquiry into international students' academic acculturation . Stud. High. Educ. 41 , 2198–2217. 10.1080/03075079.2015.1029903 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Emery A., von Spiegel J., Sayer R., Khandaker N., Anderman L. (2020). Parent perspectives on schooling experiences of internationally adopted youth with disabilities . Learn. Disabil. Multidisc. J. 25 , 1–15. 10.18666/LDMJ-2020-V25-I2-10473 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Isabelli-García C. (2006). “Study abroad social networks, motivation and attitudes: implications for second language acquisition,” in Language Learners in Study Abroad Contexts , eds M. A. DuFon and E. Churchill (Clevedon: Multilingual Matters), 231–258. 10.21832/9781853598531-013 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Jackson J. (2009). Intercultural learning on short-term sojourns . Intercult. Educ . 20 , 59–71. 10.1080/14675980903370870 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Jaeger E. L. (2017). Negotiating complexity: a bioecological systems perspective on literacy development . Hum. Dev. 59 , 163–187. 10.1159/000448743 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Jessup-Anger J. E., Aragones A. (2013). Students' peer interactions within a cohort and in host countries during a short-term study abroad . J. Student Affairs Res. Pract. 50 , 21–36. 10.1515/jsarp-2013-0002 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Jiang Q. O., Song X., Yue C., Wang K., Sun H., Zhang Z., et al.. (2023). Internationalization of medical education in China: an investigation of medical graduates' global competence and its influencing factors . Med. Teach . 10.1080/0142159X.2023.2259066 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Johnson E. S. (2008). Ecological systems and complexity theory: toward an alternative model of accountability in education . Complicity 5 , 1–10. 10.29173/cmplct8777 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Knight S. M., Schmidt-Rinehart B. D. (2002). Enhancing the homestay: study abroad from the host family's perspective . Foreign Lang. Ann . 35 , 190–201. 10.1111/j.1944-9720.2002.tb03154.x [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Lafford B., Collentine J. (2006). “The effects of study abroad and classroom contexts on the acquisition of Spanish as a second language: From research to application,” in Spanish Second Language Acquisition: From Research Findings to Teaching Applications , eds B. Lafford and R. Salaberry (Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press), 103–126. [ Google Scholar ]
• Li X., Que H. (2016). Integration and career challenges of newcomer youth in newfoundland in Canada . FIRE 2 , 44–62. 10.18275/fire201502031082 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Liu D., Xu Y. W., Zhao T. T., Che S. Q. (2022). Academic career development of Chinese returnees with overseas Ph.D. degrees: A bioecological development perspective . Front. Psychol. 13 , 859240. 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.859240 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Magnan S., Lafford B. (2012). “Learning through immersion during study abroad,” in The Routledge Handbook of Second Language Acquisition (New York, NY: Routledge; ), 525–540. 10.4324/9780203808184-44 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Marangell S. (2023). Exploring students' experiences of an internationalized university through a person-in-context lens . J. Compar. Int. High. Educ. 15 , 134–165. 10.32674/jcihe.v15i2.4133 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• McBrien J. L. (2011). The importance of context: Vietnamese, Somali, and Iranian refugee mothers discuss their resettled lives and involvement in their children's schools . Compare-A J. Compar. Int. Educ. 41 , 75–90. 10.1080/03057925.2010.523168 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• McMeekin A. (2006). “Negotiation in a Japanese study abroad setting,” in Language Learners in Study Abroad Contexts , eds M. A. DuFon and E. Churchill (Clevedon: Multilingual Matters), 177–202. 10.21832/9781853598531-011 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Merchant B., Johansson O., Ärlestig H. (2020). Welcome and välkommen: school administrators in the U.S. and Sweden responds to unexpected numbers of refugees in their rural communities . Int. J. Leader. Educ. 23 , 24–39. 10.1080/13603124.2019.1629630 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Merçon-Vargas E. A., Lima R. F. F., Rosa E. M., Tudge J. (2020). Processing proximal processes: what Bronfenbrenner meant, what he didn't mean, and what he should have meant . J. Family Theory Rev. 12 , 321–334. 10.1111/jftr.12373 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Mulisa F. (2019). Application of bioecological systems theory to higher education: best evidence review . J. Pedagog. Soc. Psychol . 1 , 104–115. [ Google Scholar ]
• Navarro J. L., Stephens C., Rodrigues B. C., Walker I. A., Cook O., O'Toole L., et al.. (2022). Bored of the rings: methodological and analytic approaches to operationalizing Bronfenbrenner's PPCT model in research practice . J. Family Theory Rev. 14 , 233–253. 10.1111/jftr.12459 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ngo N. H. H., Cherrington S., Crabbe D. (2022a). An integrated framework of professional development for Vietnamese lecturers of English as a foreign language . RELC J . 1–16. 10.1177/00336882221085783 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ngo N. H. H., Cherrington S., Crabbe D. (2022b). Contextual influences on the professional development experiences of lecturers in English as a foreign language at a Vietnamese university . Profess. Dev. Educ. 49 , 1197–1213. 10.1080/19415257.2022.2155983 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• O'Toole L., Hayes N., Mhathúna M. M. (2014). A bio-ecological perspective on educational transition . Proc. Soc. Behav. Sci . 140 , 121–127. 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.04.396 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Page M. J., McKenzie J. E., Bossuyt P. M., Boutron I., Hoffmann T. C., Mulrow C. D., et al.. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews . BMJ 88 , 105906. 10.1016/j.ijsu.2021.105906 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Pinar A. (2016). Second language acquisition in a study abroad context: findings and research directions . Colomb. Appl. Linguist. J . 18 , 83–94. 10.14483/calj.v18n2.9480 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Porter R., Porter N. (2020). Japanese college students' study abroad decisions: perspectives of Japanese study abroad administrators . Int. Educ. J.-Compar. Perspect. 19 , 54–71. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rokita-Jaśkow J., Wolanin A., Król-Gierat W., Nosidlak K. (2023). Bridging the 'dual lives': school socialization of young bi/multilinguals in the eyes of EFL teachers . Int. J. Bilingual Educ. Biling. 26 , 395–410. 10.1080/13670050.2022.2114788 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Rosa E. M., Tudge J. (2013). Urie Bronfenbrenner's theory of human development: its evolution from ecology to bioecology . J. Family Theory Rev. 5 , 243–258. 10.1111/jftr.12022 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Schmidt-Rinehart B., Knight S. (2004). The homestay component of study abroad: Three perspectives . Foreign Lang. Ann . 37 , 254–262. 10.1111/j.1944-9720.2004.tb02198.x [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Shelton L. G. (2019). The Bronfenbrenner Primer: A Guide to Develecology. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315136066 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Small S., Luster T. (1990). “Youth at risk for parenthood,” in Paper presented at the Creating Caring Communities Conference (East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University; ). [ Google Scholar ]
• Suárez-Orozco C., Bang H. J., Onaga M. (2010). Contributions to variations in academic trajectories amongst recent immigrant youth . Int. J. Behav. Dev. 34 , 500–510. 10.1177/0165025409360304 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Taylor G., Ali N. (2017). Learning and living overseas: exploring factors that influence meaningful learning and assimilation: how international students adjust to studying in the UK from a socio-cultural perspective . Educ. Sci . 7 :35. 10.3390/educsci7010035 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tong P., An I. S., Zhou Y. (2022). Developmental ecosystems of study abroad in a turbulent time: an Australian-Chinese's experience in multilingual Hong Kong . J. Multil. Multicult. Dev . 43 , 1–17. 10.1080/01434632.2022.2101654 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Trevor-Roper S. (2021). International academic affiliations: destination or journey? An Oman-based study of policy, practice and potential . J. Stud. Int. Educ. 27 , 240–256. 10.1177/10283153211047936 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tudge J. R. H. (2016). Implicit versus explicit ways of using Bronfenbrenner's bioecological theory . Hum. Dev. 59 , 195–199. 10.1159/000449453 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tudge J. R. H., Merçon -Vargas E. A., Liang Y., Payir A. (2017). “The importance of Urie Bronfenbrenner's bioecological theory for early childhood education,” in Theories of Early Childhood Education: Developmental, Behaviorist, and Critical , eds L. E. Cohen and S. Waite-Stupiansky (Routledge). 10.4324/9781315641560 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tudge J. R. H., Mokrova I., Hatfield B. E., Karnik R. B. (2009). Uses and misuses of Bronfenbrenner's bioecological theory of human development . J. Family Theory Rev. 1 , 198–210. 10.1111/j.1756-2589.2009.00026.x [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Tudge J. R. H., Payir A., Merçon-Vargas E., Cao H., Liang Y., Li J., O'Brien L. (2016). Still misused after all these years? A reevaluation of the uses of Bronfenbrenner's bioecological theory of human development . J. Family Theory Rev. 8 , 427–445. 10.1111/jftr.12165 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ushioda E. (2009). “A person-in-context relational view of emergent motivation, self and identity,” in Motivation, Language Identity and the L2 Self , eds Z. Dörnyei and E. Ushioda (Bristol: Multilingual Matters), 215–228. 10.21832/9781847691293-012 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Vardanyan S., Ernest J. M., Perkins F. (2018). Cultural influence and language acquisition of a syrian immigrant girl in alabama . Int. J. Early Childh. Educ. Care 7 , 42–51. 10.37134/saecj.vol7.5.2018 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Volet S. (2001). “Understanding learning and motivation in context: a multi-dimensional and multi-level cognitive-situative perspective,” in Motivation in learning contexts: Theoretical advances and methodological implications , eds. S. Volet and S. Järvelä (Pergamon), 57–82. [ Google Scholar ]
• Weisner T. S. (2008). The Urie Bronfenbrenner Top 19: Looking back at his bioecological perspective . Mind, Culture, Activity 15 , 258–262. 10.1080/10749030802186785 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Winer N., Nuttman-Shwartz O., Huss E. (2021). “A Home of My Own”: the experience of children of international migrants . Clin. Soc. Work J. 49 , 325–335. 10.1007/s10615-021-00811-1 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Xu X., Sit H., Chen S. (2021). International education through a bioecological development lens - Acase study of Chinese doctoral students in Australia . High. Educ. Res. Dev. 40 , 1342–1357. 10.1080/07294360.2020.1811646 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Xu X., Tran L. T. (2022). A qualitative investigation into Chinese International doctoral students' navigation of a disrupted study trajectory during COVID-19 . J. Stud. Int. Educ. 26 , 553–571. 10.1177/10283153211042092 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Yrttiaho S., Bruwer B., Zar H. J., Donald K. A., Malcolm-Smith S., Ginton L., et al.. (2021). Pupillary and attentional responses to infant facial expressions in mothers across socioeconomic variations . Child Dev. 92 , e236–e251. 10.1111/cdev.13503 [ PubMed ] [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Yu Y., Cheng M., Xu Y. (2021). Understanding international postgraduate students' educational mobility to China: an ecological systematic perspective . High. Educ. Res. Dev . 41 , 2137–2153. 10.1080/07294360.2021.1973383 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Zhang Y. L. (2018). Using Bronfenbrenner's ecological approach to understand academic advising with international community college students . J. Int. Stud. 8 , 1764–1782. 10.32674/jis.v8i4.230 [ CrossRef ] [ Google Scholar ]

Essay about Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Systems Theory

A child’s development is affected by their social relationships and the world around them. The ecological systems theory introduced by Urie Brofenbrenner (1979) focuses on the development of a person within the ecological environment, outlining and explaining the complex relationship and exchange between the infant, the family and society, and how these exchanges impact upon child development.

Bronfenbrenner challenges previous understandings on how children develop and within his model, identifies a hierarchy of influence levels that impact on child development including the Microsystem, the Mesosystem, the Exosystem and the Macrosystem. This essay provides an introduction to and explanatory on Brofenbrenners theory whilst referencing the author’s own childhood development in the context of opportunities and risks. “A child’s well-being is an essential foundation for early learning, and all subsequent learning” (NCCA 2004).

Development occurs through the process of progressively more complex exchanges between a child and its environment, with Bronfenbrenner describing the ecological environment as a “set of nested structures, each inside the next like a set of Russian dolls” (Bronfenbrenner 1979). The ecological theory explains that an individual will encounter different environments throughout their lifespan, and that it is the interrelationship between the child and the environment that may influence their behavior to varying degrees.

An example of this is a child’s parents affecting their beliefs and behaviours whilst at the same time, the child affecting the parents’ in return. As such, each child’s ecological model is unique and has different environmental influences. The first system within the theory is the Microsystem. This is widely considered the most influential level of the Ecological Systems Theory and is the setting in which an individual lives and where most of their direct interactions occur. As the child ages, the Microsystem becomes more complex and involves a greater number of people such as childcare centers or pre-school.

The Microsystem comprises ‘a pattern of activities, roles and interpersonal relations experienced by the developing person in a given setting with particular physical and material characteristics’ (Bronfenbrenner 1979). Family, peers and school are all examples of the type of interactions that populate this system. Bronfenbrenner’s theory explains that an individual is not a passive recipient of experiences in these settings, with relationships being bidirectional. A child’s interactions with them determine what is possible and what is not.

