THE ORIGINS OF ATTACHMENT THEORY: JOHN BOWLBY AND MARY AINSWORTH
作者: INGE BRETHERTON / 35910次阅读 时间: 2011年4月24日
来源: Developmental Psychology (1992), 28, 759-775.
www.psychspace.com心理学空间网

"sPOHI%rq#AM0REFINING ATTACHMENT THEORY AND RESEARCH:
:Tv RVTm0心理学空间%n(B2jtuz m5b.j
BOWLBY AND AINSWORTH 心理学空间 ^KD1j9a'f2A~
心理学空间P0HZWNA
Before the publication of “The Nature of the Child’s Tie to His Mother” in 1958, Mary 心理学空间e*j`8[-M j6h%f
Ainsworth received a preprint of the paper from John Bowlby. This event led Bowlby and
l2gQ3rdy1~{0Ainsworth to renew their close intellectual collaboration. Ainsworth’s subsequent analysis of data
'jxOVL1F2? Qi0from her Ganda project (Ainsworth 1963, 1967) influenced and was influenced by Bowlby’s 心理学空间%Hk6\5M8x~)| yiG
reformulation of attachment theory (published in 1969). In this sharing of ideas, Ainsworth’s 心理学空间 O8E@~h Y4hW2C
theoretical contribution to Bowlby’s presentation of the ontogeny of human attachment cannot be 心理学空间@D-d4JY&u%y
overestimated. 心理学空间8E6L$q UE*e'[.L qn
心理学空间&@A"z'l!P$Y!WCt
Findings From Ainsworth’s Ganda Project
:gc|6bu3M0
i6OQ.M-}!W0The Ganda data (Ainsworth, 1963, 1967) were a rich source for the study of individual
}^~1}K'UJ,@$S0differences in the quality of mother - infant interaction, the topic that Bowlby had earlier left aside 心理学空间(D2y&R;f;\
as too difficult to study. Of special note, in light of Ainsworth’s future work, was an evaluation of
R{9I)pf/] d4an0maternal sensitivity to infant signals, derived from interview data. Mothers who were excellent
8BW5h^;_+N"D0informants and who provided much spontaneous detail were rated as highly sensitive, in contrast
:S@?)ay1\W0to other mothers who seemed imperceptive of the nuances of infant behavior. Three infant
(Lq-N4}#P Z^*c0心理学空间5T2l5n q3J

!_e:m6qw.w7qB0attachment patterns were observed: Securely attached infants cried little and seemed content to
S\uB:OJ*B0explore in the presence of mother; insecurely attached infants cried frequently, even when held by 心理学空间!e F ~4L-N k/L
their mothers, and explored little; and not-yet attached infants manifested no differential behavior 心理学空间P5G*D X]YP3O'D
to the mother.
FjP#_ |n4x0心理学空间)]J!^ \9O+_
It turned out that secure attachment was significantly correlated with maternal sensitivity. 心理学空间H1]hZ0`'@?cfq3{
Babies of sensitive mothers tended to be securely attached, whereas babies of less sensitive
| \F;w2f8t0mothers were more likely to he classified as insecure. Mothers’ enjoyment of breast-feeding also
;wC \ o6Jc"e/|6k,[0correlated with infant security. These findings foreshadow some of Ainsworth’s later work,
UdLoS8l)G0Ji4]0although the measures are not yet as sophisticated as those developed for subsequent studies.
FctWS1e)i8Q0
FB:TF+ZL*x0Ainsworth presented her initial findings from the Ganda project at meetings of the Tavistock 心理学空间JO W1eE'z
Study Group organized by Bowlby during the 1960s (Ainsworth, 1963). Participants invited to
"c M!X(r%@&m.k%s!l*L0these influential gatherings included many now-eminent infant researchers of diverse theoretical
BN~@,Ws*M0backgrounds (in addition to Mary Ainsworth, there were Genevieve Appell, Miriam David, Jacob
K;i#[$Z.\nUi0Gewirtz, Hanus Papousek, Heinz Prechtl, Harriet Rheingold, Henry Ricciuti, Louis Sander, and 心理学空间wUW.sP*S ~5Z%P}n
Peter Wolff), as well as renowned animal researchers such as Harry Harlow, Robert Hinde, 心理学空间v E3^5a#YF H:O}
Charles Kaufmann, Jay Rosenblatt, and Thelma Rowell Their lively discussions and ensuing 心理学空间e o.vq6f*C!Q k/s5d
studies contributed much to the developing field of infant social development in general.
