Model Of Hierarchical Complexity Research Articles

Commentary on a new model for strategy development for strategy development combining categorical data analysis with growth modeling.

There have been a number of steps in the evolution of modeling cognitive strategy for development. While the older stage models such as Piaget’s and Kohlberg’s did not have much information regarding the processes that take place between stages, Boom’s new model for strategy development is 12 times as dense. It is as dense as the model of hierarchical complexity (mhc). Boom’s model and mhc include substages which explain what happens between each stage of development. Existence of substages is also confirmed indirectly by Hautamaki, Marjanen, Kupiainen, and Vainikainen (2012). In the current paper, it is argued that mhc and Boom’s model should be combined to have a complete model of stage development. Reasons for this proposal are discussed along with tests that can be done. Finally, few unanswered questions are posed.

Correspondence between some life-span, stage theory developmental sequences of stages and levels.

Good comparisons of development sequences have been made in the past. The model of hierarchical complexity is one developmental sequence which has often been compared to other developmental sequences including: Piaget & Inhelder (1969); Fischer & Bidell (1998); Colby and Kohlberg’s ( 1987a, 1987b) 9 point stages and moral maturity scores (mms) of moral judgment. However, Colby and Kohlberg’s 13 point scale has never been assessed in making comparisons to other scales. The current paper constructed a comparison table of all five models, including Colby and Kohlberg’s 13 point scale, which together cover the developmental stages of an entire life-span. Adjustments had to be made to the 9 point and 13 point scales. The formula, ohc = 3 + 2 * (Stage of Colby & Kohlberg’s), was introduced to demonstrate the relationship between the orders of hierarchical complexity and Kohlberg’s stages of development.

Using SAFMEDS and direct instruction to teach the model of hierarchical complexity.

The model of hierarchical complexity (MHC) assesses a general, unidimensional behavioral developmental set of tasks and stages that measures difficulty across different domains. Teaching the model is a challenge because of the abstract nature of the model. Using traditional methods of lecturing to t

Developmental behavior analytic therapy: Easier done than said.

Developmental Behavior Analytic Therapy (dbat) is the first behavioral therapy with developmental underpinnings. This paper introduces dbat by presenting a composite case study. It also discusses the theoretical underpinnings of this therapy. dbat aims to help individuals with behavioral problems change specific problem behaviors that consequently help them to lead more satisfying lives. It aims to alter specific behavioral problems, because the biological susceptibility to such behavioral problems is a given. It is suggested that this therapy be used as an adjunct to conventional therapies that specialize in helping individuals cope with behavioral problems. dbat is different from other contemporary or behavioral analytic therapies, as it integrates a behavioral developmental stage model, the Model of Hierarchical Complexity (mhc), into its working. The foundation of this therapy is the theory that behavioral developmental stages and value of consequences of a behavior interact to predict an individual’s behavior, and also suggests that behavioral problems affect both behavioral developmental stage and value of consequences.

Developmental stage of performance in reasoning about school bullying.

The Student-Bully Problem, an assessment of cognitive developmental stage adapted from Commons et al.’s (2006) Counselor-Patient Problem, was administered to 176 adolescent participants and 77 adult participants at an urban high school, urban middle school, and mid-size college (N = 253). This study investigated the following inquiries: At what cognitive developmental stages (as defined by the Model of Hierarchical Complexity) do urban high school and middle school students reason about bullying? How effective is the Student-Bully Problem at measuring cognitive developmental stage? Item and person Rasch scores were used to identify each participant’s cognitive developmental stage of performance on the Student-Bully Problem, and to identify the item difficulty of the Student-Bully Problem’s items. The Rasch analysis was also used to assess the validity and reliability of the Student-Bully Problem. Participants performed at the preoperational through metasystematic stages on the Student-Bully Problem. The Student-Bully Problem proved to be a useful tool in assessing cognitive developmental stage of performance in reasoning about bullying in school age youth. The Student-Bully Problem was modified with the goal of improving the instrument’s effectiveness. Consequently, the Student Bully Problem ( 2.0) was created and administered to 116 urban high school students. Initial results (see discussion) indicate the modified version could be more effective

Folk Psychology and Criminal Law: Why We Need to Replace Folk Psychology with Behavioral Science

Much of what social scientists apply when addressing legal matters is based upon “folk psychology” as opposed to behavioral science. This article addresses how folk psychological notions arise and why they continue to exist, and then proposes an alternative view of criminal behavior with references to evidence-based stage theories—in particular, the Model of Hierarchical Complexity.

How a future species of Superion hominids might negotiate to promote the survival of homo sapiens: An application of the model of hierarchical complexity.