Their responses to the environment they create, personal preferences and genetics dictate the possibilities of what a child might become as “microsystems evolve and develop much as adolescents themselves do from forces within and without” (Garbarino 1985). The importance of a baby’s attachments to their parents (mothers and fathers) has long been acknowledged (Bowlby, 1988), with the experience young babies have of forming relationships crucial in that it can influence all future relationships (Perry, 1995; Karr-Morse and Wiley, 1997).

As adoptive children may experience difficulties with behavioral and emotional control, the establishment of positive family relationships can be challenging (Brodzinsky & Pinderhughes 2002). Parental responses are linked to their own experiences from childhood and can determine the quality of current parent-child relationships and parenting styles (Howard, 2011; Newland, Freeman, & Coyle, 2011). Garbarino states that to develop a sense of self”adolescents need warm, responsive and active ‘partners”(Garbarino 1985).

As an adopted child who was emotionally reactive to the adoptive process, and having been placed in a family who were emotionally unable or unwilling, due to limited experience and understanding, to interact in a way that fostered a positive parent rapport and therefore develop a healthy relationship, this had a negative affect on my development as it lead to increased emotional unresponsiveness in my broader relationships, and negative self-evaluation (Garbarino 1985).

However, the development of independence from my family structure in response to the situation, led to an increase in my resilience which was developmentally positive as “resilient children are better equipped to resist stress and adversity, cope with change and uncertainty, and to recover faster and more completed from traumatic event or episodes” (Newman and Blackburn (2002). The next level of the ecological theory is the Mesosystem.

The Mesosystem consists of the interactions between the different parts of a child’s Microsystem, and therefore essentially represents the connections between the Microsystems. Keenan and Evans (2009) state “one could think about the mesosystem as the connections which bring together the different contexts in which a child develops”. Therefore, whilst the “proximal processes within the family are considered within ecological theory to be the primary mechanism of development, links between contexts in which the child participates also affect development trajectories” (Schweiger & O’Brien 2005).

The examination of the Mesosystem can be viewed as important to the understanding of family relationships, as a child’s experience in other contexts away from the family structure can alter their perceptions and ultimately influence the way that they interact with their parent and siblings (Schweiger & O’Brien 2005). A positive effect a Mesosystem can have on a child can be seen through the opportunities it creates to provide social support and consistency in its daily activities.

My adoptive father was a sergeant in the army. A common way for army families to bond and socialise when the regiment was on base outside of training periods, was for communal barbeques and parties to be held. This allowed me to come into contact with different mesosystems in new settings, and showed then when together, my adopted parents were united in raising me. However, Mesosystems also have the potential to cause stress for the child.

As an adopted child who has had access to and contact with my biological family, including siblings and other relatives, these interactions have been difficult and have affected my relationship with my adoptive parents even though they did not actively participate in the interactions. An example of this is the abandonment feelings that surface when interacting with my biological family and the expressions of anger and resentment that impacts on my adoptive parents through my negative behavior and emotional state which was sometimes directed at them.

This is the direct result of two microsystems coming together, and my feelings of being placed in a situation where | felt I had to play multiple roles at once. Beyond the Microsystem and Mesosystem, Bronfenbrenners system is expanded to include environmental factors that are less direct in a child’s life. The Exosystem is a setting that does not involve the child as an active participant, but structures existing within it can be see to indirectly impact upon them. As an adopted child, it is arguable that these outer systems are more important and influential than the microsystem.

The affects on an adopted child can be seen in greater detail through social services interventions in their life. Adoption is the choice of an individual/s to parent children who are biologically unrelated to them. The system of social services is engaged when establishing a legal parent-child relationship, and the ecological theory highlights the importance of the experiences between social workers and therapists in terms of how the experiences might affect the child (Schweiger & O’Brien 2005).

My adoptive parents’ experiences with social services were quite negative and challenging. When choosing to foster additional children this caused them to relive previous experiences and emotions and caused tension in the household. As a result this caused negative affects between me and my adopted parents as my views as a child hearing various comments and witnessing their behavior both pre and post social services meetings was that the adoption and fostering processes was a burden, and that I as the central factor was the cause of their problems.

It has also impacted on my beliefs and attitudes towards adoption and fostering as a whole, and my beliefs and attitudes towards them. The Macrosystem includes the belief systems or ideologies that inform cultures or sub-cultures. It is the overall culture that the child is involved in, and can include Australian culture. The ecological systems theory “emphasizes the impact that the wider society has on how families function and view themselves” (Schweiger & O’Brien 2005).

Traditional family preservation views and the stigma that is arguably still attached to the concept of adoption are all pressures and messages from the outer systems that influence a child’s own perception on who they are and what there identity is. All the levels in Bronfenbrenners Ecological Systems Theory play an important roll in the wellbeing of children and families. In concluding I have evidenced the complexity of Bronfenbrenners Ecological theory, whilst highlighting that

More Essays

• Essay on Advantages Of Adler’s Theory Of Birth Order
• Attachment Theory: Early Childhood In Japan Research Paper
• Harold Prince’s Theory On Concept Musicals Essay
• Vygotsky’s Theory Of Cognitive Development Essay
• Essay On John Bowlby’s Attachment Theory
• Moral Theory In Ethics: The Social Contract Theory Essay
• Charles Darwin’s Scientific Theory Of Natural Selection Essay
• Differential Association Theory Essay
• 20th Century Economic Systems Essay
• Betty Neuman Systems Model Essay

Bronfenbrenner Ecological Theory

What makes someone want to be a doctor? What drives someone to commit crimes? Why would someone choose to wear a dress instead of pants? Bronfenbrenner's Ecological Theory may just have the answer for you.

Social psychology attempts to answer all of these questions and more, in one way or another. Some psychologists believe that nature influences a person’s personality more than nurture, or the way they were raised. Studies may point to traumatic events as a sign of criminal behavior later in life. Where does culture fit in? Where do the lessons that their parents fit in? 

Many theories in psychology attempt to explain how a person develops and where things can go awry. These theories may involve different stages, like Freud’s stages of psychosexual development or Kohlberg’s stages of moral development. In this article, I’m going to talk about a different type of theory - Bronfenbrenner's Ecological Systems Theory.

What Is Bronfenbrenner's Ecological Theory?

Bronfenbrenner's Ecological Systems Theory of Development is unlike many theories of development in that doesn’t look at a person’s life in different stages. Instead, it looks at the layers of community that may influence a person’s personality, behavior, and decisions. 

History of Ecological Systems Theory 

Urie Bronfenbrenner was an American psychologist whose work helped to influence and start government programs. Before developing Ecological Systems Theory, he co-founded the Head Start program. Head Start is a program that aims to provide education and health services to low-income families around the country. It is still in place today. 

Bronfenbrenner is most known for Ecological Systems Theory. This theory gives a framework that shows how an individual interacts with different systems in their community and society. It shows just how much can go into a person’s personality and development. 

Layers of the Ecological System Theory 

Let’s look at the layers of this theory. It starts with a small circle in the center and continues to expand with each layer or system. 

At the center of this framework is the individual. Here, we look at the age of the person, their sex and gender identity, any disabilities that they might face, etc. 

Microsystems

But an individual does not just interact with themselves. The next layer of the framework is microsystems. These are communities that the individual interacts with every day, including:

• Family or friends 
• School or work environment
• Neighborhood 
• Clubs, groups, or religious organizations

Remember, these are the communities that the individual interacts with. How might they influence an individual’s behavior? 

Mesosystems

Outside of the microsystems, we have the mesosystems. This layer represents the relationships between different microsystems. 

Mesosystems Example

Say the individual is a child at a public school. They interact with two different communities: their family and their school. Within the mesosystem, psychologists may look at whether the child is comfortable coming to their teacher with a problem at home. Or maybe, they may look at how the parent’s income level influences their status in a school that serves children of a different income level. A child who is considered “poor” in a school filled with “wealthy” kids may have a different experience from a child who fits in with their peers, income-wise. 

Exosystem 

An individual may not directly interact with groups that influence them. Outside of the mesosystems are exosystems. These are groups that affect a person’s immediate environment.  

Exosystem Example 

Maybe the child’s parents have a demanding job that prevents them from attending school fundraisers or showing up to their ballet recital. Even though the child has never gone into their parent’s place of work, it is still influencing the child’s life. Local government is also an example of an exosystem. 

Macrosystem

There are larger systems at play. The next layer in Bronfenbrenner’s Theory is macrosystems. These systems include the attitudes and ideology of the culture surrounding the individual.

Macrosystem Example  

The larger political climate, for example, may fall into macrosystems, where local governments might fall into exosystems. Society’s view of gender roles may be considered a macrosystem, although the family structure and gender identities of the individual may fall into other layers. 

Chronosystem 

Although macrosystems may seem like the broadest category in this framework, it is not the last. Bronfenbrenner also suggests that there is a chronosystem that influences the other systems. The chronosystem is the time in which the individual is born and raised and enters different milestones. This puts the individual’s behavior into a larger sociohistorical context.

Chronosystem Examples 

A child born in the 1950s will have different experiences than a child born in the 1990s, and the macrosystems and exosystems in which they interact with will be different because of the times they are living in. Similarly, an adult entering the workforce at 22 will have a different experience than a teenager entering the workforce at 15. 

These Layers Interact With Each Other 

Graphs displaying Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Theory show each layer is separate from the rest. But this isn’t always the case. The layers frequently interact with and influence each other. Of course, this makes things more complicated, but it contributes to the overall idea that the motivations behind our behavior are complex. 

Example of Bronfenbrenner's Ecological Theory 

Here’s an example of how these layers may interact. Let’s say a man is picking out what he wants to wear. We start with his individual preferences. Does he feel more comfortable wearing a polka-dot tie or basketball shorts? Does he believe that “clothes make the man?” When it comes to the choices he has made in his life, does he believe that he did so with intention or from a lack of free will? 

His individual preferences, and the pressure to wear a certain outfit, may be influenced by larger systems. As a young boy, maybe he was instructed to wear a uniform. Or the kids in his neighborhood attributed the newest sneakers to a high social status. He may have grown up in a very conservative and gossipy environment, and wearing the “wrong” clothes to one event may influence his reputation in other areas. Maybe he lives in a time where wearing a dress is considered sinful. Maybe it’s considered to be edgy. Or maybe he is growing up in the Roman Empire, where all men wore skirts. 

Breaking Down the Layers of Bronfenbrenner's Systems

A Reddit user broke down another great example of Bronfenbrenner's systems:

"Let's take Bob, Bob is born to a family and for the first few years of life exists almost entirely within that family system. This family  microsystem  directly shapes and influences Bob's behavior and development. As Bob ages, other microsystems begin influencing Bob's behavior, like schools, church, friend groups, etc.

Now traditional research has measured the influence of each of these microsystems on human behavior quite well, but Bronfenbrenner argues that these things do not occur in isolation. There is a  mesosystem , which is the interaction between microsystems. Do the parents agree with the teachers? Do they attend conferences? Do they care if homework gets done?

Furthermore, there is an  exosystem  or a system that does not contain Bob, but still influences his behavior. For example, the architects of his school have indirectly influenced his class size. If dad gets drunk at the bar (Which does not contain Bob), maybe he comes home and beats Bob.

There is also a  macrosystem , which is a cultural construct. If Bob is a white, protestant, male, does he benefit from an inherent system of privilege in his day-to-day life? Does he act in accordance with our culture's moral values?"

You can read the full discussion on Bronfenbrenner's Ecological Systems Theory here !

Why is Bronfenbrenner's Ecological Theory Important?

As you can see, there is a lot that can go into one decision. These factors may also hold different weights, and this weight may be influenced by other systems. It is something to consider when making a judgment about another person. Are they making a decision due to their personality or biology, or are there much larger factors at play?

Urie Bronfenbrenner Quotes

Bronfenbrenner's work goes beyond his Ecological Systems Theory. Below is some wisdom attributed to the late psychologist.

On Child Development

"Development, it turns out, occurs through this process of progressively more complex exchange between a child and somebody else- especially somebody who’s crazy about that child."

"In order to develop normally, a child requires progressively more complex joint activity with one or more adults who have an irrational emotional relationship with the child. Somebody's got to be crazy about that kid. That's number one. First, last and always."

"In the planning and designing of new communities, housing projects, and urban renewal, the planners both private and public, need to give explicit consideration to the kind of world that is being created for the children who will be growing up in these settings. Particular attention should be given to the opportunities which the environment presents or precludes for involvement of children both older and younger than themselves."

"One of the most significant effects of age-segregation in our society has been the isolation of children from the world of work. Whereas in the past children not only saw what their parents did for a living but even shared substantially in the task, many children nowadays have only a vague notion of the nature of the parent's job, and have had little or no opportunity to observe the parent, or for that matter any other adult, when he is fully engaged in his work."

On Television

"Like the sorcerer of old, the television set casts its magic spell, freezing speech and action and turning the living into silent statues so long as the enchantment lasts. The primary danger of the television screen lies not so much in the behavior it produces as the behavior it prevents — the talks, the games, the family festivities and arguments."

