The exosystem in Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological model represents environments that indirectly influence an individual’s development, despite the person not being directly involved in these settings.
It encompasses external contexts and events that affect the individual’s immediate environment, such as a parent’s workplace, community organizations, or local government policies.
These indirect influences play a significant role in shaping a person’s development by demonstrating how factors beyond their immediate experience can still have profound effects on their life circumstances and opportunities.
For instance, a parent’s job loss may impact a child’s home life and educational resources, or changes in local education policies might affect a student’s learning environment without their direct involvement in the decision-making process.
By examining these indirect influences, we gain insight into the broader societal and institutional factors that contribute to human development.
Understanding the exosystem is crucial for recognizing how external forces shape the contexts in which individuals grow and develop, highlighting the interconnected nature of personal and societal systems in human development.
Examples of the Exosystem in Ecological Systems Theory
The exosystem environments do not directly include the child, but they impact the child’s immediate surroundings.
Here are some examples:
Parents Workplaces and Policies
Workplace policies regarding parental leave, flexible work hours, and work-from-home options can significantly affect a child’s development.
For instance, a company offering flexible working hours allows parents more time with their children, positively impacting the child’s emotional development and family relationships.
On the other hand, a stressful work environment with limited flexibility can lead to a parent being more irritable at home, indirectly affecting the child.
Extended Family Networks
While not considered part of the child’s immediate microsystem, extended family, such as grandparents, aunts, and uncles, can still influence a child’s development through their relationships with the child’s immediate family.
Their values, beliefs, and support systems can indirectly impact the child’s upbringing.
Local Community Organisations
The presence or absence of local community organizations providing resources and support to families, such as childcare centers, community centers, and healthcare providers, indirectly affects a child’s development by influencing the quality of resources available to the family.
School Board Decisions
School board decisions on issues like school closures, curriculum changes, and resource allocation, while not directly involving the child, can impact the quality of education and resources available to the child, indirectly influencing their development.
Social Services and Support Systems
The availability and accessibility of social services and support systems, such as welfare programmes, affordable housing options, and healthcare access, indirectly affect a child’s development by influencing the family’s economic stability and overall well-being.
Mass Media and Social Media
While children may or may not directly interact with mass media and social media, the content, values, and norms promoted through these channels can indirectly influence a child’s development by shaping their understanding of the world, relationships, and themselves.
Local Government Policies
Decisions made by local governments regarding issues like housing, transportation, and public safety can indirectly influence a child’s development by shaping the quality of their physical environment and access to essential resources.
The Exosystem in the Digital Age: Evolving Perspectives
Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Systems Theory, particularly the concept of the exosystem, has faced significant challenges in the wake of rapid technological advancements.
Originally conceived to represent environments that indirectly influence a child’s development (such as a parent’s workplace), the exosystem now requires a broader interpretation in our increasingly digital world.
Strengths of the Exosystem Concept
- Recognizing Indirect Influences: The exosystem effectively highlights how environments not directly experienced by a child can still significantly impact their development.
- Contextual Understanding: It encourages a holistic view of child development, acknowledging the complex interplay between various social and environmental factors.
Limitations and Evolution
- Blurred Boundaries: The pervasiveness of technology has blurred the lines between different systems. For example, a parent’s work (traditionally part of the exosystem) can now extend into the home through remote work technologies, creating a blend of exosystem and microsystem influences.
- Digital Environments: The original model didn’t account for online spaces, which now play a crucial role in child development. Researchers have proposed concepts like “virtual microsystems” to address this gap, but these digital spaces also have significant exosystem components.
- Rapid Cultural Transmission: Technology, especially social media, has accelerated the spread of cultural influences. This challenges the traditional view of culture as primarily a macrosystem factor, as digital platforms now serve as powerful conduits for cultural transmission at all levels.
The Exosystem Reimagined
To remain relevant, our understanding of the exosystem must evolve:
- Expanded Scope: The exosystem now includes digital environments, online communities, and the policies governing these spaces. For instance, decisions made by social media companies about content moderation or algorithm design can significantly impact a child’s development.
- Technology-Mediated Influences: We must consider how technology shapes “proximal processes” – the key interactions driving development. Online interactions, exposure to curated content, and digital communication patterns all influence a child’s social-emotional growth.
- New Research Challenges: Studying the modern exosystem requires developing new methods to capture the complex, often invisible influences of digital environments on child development.
By adapting our understanding of the exosystem to include these technological dimensions, we can better comprehend and support child development in the digital age.
Practical Applications
While the exosystem encompasses contexts that do not directly involve the child, it exerts a powerful influence on their development.
This understanding provides parents, educators, and communities with opportunities to leverage these indirect but significant forces to support healthy child development.
Leveraging the Exosystem for Positive Development
Parents
Parents can advocate for family-friendly policies in their workplaces, such as flexible working hours, paid parental leave, and on-site childcare.
These policies can reduce work-family conflict, allowing parents to be more emotionally present and engaged in their children’s lives.
Parents can also actively participate in their children’s education by communicating with teachers, attending school events, and advocating for quality education.
Furthermore, parents can connect with local community organizations that offer resources and support, such as after-school programs, parent support groups, and early childhood intervention services.
Educators
Teachers can strive to understand the social and economic factors affecting their students’ families, recognizing that these exosystem influences can impact a child’s academic performance and well-being.
This understanding can foster empathy and inform tailored support strategies.
Educators can also advocate for school policies that support both children and their families, such as access to mental health services, nutritious school meals, and transportation assistance.
Collaboration with community organizations can also extend the school’s reach, connecting families with essential resources and services.
References
Bronfenbrenner, U., & Ceci, S. J. (1994). Nature-nurture reconceptualised: A bio-ecological model. Psychological Review, 10 (4), 568–586.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1995). Developmental ecology through space and time: A future perspective. In P. Moen, G. H. Elder, Jr., & K. Lüscher (Eds.), Examining lives in context: Perspectives on the ecology of human development (pp. 619–647). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/10176-018
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1999). Environments in developmental perspective: Theoretical and operational models. In S. L. Friedman & T. D. Wachs (Eds.), Measuring environment across the life span: Emerging methods and concepts (pp.3-28). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/10317-001
Guy-Evans, O. (2024, January 17). Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Systems Theory. Simply Psychology. https://www.simplypsychology.org/bronfenbrenner.html
McLeod, S. (2024, January 24). Vygotsky’s Theory Of Cognitive Development. Simply Psychology. https://www.simplypsychology.org/vygotsky.html
Navarro, J. L., & Tudge, J. R. (2023). Technologizing Bronfenbrenner: neo-ecological theory. Current Psychology, 42(22), 19338-19354. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-022-02738-3
O’Regan, C., Brady, B., & Connolly, C. (2023). Building back better – using an ecological lens to argue for strengthening mesosystemic connections for young people in a post-pandemic world. Child Care in Practice, 29(4), 358–370. https://doi.org/10.1080/13575279.2022.2084364
Rosa, E. M., & Tudge, J. (2013). Urie Bronfenbrenner’s theory of human development: Its evolution from ecology to bioecology. Journal of family theory & review, 5(4), 243-258. https://doi.org/10.1111/jftr.12022
Vélez-Agosto, N. M., Soto-Crespo, J. G., Vizcarrondo-Oppenheimer, M., Vega-Molina, S., & García Coll, C. (2017). Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological theory revision: Moving culture from the macro into the micro. Perspectives on psychological science, 12(5), 900-910. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691617704397
