A Reprise of Two Themes

The purpose of this paper is to respond to D. Elkind’s (1985, Developmental Review, 5, 218-226) reply to D. Lapsley and M. Murphy’s (1985, Developmental Review, 5,201-217) critique of the adolescent egocentrism theory. After a reprise of the issues in contention, we address the problem of theoretical consistency and self-other differentiation in Dr. Elkind’s (1967, Chi/d Development, 38, 102.5-1034) theory. The role of formal operations in the Lapsley and Murphy (1985) account of the imaginary audience and personal fable is revised, and the empirical support for Elkind’s theory is reviewed. We conclude that there are good conceptual and empirical grounds for doubting the major assumptions of the adolescent egocentrism theory, and that the Lapsley and Murphy (1985) framework has promise in suggesting theoretical integration with other approaches to the self. Q 1985 Academic PRSS, II-C.