On "Pulling Yourself Up By Your Bootstraps"

"Witness the American ideal: the Self-Made Man. But there is no such person. If we can stand on our own two feet, it is because others have raised us up. If, as adults, we can lay claim to competence and compassion, it only means that other human beings have been willing and enabled to commit their competence and compassion to us--through infancy, childhood, and adolescence, right up to this very moment."

On Education and Caring for Others

"In the United States, it is now possible for a person eighteen years of age, female as well as male, to graduate from high school, college, or university without ever having cared for, or even held, a baby; without ever having looked after someone who was old, ill, or lonely; or without ever having comforted or assisted another human being who really needed help. No society can long sustain itself unless its members have learned the sensitivities, motivations, and skills involved in assisting and caring for other human beings."

"We as a nation need to be re-educated about the necessary and sufficient conditions for making human beings human. We need to be re-educated not as parents - but as workers, neighbors, and friends; and as members of the organizations, committees, boards - and, especially, the informal networks that control our social institutions and thereby determine the conditions of life for our families and their children."

Related posts:

• Urie Bronfenbrenner Biography - Contributions To Psychology
• The Psychology of Long Distance Relationships
• Beck’s Depression Inventory (BDI Test)
• Concrete Operational Stage (3rd Cognitive Development)
• Operant Conditioning (Examples + Research)

Reference this article:

About The Author

Free Personality Test

Free Memory Test

Free IQ Test

PracticalPie.com is a participant in the Amazon Associates Program. As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

Follow Us On:

Youtube Facebook Instagram X/Twitter

Psychology Resources

Developmental

Personality

Relationships

Psychologists

Serial Killers

Psychology Tests

Personality Quiz

Memory Test

Depression test

Type A/B Personality Test

© PracticalPsychology. All rights reserved

Privacy Policy | Terms of Use

Bronfenbrenner’s ecological theory of development Essay (Critical Writing)

Introduction, literature review on human development, psychoanalytic theories, cognitive theories, bronfenbrenner’s ecological theory of development.

The subject of human development is rich and varied. Every individual has a unique experience with development. Nevertheless, sometimes it is challenging to comprehend how and why people grow, learn, and behave as they do. Developmental psychology endeavors to understand, elucidate, and predict behaviors that emerge throughout an individual’s lifespan.

Psychologists have proposed several human developmental theories to elucidate different perspectives of human growth. There are many crucial debates and concerns pertaining developmental psychology. Psychologists and researchers have based their questions on the relative impact of genetics versus environment, the pathway of development, and the significance of early events versus later events.

Theorists often pose certain questions to help them understand a phenomenon. Similarly, Kail & Cavanaugh (2008) argue that, three main issues have emerged during the study of human development (p.35). First, the nature-nurture concern pertains to the extent of genetic and environmental influence on development.

Generally, theorists and researchers perceive nature and nurture to play a mutual influence, wherein, human development is interplay of both forces. Second, a continuity-discontinuity issue pertains to whether a similar (continuity) or different (discontinuity) must be applied to account for changes in individuals throughout one’s lifespan.

Continuity, on the one hand, focuses on quantitative change, while discontinuity focuses on qualitative change. Third, universal versus context specific development concerns whether development follows similar path in all individuals or the sociocultural context fundamentally determines it.

Four major forces are fundamental in human development. Interplay of these forces determines people’s development into whoever they are at the various stages of development. Biological forces encompass all genetic and health-related factors that determine development. Individual’s genetic code accounts for most of the biological forces (Kail & Cavanaugh, 2008, p. 35).

This issue implicates that, ancestry determines certain individual behavior or characteristic. In this light, researchers need to investigate the positions of dominant versus recessive genes in development (Rutter, 2006, p.16).

Psychological forces entail all intrinsic personality, perceptual, emotional, and cognitive factors that influence development. Altogether, psychological elements explain the most prominent variation in people. Sociocultural elements encompass ethnic, cultural, interpersonal, and societal factors that influence development (Kail & Cavanaugh, 2008, p.35).

Culture pertains to behavior, attitudes, and knowledge attached to a group of people. Sociocutlural forces provide the milieu for development. Fourth, the lifecycle forces form the settings for understanding people’s own perception of their current situation and its impact on them.

Do these forces interact at any given point? The biopsychosocial framework upholds all the aforementioned forces to be mutually interactive and learners cannot understand development by studying the forces in isolation (Kail & Cavanaugh, 2008, p. 35). Indeed, a similar event can produce a different effect based on the time it occurs.

This theory elucidates development as primarily unconscious phenomenon heavily tinted by emotion. Psychoanalytic theorists perceive that behavior is purely superficial characteristic, and the analyses of the symbolic meaning of behavior and the in-depth functioning of the mind is prerequisite for understanding development (Carver, & Scheier, 2004).

In addition, psychoanalytic philosophers stress that initial experience with parents greatly determines one’s development. Sigmund Freud highlighted these characteristics in his psychoanalytic theory.

Psychoanalytic theory highlights five different factors contributing to development. They include (Santrock, Ho Leung, Malcomson, & MacKenzie-Rivers, 2008, p. 35):

• Early experience contributes significantly in development.
• Family relationships are core to development.
• To understand personality, people should examine it developmentally.
• The mind, being not entirely conscious, theorist should consider its unconscious aspect.
• Developmental changes occur both in adulthood and in childhood years.

Nevertheless, critiques have challenged this theory regarding the following:

• The major concepts of psychoanalytic theories cannot be tested empirically.
• Psychologists derive most of the data used to validate psychoanalytic theory from people’s reconstruction of the past, regularly the remote past, and of unknown precision.
• Theorists have given so much weight to the sexual basis of development, particularly Freud.
• Theorists give too much credit to unconscious mind for influencing development.
• Critiques argue that psychoanalytic theories portray a very negative image of humans, especially Freud.
• Other critiques argue that psychoanalytic theories are gender and culture-biased.

Cognitive theory emphasizes the importance of conscious thoughts. Three major cognitive theories include the information-processing approach, Vyogotsky’s socio-cultural cognitive theory, and Piaget’s cognitive development theory.

The contributions of the cognitive theory include:

• It depicts the positive perspective of development by emphasizing peoples’ conscious thinking.
• It stresses the individual’s active building of understanding.
• Piaget and Vygotsky’s theories emphasize the significance of investigating developmental transformation in children’s thinking.
• The information-processing viewpoint provides detailed description of cognitive process.

Critiques of cognitive theories argue that:

• There is skepticism concerning the clarity of Piaget’s stages.
• The theories do not confer adequate attention to individual difference in cognitive development.
• The information-processing viewpoint does not provide adequate explanation of developmental changes in cognition.
• Psychoanalytic theorists are of the view that the cognitive theories do not confer adequate merit to unconscious thought.

This theory comprises five environmental systems ranging from the fine-grained inputs of immediate association with social elements, to the broad-based inputs of culture. These five systems in the theory are the mesosytem, microsystem, chronosystem, macrosystem, and exosystem. The microsytem designates the context within which the person lives.

This context comprises the individual’s family, neighborhood, schools, and peers. Within this system, many direct associations with social agents occur (Santrock, Ho Leung, Malcomson, & MacKenzie-Rivers, 2008, p.41). The individual does not assume a passive recipient position regarding events in this context; instead, s/he plays an active role in constructing the settings.

The mesosytem encompasses associations between microsystem and links between settings. Examples of mesosytem include the relation of family events to school events, school events to church events, and/or family events to peer events. In this light, having been born of mentally impaired parents, my passion for understanding psychological disorder is the impetus for pursuing doctorate in psychology.

The exosystem refers to the involvement of events in another social setting, which the individual does not play an active role; it affects what s/he experiences in an immediate setting. For instances, my class experience with psychology professor may affect my relationship with my parents, because I may regard them as specimens for fulfilling my curiosity.

The macrosystem pertains to the culture within which people live. Culture is the behavior patterns, beliefs, and all other outcomes of a specific population that are passed on from one generation to another (Parke & Stewart, 2010, p.26). In this regard, cross-cultural studies is the comparison of one culture against another or several others that provide insight about the generality of development.

The chronosytem entails the outlining of environmental experiences and transitions through the life courses, and socio-historical situations (Parke & Stewart, 2010, p.26). For instance, upon studying the effect of divorce on children, researchers have discovered that the adverse effects often climax in the first year following the divorce. Two years after the divorce, family relations become less chaotic and more stable.

Regarding socio-cultural circumstances, women currently are more probable to be motivated to pursue career relative to the past 20 or 30 years. Through avenues such as this, the chronosytem has a powerful influence on individual’s development.

Overall, Bronfenbrenner’s ecological theory of development has made certain contribution to understanding of human development viz.

• It provides a systematic study of macro and micro dimensions of environmental systems.
• It draws attention on connections between environmental settings – mesosytem.
• It highlights social-historical influence on development – chronosystem.

However, some criticisms have been leveled against this theory including

• Critiques argue that these theorists have given minimal attention to biological basis of development, despite the recent additional discussion of biological influences.
• In addition, this theory gives inadequate attention to cognitive processes.

Bronfenbrenner’s theory elucidates the influence of environment on one’s development. The role that people play in Bronfenbrenner’s system determines their behavior and actions. Biological factors do not offer an ultimate prediction of people’s development; for instance, I am not afflicted with mental disorders like my parents. Therefore, further research should be conducted on how ecological factors influence development.

Carver, C., & Scheier, M. (2004). Perspectives on Personality (5th ed.). Boston: Pearson.

Kail, R. V., & Cavanaugh, J. C. (2008). Human development: A life-span view. Belmont; U.S: wadsworth, Cengage learning.

Parke, R. D., & Stewart, C. A. (2010). social development. Jafferson City: John Willey & Sons.

Rutter, M. (2006). Genes and Behavior. Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing.

Santrock, J. W., MacKenzie-Rivers, A., Ho Leung, K., & Malcomson, T. (2008). Life-Span Development. United States: McGraw-Hill Ryerson.

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2019, September 29). Bronfenbrenner's ecological theory of development. https://ivypanda.com/essays/bronfenbrenners-ecological-theory-of-development-critical-writing/

"Bronfenbrenner's ecological theory of development." IvyPanda , 29 Sept. 2019, ivypanda.com/essays/bronfenbrenners-ecological-theory-of-development-critical-writing/.

IvyPanda . (2019) 'Bronfenbrenner's ecological theory of development'. 29 September.

IvyPanda . 2019. "Bronfenbrenner's ecological theory of development." September 29, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/bronfenbrenners-ecological-theory-of-development-critical-writing/.

1. IvyPanda . "Bronfenbrenner's ecological theory of development." September 29, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/bronfenbrenners-ecological-theory-of-development-critical-writing/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Bronfenbrenner's ecological theory of development." September 29, 2019. https://ivypanda.com/essays/bronfenbrenners-ecological-theory-of-development-critical-writing/.

• Bronfenbrenner's Bioecological System Theory
• Family Aggresion and Bronfenbrenner's Ecological Systems Theory
• The Life of Urie Bronfenbrenner
• The Cross-cultural Construct of Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Systems
• Urie Bronfenbrenner, a Psychological Researcher
• Child Socialization: Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Systems Theory
• Ecological Systems Theory
• The Hundred Languages of Children: Learning and Development Plan
• Developmental Observations Middle School Aged Child
• An analysis of patterns of development in children
• The Four Forces of Evolution and Variation
• Understanding of Primate Socioecology
• Human Evolution and Archaeology
• Comparison of Kula and Moka Practice
• Human Species: Homo Floresiensis

Bronfenbrenner's Ecological Systems Theory

What is Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Systems Theory?

American psychologist Urie Bronfenbrenner formulated the Ecological Systems Theory to explain how social environments affect children’s development. This theory emphasizes the importance of studying children in multiple environments, known as ecological systems, in the attempt to understand their development.

According to Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory, children typically find themselves enmeshed in various ecosystems, from the most intimate home ecological system to the larger school system, and then to the most expansive system which includes society and culture. Each of these ecological systems inevitably interact with and influence each other in all aspects of the children’s lives.

Bronfenbrenner’s ecological model organizes contexts of development into five nested levels of external influence: Microsystem , Mesosystem , Ecosystem , Macrosystem , and Chronosystem . These levels are categorized from the most intimate level to the broadest.

The Microsystem

The Bronfenbrenner theory suggests that the microsystem is the smallest and most immediate environment in which children live. As such, the microsystem comprises the home, school or daycare, peer group and community environment of the children.

Interactions within the microsystem typically involve personal relationships with family members, classmates, teachers and caregivers. How these groups or individuals interact with the children will affect how they develop. More nurturing and supportive interactions and relationships will likely to foster a better environment for development.

Bronfenbrenner proposed that many of these interactions are bi-directional: how children react to people in their microsystem will also affect how these people treat the children in return.

For example, a little boy playing alone in a room. This little boy suddenly bursts out crying for no apparent reason. His mother, who is making lunch in the kitchen, hears the boy crying. She comes into the room, picks the little boy up, and carries him to the living room.

In the above example, the little boy initiated the interaction (crying), and his mother responded. In a way, the little boy influenced his mother’s behavior.

One of the most significant findings that Urie Bronfenbrenner unearthed in his study of ecological systems is that it is possible for siblings who find themselves in the same ecological system to experience very different environments.