Using ideas from evolution and stages of development, as conceived by the Model of Hierarchical Complexity, a hypothetical scenario, premised on genetic engineering advances, portrays the development of a new humanoid species, Superions. If such a species of Superions were created, how would this impact current humans? If the Superion scenario came to pass, might this eliminate Homo Sapiens? This might happen not so much because Superions would plan to eliminate current humans, but it might be an inadvertent effect, in which new occupations and niches are created that Homo Sapiens does not fill as well. Our purpose is to examine the processes and impacts that may come into play if a new species were genetically created from current humans. In order to explicate how the two species might interact most effectively, we introduce the use of the Model of Hierarchical Complexity. The Model describes what underlies stages of development and in addition has elaborated on the idea of higher stages of development. As will be discussed, in Homo Sapiens, the mean stage is formal operations, a stage during which individuals are able to effectively deal with single-variable causal relationships. Only some humans (about 20%) reason at the Systematic stage, in which multiple interacting variable systems can be considered. Even fewer reason at higher stages called Metasystematic (comparing two or more systems) and Paradigmatic (inter-relating metasystems). In developing Superions, scientists would be assumed to bring about changes that would raise the effective mean stage of the new species. The mean stage of Superions might be Systematic or above. The paper discusses how a new species would apply systematic, metasystematic and paradigmatic stage problem solving to the issue of how to maintain the survival of Homo Sapiens.

Human Development and the Model of Hierarchical Complexity: Learning from Research in the Psychology of Moral and Religious Development

Critical consideration is given the empirical evidence for psychological models of religious development, its supposed relationship to other domains of psychological development, and especially, moral development. Significant problems with stage conceptions in these models augur a fundamental rethinking of religious development as a construct in developmental psychology. Model of Hierarchical Complexity has demonstrable promise for enabling greater precision in constructs and methods. This may resolve some central problems and advance research in the field.

A Comparison of Moral Reasoning Stages Using a Model of Hierarchical Complexity

Empirical evidence has demonstrated the validity and reliability of moral development instruments such as the Defining Issues Test (DIT) and Moral Judgment Test (MJT). Rasch item reliability for each was .95. A newer instrument generated using the Model of Hierarchical Complexity had item reliability of .97. Rasch scores of responses to each instruments' items correlated well with the items' measure of hierarchical complexity, r = .286, .372, .557, .767. Test items used to measure moral reasoning were significantly correlated. In general, stage of moral development did not predict political affiliation or voting, supporting Kohlberg's claim that structure, not content, underlies stage.

Editors' Introduction to the Special Issue on Postformal Thought and Hierarchical Complexity

We thank Alfonso Montouri and World Futures for inviting this special issue to highlight postformal thought and a range of work from the field of hierarchical complexity that defines it. Alfonso stressed that he wanted the issue to lay out the theory and postformal thought along with some of their respective applications and implications. Contributors to this issue have attempted to meet those expectations, for which we are grateful. The Model of Hierarchical Complexity has a long history that only in very recent years resulted in its formal specification as a general theory. Our introduction to this special issue thus has three tasks to perform. It gives a synopsis of the Model’s characteristics. Commons relates a brief history of the origins of the field of hierarchical complexity. He does this in order to identify with gratitude those who played key roles in influencing him and contributing to the Model’s development over these many years. We then sketch the special issue’s layout to suggest the story it is designed to tell.

Domain-Specific Increases in Stage of Performance in a Complete Theory of the Evolution of Human Intelligence

The evolution of humans required performing increasingly hierarchically complex tasks within multiple domains. Hierarchical complexity increases task by task. Tasks occur within, and differ by, determinable domains, their stages of performance measurable using the Model of Hierarchical Complexity. How well one performs within single and multiple domains is considered to indicate intelligence. Original task-initiation is more difficult than imitational learning and can create new domains. Levels of support reduce task difficulty, increasing performance. Task-performance may be generalized to other domains. Stages of developing tools and empathy are presented to demonstrate domains' roles in the evolution of human intelligence.

Stacked Neural Networks Must Emulate Evolution's Hierarchical Complexity

The missing ingredients in efforts to develop neural networks and artificial intelligence (AI) that can emulate human intelligence have been the evolutionary processes of performing tasks at increased orders of hierarchical complexity. Stacked neural networks based on the Model of Hierarchical Complexity could emulate evolution's actual learning processes and behavioral reinforcement. Theoretically, this should result in stability and reduce certain programming demands. The eventual success of such methods begs questions of humans' survival in the face of androids of superior intelligence and physical composition. These raise future moral questions worthy of speculation.