m8`O2o"ze:M*t Z0Importantly for Bowlby, they also enriched his ongoing elaboration of attachment theory. Bowlby 心理学空间7@j7Ja)m
had always believed that he had much to gain from bringing together researchers with different
^Fv(^z2U!o~2i+B0theoretical backgrounds (e.g., learning theory, psychoanalysis, and ethology), whether or not thy 心理学空间/{9X A\7Z2o
agreed with his theoretical position. Proceedings of these fruitful meetings were published in four 心理学空间 \LH IA?q ZbWto
volumes entitled Determinants of Infant Behaviour (1961, 1963, 1965, and 1969, edited by Brian 心理学空间'U#L,w!o)G w-i!f
Foss).
'Yy"MP`0aL0
/Y j#C_$@0The Baltimore Project
:J/Q5H[V,[B8J;{ A0心理学空间&~ ?:|\Z,Xw'M
In 1963, while still pondering the data from the Ganda study, Mary Ainsworth embarked on
b2C!g7M-aP0a second observational project whose thoroughness no researcher has since equaled. Again, she
3ft-f9X-Q({4]/h.O0opted for naturalistic observations, hut with interviews playing a somewhat lesser role. The 26 心理学空间3U2jx2F?J v
participating Baltimore families were recruited before their babies were horn, with 18 home visits
z'ax'j-O/c0beginning in the baby’s first month and ending at 54 weeks of age. Each visit lasted 4 hours to 心理学空间%T&Jp k#}
make sure that mothers would feel comfortable enough to follow their normal routine, resulting
(wNt'J N `GC0in approximately 72 hours of data collection per family. 心理学空间;s-K6J%CV?:g4b1K
心理学空间K y3a!Zc
Raw data took the form of narrative reports, jotted down in personal shorthand, marked in 心理学空间K WbMw k
5-minute intervals, and later dictated into a tape recorder for transcription. Typed narratives from
Af^~}0all visits for each quarter of the first year of life were grouped together for purposes of analysis. 心理学空间-n&j:k"b?:]

%s5iJ0OGvE7rq0A unique (at the time) aspect of Ainsworth’s methodology was the emphasis on meaningful 心理学空间s(Q$]#R Hy+GT^`
behavioral patterns in context, rather than on frequency counts of specific behaviors, This
(q)u(f9}6pf0approach had roots in her dissertation work, in which she classified patterns of familial and
Xd9D:~T O"y0extrafamilial dependent and independent security, in her expertise with the Rorschach test, and in 心理学空间#z#\EJL!y
her work at the Tavistock Institute with Bowlby and Robertson.
`[R}zo]9J0心理学空间 | j Fd$z$h.J#N
Close examination of the narratives revealed the emergence of characteristic mother-infant
1P)e2TjJ0interaction patterns during the first 3 months (see Ainsworth et al., 1978; see also Ainsworth, 心理学空间@(E:KsRZ]x7CwG
1982, 1983). Separate analyses were conducted on feeding situations (Ainsworth & Bell, 1969),
a ke:d;E;[ w0mother-infant face-to-face interaction (Blehar, Lieberman, & Ainsworth, 1977), crying (Bell &
&X8[Yk6[k0Ainsworth, 1972), infant greeting and following (Stayton & Ainsworth, 1973), the attachment-
3U NE;G u6x#}p8\$v0exploration balance (Ainsworth, Bell, & Stayton, 1971), obedience (Stayton, Hogan, &
$p?v4p2v&IK0Ainsworth, 1973), close bodily contact (Ainsworth, Bell, Blehar, & Main, 1971), approach
nu!A!F1v3bB0A0behavior (Tracy, Lamb, & Ainsworth, 1976), and affectionate contact (Tracy & Ainsworth,
x.O^8JQop[!MG,L01981).