Therefore, given two siblings experiencing the same microsystem, it is not impossible for the development of them to progress in different manners. Each child’s particular personality traits, such as temperament, which is influenced by unique genetic and biological factors, ultimately have a hand in how he/she is treated by others.

The Mesosystem

The mesosystem encompasses the interaction of the different microsystems which children find themselves in. It is, in essence, a system of microsystems and as such, involves linkages between home and school, between peer group and family, and between family and community.

According to Bronfenbrenner’s ecological theory, if a child’s parents are actively involved in the friendships of their child, for example they invite their child’s friends over to their house from time to time and spend time with them, then the child’s development is affected positively through harmony and like-mindedness.

However, if the child’s parents dislike their child’s peers and openly criticize them, the child will experience disequilibrium and conflicting emotions, which will likely lead to negative development.

The Exosystem

The exosystem in Bronfenbrenner’s ecological model pertains to the linkages that may exist between two or more settings, one of which may not contain the developing children but affect them indirectly nonetheless.

Based on Bronfenbrenner’s findings, people and places that children may not directly interact with may still have an impact on their lives. Such places and people may include the parents’ workplaces, extended family members, and the neighborhood the children live in.

For example, a father who is continually passed up for promotion by an indifferent boss at the workplace may take it out on his children and mistreat them at home. This will have a negative impact on the child’s development.

The Macrosystem

The macrosystem in Bronfenbrenner’s ecological model is the largest and most distant collection of people and places to the children that still have significant influences on them. This ecological system is composed of the children’s cultural patterns and values, specifically their dominant beliefs and ideas, as well as political and economic systems.

For example, children in war-torn areas will experience a different kind of development than children in a peaceful environment.

The Chronosystem

The chronosystem adds the useful dimension of time to Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory. It demonstrates the influence of both change and constancy in the children’s environments. The chronosystem may include a change in family structure, address, parents’ employment status, as well as immense society changes such as economic cycles and wars.

Application of Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Systems Theory

Through the various ecological systems, Bronfenbrenner’s theory demonstrates the diversity of interrelated influences on child development. Awareness of the contexts that children are in can sensitize us to variations in the way children may act in different settings.

For example, a child who frequently bullies smaller children at school may portray the role of a terrified victim at home. Due to these variations, adults who are concerned with the care of a particular child should pay close attention to his/her behavior in different settings, as well as to the quality and type of connections that exist between these settings.

How to cite this post: What is Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Systems Theory?. (2019, May 3). The Psychology Notes Headquarters. https://www.psychologynoteshq.com/bronfenbrenner-ecological-theory/

Related posts:

• What is the Havighurst Developmental Tasks Theory?
• Lev Vygotsky’s Sociocultural Theory of Cognitive Development
• What is Werner’s Orthogenetic Theory?
• Moral Development in Children
• Sigmund Freud’s Psychosexual Stages of Development

Categories: Developmental Psychology

41 Responses

• Comments 41
• Pingbacks 0

Very useful overview of Bronfenbrenner, thank you

You’re very welcome.

How would I cite this information APA format?

Please refer to this website: http://www.bibme.org/citation-guide/apa/website

Hope this helps, A

What is the date of this pulblication

The post was originally published in November 2013.

Very educative indeed…

when was this article published and by who, need it for reference purposes

This does not help. Who is the author of these words?

The articles and diagrams on this website are written/created by our team of writers. If you use the content on this website, you MUST provide appropriate credit. Please see here on how to cite the content on this website.

Hi, just trying to find out who wrote this article (Author)?

Can you explain the important of studying bronfenbrenner ecology tk an ecd teacher

Use the site as the author e.g. for in-text citations (The Psychology Notes Headquarters, 2011). Seeing as this information isn’t peer-reviewed I probably wouldn’t cite it as anyone could have written it.

Good advice!

I have a couple of questions: – who is the author of this article? – I note you list copyright on the diagram demonstrating the model. Is this your original work? What Bronfenbrenner source did you use to create it?

Good morning,

I have to submit a task on Bronfenbrenner and appreciate your notes – it really helps. May I know who the author is for proper reference? Or will it be Psychology Notes HQ?

Who are the authors of these articles? The articles and diagrams on this website are written/created by our team of writers. If you use the content on this website, you MUST provide appropriate credit. Please see below on how to cite the content on this website.

How to cite the content on this website? If you use the content on this website in your work, you MUST cite this website as your source. Here’s how to do so in APA format .

Hope this helps.

good afternoon

whoah this blog is excellent i like studying your posts. Keep up the good work! You realize, a lot of persons are hunting round for this info, you can help them greatly.

Loved this clear and informative blog post! This theory seems so great that it makes me wonder what the cons or problems with using this theory? I’m not trying to be negative, just well informed. Thanks!

how do I cite this?

Does this apply to adults as well?

who is the author of this aritcle so i can properply cite this in my essay!?

Here’s how to cite the content on this website: https://www.psychologynoteshq.com/contactu/

This is not peer-reviewed, so probably just “Retrieved from” would be better. I hate that its not as it explains things in much simpler terms.

You can google for apa format citations for ur referal hehe

Can i get the cite of this information.

Informative. This helped me a lot. Thanks.

Thank you so much!

Thank you this is very helpful

Very well defined article with examples

Are there four or five systems in Bronfenbrenner’s ecological theory of development? Some resources include chronosystem, but some exclude.

Hello, Can I please use this diagram for my honour’s thesis literature review? Thank you, Luella

your article is presented with the help of a systematic approach.

Useful content 👌 👍

In 1979 is when he first found about this information ?

Excellent article and diagram. May I use the diagram for my dissertation? Is this the correct process for requesting permission? Thank you.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Post comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

The Bronfenbrenner ecological systems theory of human development

This article is focused on Urie Bronfenbrenner ́s ecological theory of human development and socialization. In Finland this theory has been applied in psychology and pedagogy in relation to the phenomena of development and education. In the field of early childhood education the Bronfenbrenner ecological theory has been in recurrent use for well over twenty years. In this article the light is cast specifically on the applicability of the Bronfenbrenner theory to different areas of student research activity, its degree of social orientation, its main features and the ways of its modeling. The article is a theoretical one, based on written works and the author ́s personal experience gained while tutoring student research. Societies and child development Urie Bronfenbrenner was an American psychologist. He was the son of Doctor Alexander Bronfenbrenner and Eugenia Kamenetskaja, born on April 29, 1917 in Moscow, Russia. He was 6 years old, when coming to the United States. He died on Se...

Related Papers

Perspectives on Psychological Science

Nicole M. Vélez-Agosto , Mónica Vizcarrondo Oppenheimer , Stephanie M Vega-Molina

Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological theory of human development is one of the most widely known theoretical frameworks in human development. In spite of its popularity, the notion of culture within the macrosystem, as a separate entity of everyday practices and therefore microsystems, is problematic. Using the theoretical and empirical work of Rogoff and Weisner, and influenced as they are by Vygotsky’s sociocultural perspective, we reconceptualize Bronfenbrenner’s model by placing culture as an intricate part of proximal development processes. In our model, culture has the role of defining and organizing microsystems and therefore becomes part of the central processes of human development. Culture is an ever changing system composed of the daily practices of social communities (families, schools, neighborhoods, etc.) and the interpretation of those practices through language and communication. It also comprises tools and signs that are part of the historical legacy of those communities, and thus diversity is an integral part of the child’s microsystems, leading to culturally defined acceptable developmental processes and outcomes.

Francesca Eleuteri

Prior research suggests that the current economic crisis has negative impacts on population mental health, while some studies show that the recession also causes positive effects. This paper aims to understand the individual, community and societal effects of the global financial crisis by examining several studies using the bioecological model. The analysis suggests that coping methods for the global financial crisis are highly associated with: social policies and labour market programmes, social support, employment status and individual vulnerability.

Tim Lomas , Itai Ivtzan

As positive psychology has matured as a discipline, sub-fields have emerged focusing on particular areas, including a number concentrating on specific life stages. These include positive parenting, positive education, positive youth development, and positive aging. However, until now, there has not been a systematic appreciation of these various developmental paradigms, nor an attempt to consider them as a whole. As such, the current paper introduces the overarching notion of positive developmental psychology, an umbrella term encompassing these intersecting developmental disciplines. The paper offers a narrative review of selected literature within these areas – highlighting key theoretical concepts, empirical studies and applied interventions – doing so through the prism of a multidimensional framework. Thus the paper provides a synthesis of the wealth of theory and research within positive developmental psychology, offering a much-needed overview of this burgeoning new field, and setting out a comprehensive research agenda for the years ahead. Özet Pozitif psikoloji geliştikçe, belirli yaşam evrelerinin de dahil olduğu, spesifik alanlara odaklanan alt dallar ortaya çıkmıştır. Bunlar pozitif ebeveynlik, pozitif eğitim, pozitif gençlik gelişimi ve pozitif yaşlamayı kapsıyor. Fakat şimdiye kadar bu gelişimsel paradigmalar sistematik bir şekilde gözden geçirilmedi ya da bütünüyle ele alınmadı. Bu nedenle bu çalışma pozitif gelişimsel psikolojiyi kapsayıcı bir kavram ve bu kesişen gelişimsel disiplinleri birleştiren bir çatı terim olarak ortaya koyuyor. Mevcut çalışma bu alanlardan seçilmiş olan literatürün anlatımsal taramasını anahtar teorik kavramların, deneysel çalışmaların ve uygulanan müdahalelerin altını çizerek çok boyutlu çerçeveden bakarak sunuyor. Böylelikle çalışma yeni gelişen bir alanın çok gerekli olan kısa gözden geçirmesini, gelecek için kapsamlı bir araştırma ajandası ortaya koyarak pozitif gelişimsel psikoloji alanında zengin teori ve araştırmaların sentezini sunuyor. Anahtar Kelimeler: Gelişimsel psikoloji, pozitif ebeveynlik, pozitif eğitim, pozitif geçlik gelişimi, pozitif yaşlanma

Laura Hirsto

This research is a theoretical analysis of the learning environments in which the personal world view of children develop at the beginning of their school careers. This project started as an empirical study, but in the process it became clear that in order to understand and interpret the results, a coherent theoretical framework should be elaborated. The main focus in this series of studies has been on the home environment of 7-8-year old boys and girls in the context of child-rearing practices at home (Hirsto 1998, 2001a, 2001b). The first study concerned parental roles in child-rearing and child-rearing practices of boys and girls. The second study surveyed teachers’ representations of their pupils home environment. These two studies are briefly reviewed here. The learning environment is seen as a socialisation environment in which children are in continuous interaction. The starting point for the study was Bronfenbrenner’s (1979) ecological model and the theory of pragmatic constructivism (Rauste-von Wright & von Wright 1994; Rauste-von Wright 1999a, 1999b; von Wright 1996a, 1996b). The socialisation environment of children is analysed on the basis of ecological contexts, which have been defined by Bronfenbrenner (1979), Bronfenbrenner & Morris (1998) and Hurrelmann (1988). These models were elaborated by adopting the concept of the endosystem, which is considered to represent a person as an open, systemic whole. “Open” refers to the nature of people as intentional doers, who seek stimulation and feedback on their actions, and “systemic” to the fact that different levels (hormonal, motoric, psychological) are in continuous interaction and affect each other. The personal world view (see Rauste-von Wright 1979, 1986) is defined here as part of the endosystem, and is both empirical and theoretical in concept. On the one hand, it directs the actions and interpretations of a person in certain contexts, and on the other, it is a tool for conceptualizing and understanding other people’s actions. The concept of the self is central to the personal world view. Thus, people’s beliefs about themselves and about their relations with the environment are thought to affect their actions. The concept of the self is approached from the perspective of G. H. Mead (1934/1972), who suggests that it develops thought social interaction. This is the context in which boys and girls are also thought to construct their views of themselves. Home and school collaboration is considered here as a means of integrating learning environments in which the child is in continuous interaction. This in turn may contribute to the construction of a coherent personal world view. The main results of the earlier studies are discussed in the context of the theoretical framework.

Canan DEMİR YILDIZ

Bu çalışmada, yöneticiyi karar verme sürecinde etkileyen çevresel faktörleri, ekolojik sistemler kuramı çerçevesinde incelemek hedeflenmiştir. Ekolojik sistemler kuramı, dış dünya ve organizma arasındaki etkileşimi incelemektedir. Bütün yöneticiler, çeşitli derecelerde dış çevre unsurlarını ve eylemlerini göz önünde bulundururlar. Dolayısıyla yöneticiler, örgütün eylemlerini etkileyen çevresel güçleri belirlemeli, değerlendirmeli ve cevap vermelidirler. Çevresel faktörler, örgüt üzerindeki etkileri açısından yönetimde oldukça önemli görülmektedir. Bu bağlamda araştırmada nitel bir yaklaşım benimsenmiştir. Araştırma, Gaziantep ili Şahinbey ilçe merkezinde farklı düzeydeki okullarda görev yapan okul müdürleri üzerinde gerçekleştirilmiştir. Okul müdürlerinin seçiminde, okul müdürlerinin en az 2 yıl yöneticilik yapması temel ölçüt olarak belirlenmiştir. Bu temel ölçüte göre, 2012-2013 eğitim-öğretim yılında görev yapan 19 okul müdürü ile gönüllülük esasına göre yüzyüze görüşmeler yapılmıştır. Katılımcılara kendilerini etkileyebilecek çevresel faktörleri içeren bir liste verilmiştir ve bunlardan kendilerini etkileyen faktörleri belirlemeleri ve önem sırasına koymaları istenmiştir. Daha sonra bu faktörlerin kendilerini nasıl etkilediği sorulmuştur. Elde edilen veriler nitel araştırma tekniklerinden “betimsel analiz” yoluyla ve frekans değerleri verilerek analiz edilmiştir. Elde edilen veriler doğrultusunda yöneticiyi en çok etkileyen faktörlerin MEB, yasalar ve etik kurallar olduğu ortaya çıkmıştır. Dolayısıyla karar verme sürecinde yöneticilerin ekolojik sistemler kuramına göre yakın çevreyi içeren mikrosistemin değil, daha çok ekzosistem ve makrosistemin etkisinde kaldığı söylenebilir.