What Postformal Thought Is, and Why It Matters

The four stages of postformal thought are Systematic, Metasystematic, Paradigmatic, and Cross-Paradigmatic. Each successive stage is more hierarchically complex than the one that precedes it. Each stage uses the elements formed at the previous stage to construct more hierarchically complex elements (e.g., metasystems, paradigms). An actual instrument constructed using the Model of Hierarchical Complexity illustrates the progression in hierarchical complexity. Another example illustrates the nonlinear nature of hierarchical complexity. The distinct tasks of the four stages are described. Postformal thought benefits interpersonal, societal, and academic endeavors by virtue of the kinds of tasks performed at each stage.

Presenting the Formal Theory of Hierarchical Complexity

The formal theory of the Model of Hierarchical Complexity is presented. Complexity theories generally exclude the concept of hierarchical complexity; Developmental Psychology has included it for over 20 years. It also applies to social systems and non-human systems. Formal axioms for the Model are outlined. The model assigns an order of hierarchical complexity to every task, using natural numbers, establishing a quantal notion of stage and stages of performance. This formalizes properties of stage theories in psychology. The formal theory of the model enables extending the concept of hierarchical complexity to any field where tasks and their performances exist.

Toward a Cross-Species Measure of General Intelligence

Science requires postformal capabilities to compare competing explanations and conceptualize how to coordinate or integrate them. With conflicts thus reconciled, science advances. The Model of Hierarchical Complexity facilitates the coordination of current arguments about intelligence. A cross-species measurement theory of comparative cognition is proposed. It has potential to overcome the lack of a general measurement theory for the science of comparative cognition, and the lack of domain-general mechanisms for evolutionary psychologists. The hierarchical complexity of concepts and debates as well as the new theory are scored, and demonstrate the postformal hierarchical complexity of the proposed theory.

Assessment of thinking in adult learners.

Higher-order thinking is one of the defining characteristics of higher education, yet the rating of such behavior has been neither reliable nor valid. Recent research involving the use of categories has yielded relatively high inter-rater reliability, with nominal categories of behavior identified. The current study applies an ordinal-scale model of hierarchical complexity (MHC) to educational tasks. The initial results suggest that the MHC can be used to score questions with varying degrees of complexity and support, and that future research should concentrate on determining the reliability and validity of this scoring system for educational purposes.

How are the processes by which people become attached influenced by stage of development?

The current paper examines individuals’ understanding of relationships with significant others in terms of the increase in complexity of tasks that is posited to occur in the Model of Hierarchical Complexity (Commons et al., 1998). We interviewed 8 to 10 year old children, and adults, about losses of attachment objects, including people, pets, objects, places, events and ideals. Statements that children and adults made about these attachment objects were scored used the Model of Hierarchical Complexity. It was found that children’s statements were primarily scored as primary or concrete. Adults’ statements ranged from primary to systematic, but were more often scored as abstract, formal and systematic (not primary or concrete). Illustrative examples of statements at each of the orders of complexity for both children and adults are provided. It will be important to extend these findings by examining whether the verbal behavior of individuals with respect to relationships is related to the kinds of relationships they appear to have.

Introduction to the model of hierarchical complexity.

This special issue presents a collection of papers based on the Model of Hierarchical Complexity, a non-mentalistic model of developmental stages. The model is different from previous proposals about developmental stage (e.g., Inhelder & Piaget, 1958). Instead of explaining behavior change across age as being due to the development of mental structures or schema, this model instead posits that task sequences form hierarchies that become increasingly complex. Because less complex tasks must be completed and practiced before more complex tasks can be acquired, this accounts for the developmental changes seen. Furthermore, previous theories of stage have confounded the stimulus and response in assessing stage by simply scoring responses and ignoring the task or stimulus. The Model of Hierarchical Complexity separates the task or stimulus from the performance. This short introduction to the special issue will describe this model in some detail, as each of the papers to follow will rely on it. Tasks One major basis for this developmental theory is task analysis. The study of ideal tasks, including their instantiation in the real world, has been the basis of the branch of stimulus control called Psychophysics. Tasks are defined as sequences of contingencies, each presenting stimuli and each requiring a behavior or a sequence of behaviors that must occur in some non-arbitrary fashion. In the present use of task analysis, the complexity of behaviors necessary to complete a task can be specified using the complexity definitions described below. One examines behavior with respect to the analytically known complexity of the task.

Bringing about changes in workplace behavior.

Bringing about changes in workplace behavior.

A complete theory of human evolution of intelligence must consider stage changes

We show 13 stages of the development of tool-use and tool making during different eras in the evolution of Homo sapiens. We used the NeoPiagetian Model of Hierarchical Complexity rather than Piaget's. We distinguished the use of existing methods imitated or learned from others, from doing such a task on one's own.