Journal of Pedagogical Sociology and Psychology

Feyisa Mulisa

Urie Bronfenbrenner's bioecological theory is an important model to illustrate the complexity of reciprocal interactions between growing persons and their multilevel socioecological milieus. In higher education, students' achievement may be similarly affected by manifold bioecological systems. The applications of this holistic theory have been widely considered in higher education across the world, but it seems that a simplistic reductionist approach is popular in higher education of Ethiopian to determine educational outputs. The objective of this article is, therefore, pertaining partial application of Bronfenbrenner's bioecological model to higher education with an intention to surpass students' learning. This theory may offer useful theoretical frameworks and practical implications for practitioners. Thereby, they could demonstrate comprehensive maneuvers to successfully handle multilevel socioecological factors that counteract students' learning. Although it is very challenging to apply bioecological theory in a complete manner, implications of key concepts such as a person, microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem, macrosystem, and chronosystem variables have been discussed.

Sue Nichols

Ecological approaches to literacy research encompass both person-centred and system- centred perspectives and can be mobilised from both positivist and postmodern epistemological stances. This research handbook chapter presents an explanation and discussion of theoretical and methodological aspects of ecological research in literacy and language. Conceptual tools discussed include nested systems, time scales, storied worlds, linguistic landscapes and actor networks.

Kweku Esia-Donkoh

The study examined the efficacy of the Bioecological Model of Human Development to predict Ghanaian primary school pupils' academic achievement in a National Education Assessment test in English language and mathematics. A total of 19,458 primary 3 and 17,447 primary 6 pupils from 548 schools were involved in the study. Participating schools were selected using stratified random sampling. Using a hierarchical multiple regression with a significance criterion at p < 0.001, pupils' academic achievement was found to be significantly influenced by their personal characteristics, as well as the micro and macro environments they interacted in. Consistent with the theoretical model, pupils' microsystems contributed most to their levels of academic achievement. Moreover, the impact of pupils' personal characteristics on their academic achievement was moderated by the types of micro and macro systems they operated in. The outcome of the study validates the model's proposition that none of the variables operates in isolation but are mutually dependent in determining the levels of pupils' academic achievement in a given context. It is therefore suggested curriculum developers and education policy formulators to be guided by the model in attempts to initiate interventions to address the problem of low academic achievement among primary school pupils' in Ghana.

RELATED PAPERS

Talent Development and Excellence

Cristina Fonseca

International Journal of Early Childhood Special Education

Margareta Sandström

Christo Els

manuel fedrighi

British Journal of Visual Impairment

John Ravenscroft

Marigold Cobbina

Bridget Hatfield

Seugnet Blignaut

Journal of Professional Nursing

Elizabeth Reifsnider , Bunny Forgione

Silliman Journal, 57 (3)

Gina F Bonior

IJASOS- International E-journal of Advances in Social Sciences

Ramiaida Darmi

Journal of youth and adolescence

Larry D. Long

Journal of Human Growth and Development

nadia valentini

Meenakshi Kalyanpur

Child Psychiatry & Human Development

ISRN Nursing

Linda Harrison

Sport, Education and Society

Christian Augustsson

Salviano Nobre

Topics in Early Childhood Special Education

Sheresa Blanchard

James Zastovnik

Merethe Skårås

Journal of Immigrant & Refugee Studies

Bryant Jensen

Journal of Children and Media

Journal of School Violence

Anthony Peguero , Shinwoo Choi

IRA-International Journal of Management & Social Sciences (ISSN 2455-2267)

Humanities and Social Sciences Letters

Rudolf T Vecaldo

Australasian Journal of Early Childhood

Joseph Agbenyega

David Osher

South Asian Review

kalpana iyengar

Vasiliki Ioannidi

Ching-Ling Lin

Paul Horton

American Behavioral Scientist

Aryn Dotterer

Journal of College Student Development

Kristen Renn

Georgia School Counselors Association Journal

Sakinah Rasheed

Marja Kankaanranta

The Journal of Negro Education

Ronald Pitner

mavhungu steven

Ulla Härkönen

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

• Environment

Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Theory Essay Example

Bronfenbrenner’s ecological theory does not focus on stages of human development but instead focuses on influences from social environments. This theory focuses on five interrelated systems. These systems are the microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem, macrosystem, and chronosystem. (Bronfenbrenner, 2005). The microsystem is a human’s immediate environment. It is what makes up their everyday lives. This means a human’s family, friends, classmates, coworkers, and even teachers. The second system that influences a human’s development is called the mesosystem. This system is the interactions between microsystems. The way a child is being treated in one microsystem may influence how they act in another. The Exosystem is made up of social institutions. These institutions include schools, media, and religious institutions and have an indirect influence on development. The macrosystem is the system of cultural beliefs and values. This also includes government systems that are built on beliefs and values such as in the middle east. The last system in Bronfenbrenner’s theory is the chronosystem. This system is the changes that happen over time. This includes an individual’s development and historical changes. The biggest thing Bronfenbrenner emphasized about his theory of development is that humans are active participants in their development. This means that a person may affect other people’s behaviors and vice versa. (Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 1998).

Mackenna’s language development goes along with Bronfenbrenner’s ecological theory. Although Mackenna is only three years old and in the toddler development stage, this theory specifically the microsystem is already consistent with her development. Mackenna is mostly with adults. These adults include her parents, grandparents, aunts, uncles, and her parents’ friends. As mentioned previously mentioned in part two observation and analysis project, being around these adults, makes for a language-rich environment (Weislender & Fernald, 2013).  These adults do not water down grammar when they talk to Mackenna but instead talk in paragraphs. This has led to an advancement in Mackenna’s language as she already talks in paragraphs and knows how to use prepositions. She does sometimes overregulate but this can display just how much development Mackenna is going through (Arnett & Jensen, 2019). This is evident in the fact that Mackenna does not overregulate all her verbs. 

In the future, Mackenna’s language development according to this theory will reflect the systems she is associated with. As she goes to school (this deals with the mesosystem and exosystems) she will learn different ways people talk. The first is other children may teach her different ways to say a verb. An example of this may be a child using African American Vernacular English who may say, “I ain’t doing anything.” Mackenna may pick up this phrase. She will be taught grammar rules by her teachers. This will influence the grammar that will be displayed in her speech. Specifically, it will most likely make overregulation extinct in her speech.  Her language will also be influenced by media, including books. This will also expand her language (Fitneva & Matsui, 2015)

Related Samples

• Analysis of Turkle’s Argument
• Essay on Technology in Music: Advantages and Disadvantages
• Essay On Sun
• Essay On Effects Of Hurricane Katrina
• Research Paper on Hurricane Ida May Spark Mass Migration
• Descriptive Essay On The Bermuda Triangle
• Element Research Paragraphs: Hydrogen
• Essay Sample about Climate Change: Impacts of the Industrial Revolution and Human Activities
• The Effects of Animals on Human Health and Well-Being Essay Sample
• Persuasive Essay: Zoos Should Not Exist

Didn't find the perfect sample?

You can order a custom paper by our expert writers

Different uses of Bronfenbrenner’s ecological theory in public mental health research: what is their value for guiding public mental health policy and practice?

• Original Article
• Open access
• Published: 14 March 2018
• Volume 16 , pages 414–433, ( 2018 )

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Malin Eriksson 1 ,
• Mehdi Ghazinour 2 &
• Anne Hammarström 3  

231k Accesses

148 Citations

4 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

Bronfenbrenner’s ecological theory is appealing as a conceptual tool for guiding public mental health interventions. However, his theory underwent significant changes since its first inception during the late 1970s until his death in 2005, due to which the implications that can be drawn might differ depending on what concepts (i.e. early or later) of the theory is utilized. The aim of this paper was to examine how different concepts of Bronfenbrenner’s theory have been utilized in (public) mental health research, and to analyse the value of these different uses for guiding public mental health policy and practice. A systematic search for articles that have utilized concepts of Bronfenbrenner’s theory within the field of mental health resulted in a review of 16 published papers. We found that one set of papers ( N  = 10) used the early concepts of ecological systems without investigating interactions between these systems, while another set of papers used the concepts of ecological systems by also investigating interactions within and between these systems ( N  = 4). Another limited set of papers ( N  = 2) utilized the later concepts of proximal processes and the PPCT model. Our results show that studies using Bronfenbrenner’s ecological system concepts by clearly considering interactions between and within these systems can result in recommendations that are most useful for guiding public mental health policy and practice.

Similar content being viewed by others

Conceptualising public mental health: development of a conceptual framework for public mental health

Jennifer Dykxhoorn, Laura Fischer, … Kate Walters

Introduction: Qualitative Research in Mental Health—Innovation and Collaboration

Problem Structuring Methods in Social-Ecological Systems

Alexandre de A. Gomes Júnior, Vanessa B. Schramm & Fernando Schramm

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

Introduction

Mental health is an integral part of health, defined as “a state of well-being in which an individual realizes his or her own abilities, can cope with the normal stresses of life, can work productively and is able to make a contribution to his or her community” (WHO 2014 ). Thus, mental health is more than just the absence of mental disorders or disabilities but a fundamental for good quality of life (WHO 2012 ). Mental illness is a growing global public health problem. The burden of mental and substance use disorders increased by 37.6% between 1990 and 2010 (Whiteford et al. 2013 ). In 2010, mental and substance abuse disorder accounted for 7.4% of disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) worldwide, not the least caused by depressive and anxiety disorders (Whiteford et al. 2013 ). Depression alone accounts for 4.3% of the global burden of disease and is among the largest single causes of disability worldwide, particularly for women (WHO 2013 ). A review of the global burden of mental disorders (Kessler et al. 2007 ), based on data from the WHO mental health survey in 28 countries around the globe, concludes that mental disorders commonly occur in the general population worldwide, often making a debut at an early age, and are often associated with significant adverse costs to society. Since many mental disorders begin in childhood and adolescence (Kessler et al. 2007 ), early detection and interventions are needed. Given the magnitude of mental health problems worldwide, improvements in population health are only possible if countries make prevention of mental health disorders a public health priority (Whiteford et al. 2013 ).

Determinants of mental health and illness include individual, social and societal factors, and their interaction with each other (Sturgeon 2007 ). Thus, mental health needs to be understood from biological, psychological as well as sociocultural perspectives (Kendler 2008 ), and in order to prevent mental illness and promote mental health, there is a need to simultaneously target several multilayered factors (WHO 2012 ). Consequently, a broad public health perspective is needed to promote mental health and prevent mental illness (WHO 2005 ). Public mental health promotion focuses on the social determinants of health in order to strive for positive mental health for all (Jané-Llopis et al. 2005 ). The need for a holistic approach in (mental) health promotion and intervention has been underlined in several international health documents, not the least in the Alma Ata Declaration (WHO 1978 ), the Ottawa Charter (WHO 1986 ) and later by the WHO Commission on the Social Determinants of Health (CSDH, WHO 2008 ). However, in order to clearly understand and act upon these multilayered and interacting social and biological processes that determine mental health, theory is crucial. Theory offers understandings of the causal pathways between various factors and health and disease, and can thus guide the planning and design of public mental health interventions. Despite this, the use of theory in epidemiology and public health research and interventions is still quite sparse (Krieger 2001 ). Further, despite the renewed interest in the social determinants of health, the dominant theories in epidemiology and public health have so far mainly been biomedical or lifestyle oriented, implying a focus on individual-level exposures, behaviours and interventions (Krieger 2014 ). There is clearly a need for theories embracing the complex and multifaceted pathways in mental health, in order to be useful for guiding public mental health policy and practice.

An ecological approach to public mental health

An ecological perspective offers a way to simultaneously emphasize both individual and contextual systems and the interdependent relations between these two systems, and thus offers a variety of conceptual and methodological tools for organizing and evaluating health-promotion interventions (Stokols 1996 ). From a public (mental) health perspective, ecological thinking is appealing since it encompasses several contexts in a very broad sense, including trends such as globalization, urbanization and environmental change, together with (but not solely focusing on) attributes and behaviours of individuals—all relevant aspects for understanding and determining public health (McLaren and Hawe 2004 ). Ecological theories emanate from many disciplines, but health research has mainly been influenced by psychology, including community and developmental psychology (Richard et al. 2011 ). The developmental psychologist, Urie Bronfenbrenner, stands out as one of the most influential contributors to ecological thinking in health research. Influenced by his mentor, Kurt Lewin, Bronfenbrenner ( 1977 ) started to develop his ecological theory as a new theoretical perspective for understanding human development. His theory underwent significant changes since its first inception during the late 1970s, as he constantly revised the theory until his death in 2005. Even though Bronfenbrenner developed his theory to understand human development, it has been extensively applied in many other fields including health research (see e.g. Richard et al. 2011 ; Grzywacz and Fuqua 2000 ).

The evolution of Bronfenbrenner’s theory has been described in different phases (Rosa and Tudge 2013 ): from an ecological approach to human development during the initial phase (1973–1979), followed by a stronger emphasis on the role of the individual and developmental processes during 1980–1993. Finally, in the last phase (1993–2006), the Process–Person–Context–Time model (PPCT) was developed and described as the most appropriate research design for the theory. This development of Bronfenbrenner’s theory has, however, been neglected in most studies. Tudge et al. ( 2009 ) examined 25 papers, all explicitly claiming to be based on Bronfenbrenner’s theory and published in 2001 or later, and found that only four of these studies built on the latest form (PPCT) of the theory. In this paper, we use the term “Bronfenbrenner’s theory” when referring to any of the versions of his theory, and elsewhere we specify what version or concepts we refer to.

Bronfenbrenner’s theory is clearly appealing as a conceptual tool for guiding interventions within the field of public mental health. However, the implications that can be drawn for public mental health policy and practice might differ depending on what concepts (i.e. early or later) of the theory are utilized, and how these concepts are applied. Therefore, the aim of this paper was to examine how different concepts of Bronfenbrenner’s theory have been utilized in (public) mental health research, and to analyse the value of these different uses for guiding public mental health policy and practice.

This implies that we do not intend to judge what version of the theory is the most correct to use, but rather to assess the value of using different concepts of the theory for guiding public mental health interventions. Even though Bronfenbrenner himself acknowledged the latest form of his theory as the most appropriate (Bronfenbrenner and Evans 2000 ), we adhere to a pragmatic view of knowledge and theory. In line with Bryant ( 2009 ), we believe that “knowledge exists in the form of statements or theories which are best seen as instruments or tools; coping mechanisms, not once-and-for-all-time truths. … Rather knowledge [or theory, our note] is a web or a network of statements rather than an edifice, and the value of any form of knowledge [or theory, our note] is its usefulness and applicability which may be constrained in terms of time and place and user” (Bryant 2009 , pp. 4–5).

Thus, we believe that even use of earlier concepts from Bronfenbrenner’s ecological theory might potentially be useful for guiding public mental health interventions.

Methodological approach

Our overall research approach was theoretical in that we examined how different concepts (i.e. earlier versus later) of Bronfenbrenner’s theory have been used within the public mental health field and analysed the value of these uses for guiding public mental health policy and practice. The study was conducted in several distinct steps. Initially, we systematically read through a selection of Bronfenbrenner’s key publications (starting with earlier publications and stepwise continuing with later publications) in order to get a good overview and understanding of how his theory evolved and developed over time. Next, we identified key concepts and basic assumptions in the early and later versions of his theory that could be contrasted and compared with regard to mental health.

After that, we systematically searched for published articles that have utilized Bronfenbrenner’s theory within the field of mental health. This search was conducted to identify illustrative examples of how different concepts of his theory have been applied in mental health research. We searched for articles in the database Web of Sciences, using the following search terms: “Bronfenbrenner” AND “mental health” (topic, all years until November 9, 2015). This search resulted in 34 articles.

These 34 articles were briefly read through to assess their relevance for the purpose of our study. Our criterion for selecting articles for further review was that it should be possible to identify from the article what concepts of Bronfenbrenner’s theory were utilized (i.e. earlier or later concepts), even if not specifically stated by the authors. We made an independent assessment of what concepts of the theory were utilized in each paper, beyond the references used by the authors themselves. In some cases, the authors had referred, for example, to Bronfenbrenner’s later texts, without using concepts of later versions of the theory. Other inclusion criteria were that the concepts used should have been clearly described/defined and applied in the study (as opposed to only discussed in relation to results). Further, some kind of mental health indicator ought to have been used as an “outcome variable”. Articles that did not fulfil these criteria were excluded from further analysis, including purely methodological and/or theoretical papers. In this way, 15 of the 34 papers were selected for further analysis. In addition, another relevant article was found in the database Pub-Med, using “Bronfenbrenner” as the search term (all fields, until 9 November 2015).

In total, 16 relevant articles were identified, and these papers were used as a basis for analysing the value of using different concepts of Bronfenbrenner’s theory for guiding public mental health policy and practice. The selected articles were summarized by content in Appendix 1. They are included in the list of references (indicated by *) and are cited below.

Analysis of selected articles

All 16 papers were read and reread thoroughly in order to identify how concepts of Bronfenbrenner’s theory were utilized; the aims of using his theory within the field of mental health; study design; ecological concepts used; main findings with regard to mental health; conclusions drawn and implications for public mental health interventions (see Appendix 1 for a summary of this review). This review was then used as a basis for analysing the overall strengths and limitations of using different concepts of the theory with regard to guiding public mental health interventions.

Results and reflections

This section is structured in three parts: first, we briefly present the development of Bronfenbrenner’s theory over time and compare the analytical focus between different conceptual versions of his theory, with regard to mental health. Next, we present a summary of how various concepts of Bronfenbrenner’s theory have been applied in mental health research, and finally we discuss the value of these different uses of the theory for guiding public mental health interventions.

Key concepts and basic assumptions in early and later versions of Bronfenbrenner’s theory

In this section, we give a brief overview of the development of Bronfenbrenner’s theory during the period 1973–2006, mainly based on the three phases proposed by Rosa and Tudge ( 2013 ).

Phase 1 (1973–1979)—an ecological approach to human development

During the 1970s, Bronfenbrenner named his emerging theory an “ecological model of human development” (Rosa and Tudge 2013 ). Ecology was defined as a fit between the individual and his/her environment. In order to develop, and not only survive, the fit between the individual and its environment must be even closer (Bronfenbrenner 1975 ). In this earliest stage of the theory, Bronfenbrenner described the ecological environment as composed of systems at four different levels. The microsystem contains relations between the individual and the immediate environment surrounding the individual, such as the home, school and workplace (Bronfenbrenner 1977 ). The mesosystem comprises interrelations between major settings containing an individual, such as relations between home and school, home and peer-groups, etc. (Bronfenbrenner 1977 ). The exosystem embraces social structures—major institutions of the society—such as the world of work, the mass media and public agencies. These social structures do not themselves contain the developing person but impinge upon the immediate settings in which that person is found, and as such influence what is going on in these settings (Bronfenbrenner 1977 ). The macrosystem consists of the blueprints of a particular society such as laws and regulations but also unprinted rules and norms (Bronfenbrenner 1978 ). Analysing the composition of these ecological systems as well as interactions between and within these systems and individual factors was regarded as crucial in order to understand and explain a developmental outcome. The requirement for ecological research was to include at least two different ecological systems in the analysis to understand a particular developmental outcome (Bronfenbrenner 1975 ). In addition, Bronfenbrenner also emphasized ecological transitions in his early texts, i.e. shifts from one ecological context to another that every person undergoes throughout life (Bronfenbrenner 1979 ), such as starting school, getting a sibling, marriage, divorce, getting a new teacher, moving, etc. Investigating the characteristics, qualities and impact of the ecological transitions an individual goes through was also proposed by Bronfenbrenner ( 1978 ) as an important part of ecological research.

Phase 2 (1980–mid-1990s)—adding biology and chronosystem into the ecological framework

During this period, Bronfenbrenner further developed ideas about how individual characteristics interplay with context. In a paper from 1994 about the relation between nature and nurture, Bronfenbrenner and Ceci state that genetic material is not finished traits, but interacts with environmental experiences in determining developmental outcomes. According to them (Bronfenbrenner and Ceci 1994 ) human development involves interaction between the biological and psychological person and his/her environments, and the realization of human potential requires an intervening mechanism that connects the inner with the outer in a two-way process occurring over time.

During this phase, Bronfenbrenner put more emphasis on the close and reciprocal face-to-face interactions with the child’s immediate environment (Bronfenbrenner and Ceci 1994 ). This was later referred to as “proximal processes”—a concept that was fully developed in phase 3 (see below). During this phase, Bronfenbrenner also developed his thinking about time by adding “chronosystems” to his ecological model. Although Bronfenbrenner mentioned time already in his book from 1979, the concept of chronosystem was not added until this second phase. By adding chronosystems, Bronfenbrenner wanted to take into account changes over time, not only within the person but also in the environments in which that person is found, to investigate how these changes may affect a person’s developmental outcomes (Bronfenbrenner 1986 ). This could entail investigating how changes in a parent’s work status (part-time, full-time, etc.) over time during a child’s school ages could affect patterns of parent–child communication, and how these patterns in turn could influence the child’s achievement and social behaviour in school (Bronfenbrenner 1986 ).

Phase 3 (mid-1990s–2006)—a Process–Person–Context–Time (PPCT) model

During this final phase, Bronfenbrenner finalized his theory by developing his thinking about “proximal processes”, now referred to as the “engine of development”. Proximal processes involved reciprocal interaction between the developing individual and other (significant) persons, objects and symbols in his/her immediate environment, and these processes could involve activities between parents and child and child and child, such as playing, reading and learning new skills (Bronfenbrenner 1995 ). Proximal processes were viewed as the most powerful predictor of human development and Bronfenbrenner wanted to show how individual characteristics, together with aspects of the environment, influence proximal processes (Rosa and Tudge 2013 ). In specifying the nature, operation and developmental effects of proximal processes, Bronfenbrenner “re-conceptualized” the microsystem. According to him, proximal processes operate within microsystems and involve interaction with three features of the immediate environment: persons, objects and symbols. Persons were further referred to as “significant others” by adopting Mead’s terminology (Bronfenbrenner 1995 ). In further trying to rule out why different developmental outcomes vary between individuals, Bronfenbrenner and his colleagues (Bronfenbrenner and Ceci 1994 ; Bronfenbrenner 1995 ; Bronfenbrenner and Evans 2000 ) developed this hypothesis into a Process–Person–Context–Time model (PPCT), and the model was developed to guide how bioecological research best could be conducted (Rosa and Tudge 2013 ). Considering Process would imply assessment of regularly occurring activities and interactions with significant persons, objects and symbols in the developing individual’s lives. Accounting for Person would require analysing how individual characteristics influence proximal processes, such as assessing how age, gender, temperament, intelligence, etc. influence these activities and interactions. Context was described as involving four interrelated systems: microsystem (the immediate environment where the developing person engages in activities and interactions, i.e. where proximal processes occur), mesosystem (interrelations among several microsystems in which that person is situated), exosystems (contexts having an indirect influence on the person) and finally, macrosystem (contexts with a shared belief system). Adding Context could thus imply evaluating the influences of different exosystems (such as parent’s work or the mass media) and/or different macrosystems (such as values within cultural groups) on the proximal processes of interest. Finally, considering aspects of Time would ideally require a longitudinal study with at least two measurement points taking into account the current point of historical time (Tudge et al. 2009 ). Bronfenbrenner never implied that all four elements have to be included in every study, but underlined that studies involving the PPCT model should focus on proximal processes, showing how they are influenced both by characteristics of the developing individual and by the context in which they occur (Tudge et al. 2009 ).

Table  1 shows that the core of analysis of mental health studies applying the earliest concepts (developed in phase 1) of Bronfenbrenner’s theory would be to examine how mental health is determined by mutual influence between individual factors and the ecological systems surrounding an individual/group, as well as interactions between and within these ecological systems. Further, mental health studies applying later concepts (from phase 2) of Bronfenbrenner’s theory would also add chronosystem to the ecology. Finally, studies using the most mature concepts of the theory (developed in phase 3) would focus on proximal processes and applying the PPCT model. As Table  1 shows, it is also clear that the earlier phase of the theory put more emphasis on context, while the later phases put more emphasis on the closer environment.

Different uses of Bronfenbrenner’s theory in mental health research

From the 16 reviewed articles, we were unable to identify articles that could be regarded as “purely” using concepts from just one of the identified phases of the theory, as outlined by Rosa and Tudge ( 2013 ). This probably reflects a general unawareness of how Bronfenbrenner’s theory developed over time, a fact also noted by others (Tudge et al. 2009 ; 2016 ). Instead, we found three main ways of using concepts from Bronfenbrenner’s theory within our 16 reviewed papers. One set of papers ( N  = 10) used the concepts of ecological system (of which five also included chronosystem) without investigating interactions between these systems, while another set of papers used the concepts of ecological systems by also investigating interactions within and between these systems ( N  = 4). Another limited set of papers ( N  = 2) utilized the later concepts of proximal processes and the PPCT model. Two of the reviewed articles (Mutumba and Harper 2015 ; Romano et al. 2015 ) used concepts of Bronfenbrenner’s theory (at least partly) in conjunction with other theoretical frameworks, while the others were based solely on concepts from Bronfenbrenner’s theory. Table  2 summarizes how the theory has been utilized within these three identified groups of articles with regard to the purpose of using Bronfenbrenner’s theory; study designs; concepts utilized; main results; implications for public mental health policy and interventions; and strengths and weaknesses for guiding public mental health policy and practice.

Studies utilizing ecological systems concepts without considering interactions between and within ecological systems

Table  2 illustrates that ten out of 16 reviewed articles utilized ecological systems concepts without clearly considering interactions within and between these different ecological systems. This implies that the majority of our reviewed articles utilize Bronfenbrenner’s theory in a way that was never intended by Bronfenbrenner himself, since even in his earliest writings he underlined the importance of considering interactions within and between ecological systems (Bronfenbrenner 1975 ). These ten studies have in common that they aim to go beyond individual risk factors for understanding various mental health outcomes, since previous studies have mainly focused on personal characteristics without considering the larger surrounding environments. Thus, these studies use concepts of Bronfenbrenner’s ecological theory for identifying factors at different ecological levels that can explain the development of mental health outcomes in general (Pilgrim and Blum 2012 ; Aston 2014 ), but also more specific mental health related outcomes such as parenting capacity (Grant and Guerin 2014 ), bullying and peer victimization in schools (Hong and Espelage 2012 ; Huang et al. 2013 ; Upton Patton et al. 2013 ), school shootings (Hong et al. 2010 ), and sexual assaults (Campbell et al. 2009 ).

The concepts used in these studies are naturally different ecological systems (micro, meso, exo, macro, and chrono) as well as various individual factors. Consequently, the results from these studies end up identifying factors at different ecological levels that are positively and/or negatively associated with the particular mental health outcome in focus. Further, even if the need to consider interactions between and within ecological systems in order to understand mental health outcomes is pointed out in (some of) these studies, this is not explicitly done in the analyses. As an example, Hong and Espelage ( 2012 ) in their literature review identified risk factors at all ecological levels associated with bullying and peer victimization in school, but did not really consider interactions between these different systems beyond bringing up the fact that the associations between parent–youth relationships and bullying may differ for boys and girls. Likewise, Campbell et al. ( 2009 ) point out that the “next step” of developing a model of rape recovery would be to examine interactions across different levels of the social ecology, in order to get a comprehensive understanding. They (Campbell et al. 2009 ) further discuss that the mixed results found in their review regarding the influence of individual characteristics and assault characteristics on the mental health effects of sexual assaults probably are due to unexplored cross-level interactions.

The policy implications that can be drawn from these studies are consequently quite unspecific. When discussing the policy implications from their review of factors associated with school bullying and peer victimization in the People’s Republic of China, Huang et al. ( 2013 ) end up in general recommendations such as the need for (1) considering individual factors (age and gender) by targeting younger children and boys in particular (since these groups are more prone to engage in bullying); (2) setting up parent education for abusive parents ( micro level ); and (3) restricting children’s exposure to media violence ( exo level ). Similarly, Hong et al. ( 2010 ), when discussing the policy implications of how to prevent school shootings, end up with unspecific recommendations such as the need for skill-building programmes for parents and youths on communication and conflict resolution ( micro level ); setting up of arenas where parents and teachers can meet ( meso level ); provision of educational material about the detrimental effects of exposure to media violence ( exo level ); implementing school programmes that address gun violence in school ( macro level ); and educating governments about the relation between social conditions and negative outcomes among immigrants ( chrono level ). Likewise, Yakushko and Chronister ( 2005 ) outline various counselling strategies and interventions at different ecological levels for immigrant women in the US. They suggest the importance of the counsellor valuing immigrant women’s cultural experiences (individual level); assessing changes in women’s family structure (micro level); strengthening existing support networks (meso and exo levels); and informing about laws that prohibit discrimination (macro level). Although these recommendations are relevant and valid, one might assume that these recommendations could have been brought up even without using an ecological theoretical framework. Likewise, Mutumba and Harper ( 2015 ) use an ecological framework to identify the risk and protective factors for mental health diseases for sexual minority youth at different ecological levels. However, in their recommendations for treatment and support, they end up in very broad recommendation such as “developing and enforcing child protection systems”, without even linking these recommendations to the ecological levels where they “belong”.

Thus, even though these studies bring up general suggestions for how to move beyond individual factors to also intervene in the social environment, they do not give any detailed advice on how to prevent a specific mental health outcome for a particular target group. One exception though is Pilgrim and Blum’s ( 2012 ) study about the risk and protective factors for adolescents’ mental and physical health in the English-speaking Caribbean. They identified that girls are more likely to experience internalizing problems, while boys are more likely to have externalizing problems. Therefore, interventions focusing on skills training for emotional regulations, coping skills for managing stress and dietary behaviour may be especially beneficial for girls, while policies advocating for reduced youth access to drugs and weapons and programmes focusing on conflict resolution skills may be especially beneficial for boys. However, beyond this example, studies utilizing early concepts of Bronfenbrenner’s theory without considering interactions between and within ecological systems tend just to include many factors at various levels in a mental health-risk model, without being able to rule out the complex interactions between these factors. These kind of results easily lead to the conclusion that “everything affects everything”, which is not very helpful for health policy and planning (Grzywacz and Fuqua 2000 ).

Studies utilizing ecological systems concepts by considering interactions within and between systems

Four of the reviewed articles used a more multifaceted ecological analysis by taking into account interactions within and between ecological systems. Beyond identifying factors within different ecological systems (micro, meso, exo and macro) associated with various health outcomes for different groups of people (e.g. based on gender, age, etc.), these articles also aim to analyse interactions between risk factors at different levels and if and how risk factors act in a cumulative manner. Thus, these studies move beyond focusing on isolated variables and contribute to an understanding of the complex interactions between various risk and/or protective factors and their effect on mental health outcomes for different groups of people.

When analysing risk factors for problem behaviour among English and Indian children living in London, Atzaba-Poria et al. ( 2004 ) not only identified risk factors at different ecological levels, but also analysed how much of the risk could be attributed to each of the different ecological levels, as well as cumulative risks of various exposures. They found that regardless of the specific type of risk, the more accumulated risks children experienced, the higher the levels of total problem behaviour. They were also able to detect how different kinds of accumulated risks (emanating from the micro, meso or exo level or individual factors) were associated with different behavioural problems (aggressive behaviour versus anxiety and depression). Likewise, Behnke et al. ( 2011 ) were able to detect how the association between factors at different ecological levels and depressive symptoms differed for girls and boys. Equally, Romano et al. ( 2015 ), in their review of the complex relationship between childhood maltreatment and later academic achievement and mental health, found that the negative consequences of childhood maltreatment seemed to be greater for boys than girls. They also found that some forms of maltreatment (early in life, multiple, neglect) seemed to be especially harmful for academic achievements. Further, McDaniel et al. ( 2012 ) explored interactions between micro and meso level interactions and found that blogging (meso level interactions) positively influenced family relations (micro level interactions) which in turn had a positive effect on maternal well-being. Thus, the positive effects of the mesosystem went through interactions with the microsystem.

The results of these studies show how the influence of different risk factors may vary for different groups and depending on the mental health outcome in focus. Thus, the recommendations for interventions that can be drawn from these studies are in general more specific. One clear example is the study by Atzaba-Poria et al. ( 2004 ). They found that interventions within the microsystem were needed in order to prevent aggressive behaviours among children, while interventions in the exosystems (peer and parental relations) were needed in order to prevent anxious and depressive behaviours among children. Behnke et al.’s study ( 2011 ) further suggests that interventions targeting adolescents’ self-esteem and depressive symptoms need to be tailored differently for boys and girls; targeting neighbourhood factors might have to be especially tailored to meet the needs of boys while targeting societal discrimination has to specifically address the needs of girls. Finally, the review by Romano et al. ( 2015 ) suggests that some forms of child maltreatment—neglect, early and multiple—might be especially important to detect and intervene against in order to promote later academic achievement and mental health. These recommendations can thus be used for tailoring interventions for the specific target group and outcome in focus. Consequently, studies using Bronfenbrenner’s ecological system concepts by clearly considering interactions between and within these systems can result in recommendations that are most useful for guiding public mental health policy and practice. However, even if these recommendations might be specific, one needs to acknowledge that the recommendations might not be too easy to implement in practice since they require quite complex societal interventions.

Studies applying later concepts of the theory

We identified only two studies that have utilized the later concepts of Bronfenbrenner’s theory. Our review suggests, in line with others (Tudge et al. 2009 ; Tudge et al. 2016 ), that the later version of Bronfenbrenner’s theory is still less utilized in research, including the field of public mental health. Liem et al. ( 2010 ) used longitudinal data from a random sample of young people in Boston, USA, to explore differences in mental health outcomes (depressive symptoms, life satisfaction) between high school dropouts and graduates, while Williams and Nelson-Gardell ( 2012 ) used data from the US National Survey of Child and Adolescent Well-Being to examine factors predicting resilience in sexually abused adolescents. Both these studies used all or some elements from the PPCT model to analyse factors positively and negatively associated with mental health outcomes for different population groups. In these studies, proximal factors are given more “weight” for understanding mental health outcomes, although especially Williams and Nelson-Gardell ( 2012 ) also considered some more distal factors (family SES) that proved to be of equal importance in predicting clinical symptoms in sexually abused adolescents.

Both these studies found that peer and family support, in combination with an individual’s capacity to accept and utilize these resources, is critical for protecting individuals against poor mental health. Thus, these studies underline the importance of a close supporting surrounding environment, and the policy recommendations, therefore, suggest interventions to support and strengthen the parent, peer and child relations. Williams and Nelson-Gardell ( 2012 ) conclude that in order to promote resilience in sexually abused adolescents, interventions focusing on caregiver support and school engagement (proximal processes) or addressing caregiver education or economic assistance (contextual factors) will be the most effective and beneficial.

In summary, these studies give quite detailed guidance on (proximal) factors influencing the particular mental health outcomes in focus. However, given the weights on factors in the immediate, close environment, the recommendations that can be drawn from these studies focus mainly on interventions in the close and immediate environment, while somewhat downgrading actions are needed in the wider environment.

Conclusion—different uses of Bronfenbrenner’s theory; what is their value for guiding public mental health policy and practice?

In summary, our study shows how the majority of mental health studies utilizing Bronfenbrenner’s theory seem to use the early developed ecological system concepts without considering interactions within and between these systems. We do not believe that our review covers all studies within the field of public mental health that utilize Bronfenbrenner’s theory. Still, it is striking that the vast majority of the identified articles use concepts of the theory in a way that was never intended by Bronfenbrenner himself. This finding supports Tudge et al.’s ( 2009 ) conclusion that one common misuse of early versions of Bronfenbrenner’s theory is that it is used to map out contextual and individual factors contributing to an outcome while not analysing mutual interactions between the individual and the context, which was the explicit intention even with the initial version of the theory. Above, we claimed a “pragmatic view of theory”, implying that concepts of a theory could be potentially useful (within a specific context) even if used in a way that was never intended. However, our results show that the recommendations for public mental health policy and practice that can be drawn from these studies are not very useful in that they are too broad and unspecific for suggesting what needs to be done for whom in order to influence a particular mental health outcome. As Stokols ( 1996 , p. 288) puts it, “overly inclusive models are not likely to assist researchers in targeting selected variables for study, or clinicians and policy-makers in determining where, when, and how to intervene”. Thus, we propose that using early concepts of Bronfenbrenner’s theory without considering interactions within and between different ecological systems might be a less valuable use of the theory within the field of public mental health.

In contrast, our analysis shows that studies utilizing Bronfenbrenner’s ecological system concepts, by clearly considering interactions within and between different ecological systems, can come up with most useful recommendations for public mental health promotion and interventions. These kinds of studies have the potential to rule out the “specific circumstances (e.g. intrapersonal, physical environmental, organizational, cultural) that account for the occurrence and prevalence of particular health problems, and a corresponding analysis of the contextual factors that are likely to influence the effectiveness of health-promotive interventions designed to reduce those problems” (Stokols 1996 , p. 288). These kinds of recommendations may suggest what works for whom to prevent a particular mental health outcome. Therefore, we conclude that studies using early concepts of Bronfenbrenner’s theory, by considering interactions within and between different ecological systems, can come up with valuable results for guiding public mental health interventions. This use of the theory offers a way to simultaneously focus on intrapersonal and environmental factors and the dynamic interplay between these factors in determining mental health. This way of using early concepts of the theory therefore corresponds very well to the ecological “needs” within public (mental) health for understanding the complexity of public health problems, including social inequality in health and the effects of place on health (McLaren and Hawe 2004 ). In addition, using concepts of Bronfenbrenner’s theory in this way is well in line with a life course and social determinants of mental health perspective that emphasizes how mental health is shaped not only by individual factors but to a great extent by the social, economical and physical environments in which people live throughout their lives (WHO and Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation 2014 ).

We found only two mental health studies that had utilized the later concepts of proximal processes and the PPCT model of Bronfenbrenner’s theory. This is despite the fact that these concepts were stated to be the most appropriate use of his theory (Bronfenbrenner and Evans 2000 ). The lack of studies utilizing these concepts might be due to the fact that this version of the theory is less known and spread in the scientific community, as indicated by Tudge et al. ( 2009 ). Alternatively, there may be a considered decision not to use these later concepts, given their main focus on proximal processes at the expense of environmental factors. Our analysis show that these final concepts do not obviously fit a public health and social determinants of mental health perspective, but might be more suitable within other fields such as psychotherapy where person-centred theories are the most appropriate to understand the structure and development of personality, taking into account dimensions of both temperament and character. The PPCT model is well in line with the ideas of Cloninger et al. ( 1993 ), who describe four dimensions of temperament: novelty seeking, harm avoidance, reward dependence, and persistence, which are independently heritable and manifest early in life. Cloninger et al. ( 1993 ) additionally describe three dimensions of character that mature in adulthood and influence personal and social effectiveness by insight learning about self-concepts. Self-concepts vary according to the extent to which a person identifies the self as (1) an autonomous individual, (2) an integral part of humanity, and (3) an integral part of the universe as a whole. Consequently, our study suggests that within the field of public mental health research and practice, the later concepts of Bronfenbrenner’s theory might not be the most useful. The final version of his theory, with its emphasis on proximal processes and the immediate environment, lacks a clear focus on how the social, economic and cultural environments that people are exposed to influence mental health. The policy implications that can be drawn from the PPCT model thus focus much more on the individual and consequently lean towards individual health promotion models, with an emphasis on changing individual health behaviour without considering the social and organizational context. These models have previously been extensively used in health promotion but have been criticized, not least for their “victim-blaming” ideology (McLeroy et al. 1988 ; Baum 2008 ). We should, however, remember that Bronfenbrenner was a developmental psychologist - a knowledge field with a clear focus on human growth and development in relation to age. Therefore, the latest concepts of Bronfenbrenner’s theory could be seen as a return from a macro level perspective to a more individual-directed perspective where most developmental psychologists operate. In addition, one must also acknowledge that we were able to find very few articles that had tried to utilize these later, most mature concepts of Bronfenbrenner’s theory. One of our two identified articles (Williams and Nelson-Gardell 2012 ) was also brought up in a recent re-evaluation of the uses of Bronfenbrenner’s theory (Tudge et al. 2016 ) where it was evaluated as a study utilizing variables related to the PPCT, but without really testing the theory. The lack of illustrative examples of studies using the PPCT model limits a “fair” assessment of the value of using these concepts to guide public mental health interventions. Indeed, assessing the “influence of individual and contextual characteristics, through their influence on proximal processes” (Bronfenbrenner 1995 ), might be an appealing approach also in public mental health research. We believe that further development of an ecological approach in public mental health research would benefit from exploring proximal processes, operating on a more collective level, beyond Bronfenbrenner’s more individually focused approach. Finally, even if we conclude that the PPCT model might not be the most useful version of Bronfenbrenner’s theory within the field of public (mental) health, we do not claim that individual factors do not matter. In fact, equally important for public mental health policy and practice is to consider the variety of personal attributes such as psychological disposition and behavioural patterns that influence mental health (Stokols 1996 ). An ecological perspective that can “integrate the community wide, preventive strategies of public health and epidemiology with the individual-level, therapeutic and curative strategies of medicine” (Stokols 1996 , p. 286) is needed within public mental health. This dual focus both on the surrounding environment and on personal attributes for explaining and promoting mental health can be achieved by utilizing early concepts of Bronfenbrenner’s ecological theory, as long as interactions between and within ecological systems and individual factors are thoroughly investigated and considered.

* Aston, H.J. 2014. An ecological model of mental health promotion for school communities: Adolescent views about mental health promotion in secondary schools in the UK. International Journal of Mental Health Promotion 16 (5): 289–307.

Article   Google Scholar  

* Atzaba-Poria, N., A. Pike, and K. Deater-Deckard. 2004. Do risk factors for problem behavior act in a cumulative manner? An examination of ethnic minority and majority children through an ecological perspective. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 45 (4): 707–718.

Baum, F. 2008. The new public health . New York: Oxford University Press.

Google Scholar  

* Behnke, A.O., S.W. Plunkett, T. Sands, and M.Y. Bámaca-Colbert. 2011. The relationship between Latino adolescents perceptions of discrimination, neighborhood risk, and parenting on self-esteem and depressive symptoms. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 42 (7): 1179–1197.

Bronfenbrenner, U. 1975. Reality and research in the ecology of human development. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 119 (6): 439–469.

Bronfenbrenner, U. 1977. Toward an experimental ecology of human development. American Psychologist 32 (7): 513–531.

Bronfenbrenner, U. 1978. The social role of the child in ecological perspective. Zeitschrift für Soziologie 7 (1): 4–20.

Bronfenbrenner, U. 1979. The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design . Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Bronfenbrenner, U. 1986. Ecology of the family as a context for human development: Research perspectives. Developmental Psychology 22 (6): 723–742.

Bronfenbrenner, U., and S.J. Ceci. 1994. Nature-nurture reconceptualized in developmental perspective: A bioecological model. Psychological Review 101 (4): 568–586.

Bronfenbrenner, U. 1995. Developmental ecology through space and time: A future perspective. In Examining lives in context: Perspectives on the ecology of human development , ed. P. Moen, G.H. Elder Jr., and K. Lüscher, 619–647. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Bronfenbrenner, U., and G.W. Evans. 2000. Developmental science in the 21st century: Emerging questions, theoretical models, research designs and empirical findings. Social Development 9 (1): 115–125.

Bryant, A. 2009. Grounded theory and pragmatism: The curious case of Anselm Strauss. Forum: Qualitative Social Research 10(3), Art. 2. http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs090325 .

* Campbell, R., E. Dworkin, and Giannina Cabral. 2009. An ecological model of the impact of sexual assault on women’s mental health. Trauma, Violence & Abuse 10: 225–246.

Cloninger, C.R., D.M. Syrakic, and T.R. Przybeck. 1993. Psychobiological model of temperament and character. Archives of General Psychiatry 50 (12): 975–990.

* Grant, J., and P.B. Guerin. 2014. Applying ecological modelling to parenting for Australian refugee families. Journal of Transcultural Nursing 25: 325–333.

Grzywacz, J.P., and J. Fuqua. 2000. The social ecology of health: Leverage points and linkages. Behavioral Medicine 26 (3): 101–115.

* Hong, J.S., H. Cho, and A.-S. Lee. 2010. Revisiting the Virginia Tech shootings: An ecological systems analysis. Journal of Loss and Trauma: International Perspectives on Stress & Coping 15 (6): 561–575.

* Hong, J.S., and D.L. Espelage. 2012. A review of research on bullying and peer victimization in school: An ecological system analysis. Aggression and Violent Behavior 17: 311–322.

* Huang, H., J.S. Hong, and D.L. Espelage. 2013. Understanding factors associated with bullying and peer victimization in Chinese schools within ecological contexts. Journal of Child and Family Studies 22: 881–892.

Jané-Llopis, E., M. Barry, C. Hosman, and V. Patel. 2005. Mental health promotion works: A review. Promotion & Education 12 (9): 9–25.

Kendler, K.S. 2008. Explanatory models for psychiatric illness. American Journal of Psychiatry 165 (6): 695–702.

Kessler, R.C., et al. 2007. Lifetime prevalence and age-of-onset distributions of mental disorders in the World Health Organization’s World Mental Health Survey Initiative. World Psychiatry 6 (3): 168–176.

Krieger, N. 2001. Theories for social epidemiology in the 21st century: An ecosocial perspective. International Journal of Epidemiology 30: 668–677.

Krieger, N. 2014. Got theory? On the 21st c. CE rise of explicit use of epidemiologic theories of disease distribution: A review and ecosocial analysis. Current Epidemiological Report 1: 45–56.

* Liem, J.H., K. Lustig, and C. Dillon. 2010. Depressive symptoms and life satisfaction among emerging adults: A comparison of high school dropouts and graduates. Journal of Adult Development 17: 33–43.

* McDaniel, B.T., S.M. Coyne, and E.K. Holmes. 2012. New mothers and media use: Associations between blogging, social networking, and maternal well-being. Maternal and Child Health Journal 16: 1509–1517.

McLaren, L., and P. Hawe. 2004. Ecological perspectives in health research. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 59: 6–14.

McLeroy, K.R., D. Bibeau, A. Steckler, and K. Glanz. 1988. An ecological perspective on health promotion programs. Health Education Quarterly 15 (4): 351–377.

* Mutumba, M., and G.W. Harper. 2015. Mental health and support among young key populations: An ecological approach to understanding and intervention. Journal of the International AIDS Society 18 (S1): 19429.

* Pilgrim, N.A., and R. Blum. 2012. Adolescent mental and physical health in the English-speaking Caribbean. Review Panama Salud Publica 32 (1): 62–68.

Richard, L., L. Gauvin, and K. Raine. 2011. Ecological models revisited. Their uses and evolution in health promotion over two decades. Annual Review of Public Health 32: 307–326.

* Romano, E., L. Babchishin, R. Marquis, and S. Fréchette. 2015. Childhood maltreatment and educational outcomes. Trauma, Violence & Abuse 16 (4): 418–437.

Rosa, E.M., and J. Tudge. 2013. Urie Bronfenbrenner’s theory of human development: Its evolution from ecology to bioecology. Journal of Family Theory & Review 5: 243–258.

Stokols, D. 1996. Translating social ecological theory into guidelines for community health promotion. American Journal of Health Promotion 10 (4): 282–298.

Sturgeon, S. 2007. Promoting mental health as an essential aspect of health promotion. Health promotion International 21 (S1): 36–41.

Tudge, J.R.H., I. Mokrova, B.-E. Hatfield, and R.B. Karnik. 2009. Uses and misuses of Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological theory of human development. Journal of Family Theory & Review 1: 198–210.

Tudge, J.R.H., A. Payir, E. Mercon-Vargas, H. Cao, Y. Liang, J. Li, and L. O’Brien. 2016. Still misused after all these years? A reevaluation of the uses of Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological theory of human development. Journal of Family Theory & Review 8: 427–445.

* Upton Patton, D., J.S. Hong, A.B. Williams, and P. Allen-Meares. 2013. A review of research on school bullying among African American youth: An ecological systems analysis. Educational Psychology review 25: 245–260.

Whiteford, H.A., L. Degenhardt, J. Rehm, A.M. Baxter, A.J. Ferrari, H.E. Erskine, F.J. Charlson, R.E. Norman, A.D. Flaxman, N. Johns, R. Burstein, C.J.L. Murray, and T. Vos. 2013. Global burden of disease attributable to mental and substance use disorders: Findings from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010. Lancet 382: 1575–1586.

* Williams, J., and D. Nelson-Gardell. 2012. Predicting resilience in sexually abused adolescents. Child Abuse and Neglect 36: 53–63.

World Health Organization (WHO). 1978. The Alma Ata Declaration . Geneva: WHO.

World Health Organization (WHO). 1986. The Ottawa Charter for health promotion . Geneva: WHO.

World Health Organization (WHO). 2005. Promoting mental health: Concepts, emerging evidence, practice. Geneva: WHO. http://www.who.int/mental_health/publications/promoting_mh_2005/en/ . Accessed March 7, 2016.

World Health Organization (WHO). 2008. Closing the gap in a generation: Health equity through action on the social determinants of health. Geneva: WHO. Final Report of the Commission on Social Determinants of Health.

World Health Organization (WHO). 2012. Risks to mental health: An overview of vulnerabilities and risk factors. Background paper by WHO secretariat for the development of a comprehensive mental health action plan. Geneva: WHO http://www.who.int/mental_health/mhgap/risks_to_mental_health_EN_27_08_12.pdf?ua=1 . Accessed March 7, 2016.

World Health Organization (WHO). 2013. Mental health action plan 2013–2020 . Geneva: WHO. http://www.who.int/mental_health/publications/action_plan/en/ . Accessed March 7, 2016.

World Health Organization (WHO). 2014. Mental health: Strengthening our response. Fact sheet No. 220. Geneva: WHO. http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs220/en/ . Accessed March 7, 2016.

World Health Organization (WHO) and Calouste Foundation. 2014. Social determinants of mental health . Geneva: WHO.

* Yakushko, O., and K.M. Chronister. 2005. Immigrant women and counselling: The invisible others. Journal of Counselling & Development 83: 292–298.

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was financially supported by the Swedish Research Council Formas, dnr 259-2012-37.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Social Work, Umeå University, 901 87, Umeå, Sweden

Malin Eriksson

Police Education Unit at Umeå University, Umeå, Sweden

Mehdi Ghazinour

Department of Public Health and Caring Sciences, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden

Anne Hammarström

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Malin Eriksson .

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 38 kb)

Rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Eriksson, M., Ghazinour, M. & Hammarström, A. Different uses of Bronfenbrenner’s ecological theory in public mental health research: what is their value for guiding public mental health policy and practice?. Soc Theory Health 16 , 414–433 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41285-018-0065-6

Download citation

Published : 14 March 2018

Issue Date : November 2018

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/s41285-018-0065-6

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Bronfenbrenner
• Ecological theory
• Mental health
• Public mental health interventions
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research