.Dmd:n7{3U2B0心理学空间N8^8ZN-g
Striking individual differences were observed in how sensitively, appropriately, and
5z-dOPWW*@B0promptly mothers responded to their infants’ signals. For some mother-infant pairs, feeding was
O)M*M!iX p\HQ0an occasion for smooth cooperation. Other mothers had difficulties in adjusting their pacing and 心理学空间k^+|{p:qu_6T
behavior to the baby’s cues. In response, their babies tended to struggle, choke, and spit up,
7c.j/F&k [(If q a0hardly the sensuous oral experience Freud had had in mind. Similar distinctive patterns were
{3O1?'\u5q({0observed in face-to-face interactions between mother and infant during the period from 6 to 15
-ud%g}n'L \0weeks (Blehar et al,, 1977). When mothers meshed their own playful behavior with that of their
Q'Ne6Fcl[2o0babies, infants responded with joyful bouncing, smiling, and vocalizing. However, when mothers
5^L l r3i Xo0initiated face-to-face interactions silently and with an unsmiling expression, ensuing interactions
o#z3q/L3m ]-D0were muted and brief. Findings on close bodily contact resembled those on feeding and
2W K*AvArskmt0face-to-face Interaction, as did those on crying. There were enormous variations in how many
)}Sv1rC&Y xM0crying episodes a mother ignored and how long she let the baby cry. In countering those who 心理学空间j0[ ?C J4}
argued that maternal responsiveness might lead to “spoiling,” Bell and Ainsworth (1972) 心理学空间Y-G{*D9\-wV*T
concluded that “an infant whose mother’s responsiveness helps him to achieve his ends develops
E*odL$a Mzb1N(Z0confidence in his own ability to control what happens to him” (p. 1188). 心理学空间E+ur e_6?
心理学空间Wy4~o%uGxt
Maternal sensitivity in the first quarter was associated with more harmonious mother-infant
.[2B,Gmav*e0relationships In the fourth quarter. Babies whose mothers had been highly responsive to crying
I-vQ^(oS_2Y M U0during the early months now tended to cry less, relying for communication on facial expressions,
O"D-SG J:J0gestures, and vocalizations (Bell & Ainsworth, 1972). Similarly, infants whose mothers had 心理学空间8g0iW)b5i*HI7z0f6o)W9z
provided much tender holding during the first quarter sought contact less often during the fourth
S$d^;XQX'U0quarter, hut when contact occurred, it was rated as more satisfying and affectionate (Ainsworth, 心理学空间~;EE.sZ4[j*CI
Bell, Blehar, et al,, 1971), Ainsworth (Ainsworth et al., 1978) explains these findings by recourse
-GU6_9V:a+X8jJ0to infants’ expectations, based on prior satisfying or rejecting experiences with mother.
*B{ `| _U3U%R \0心理学空间yUx(T%w
All first-quarter interactive patterns were also related to infant behavior in a laboratory procedure
E!p'E2};y-n;zl0known as the Strange Situation (Ainsworth & Wittig, 1969). This initially very controversial
5V9g/u._J5IYf ^0laboratory procedure for 1 -year-olds was originally designed to examine the balance of attachment
\8{C~jj+NWX0and exploratory behaviors under conditions of low and high stress, a topic in which
E3f~*~s4I2`0Harlow (196!) had aroused Ainsworth’s interest during meetings of the Tavistock group, but
4X$DF?1lbl/n0U7F0which also reminded her of an earlier study by Arsenian (1943) on young children in an insecure
.o1lfV^ri%v:B q6[0situation and of her dissertation work on security theory.
L*\X4w^{s0心理学空间0`E2^PY-M
The Strange Situation is a 20-minute miniature drama with eight episodes. Mother and 心理学空间)pD?#B)u
infant are introduced to a laboratory playroom, where they are later joined by an unfamiliar 心理学空间'bIw'H}&B)xp
woman. While the stranger plays with the baby, the mother leaves briefly and then returns. A
^*s&rS0F4e0second separation ensues during which the baby is completely alone. Finally, the stranger and then 心理学空间h|wBh.J%HG1O
the mother return. 心理学空间d2] nsW4s

.@"f6\5C~ U5I"C-g0As expected, Ainsworth found that infants explored the playroom and toys more vigorously
l2W0z)T(P6QsF0in the presence of their mothers than after a stranger entered or while the mother was absent 心理学空间f8i2u Dhp3C%uS
(Ainsworth & Bell, 1970). Although these results were theoretically interesting, Ainsworth
;n5vk:a6z4`!UZ5c0became much more intrigued with unexpected patterns of infant reunion behaviors, which 心理学空间,J2Qx%JZb s0G
reminded her of responses Robertson had documented in children exposed to prolonged
f`o;OJJ0separations, and about which Bowlby (1959) had theorized in his paper on separation.
6ae^'a1C6~Q0心理学空间D4JZ,U'K4\-}
A few of the I -year-olds from the Baltimore study were surprisingly angry when the mother
;~7SOc x0returned after a 3-minute (or shorter) separation. They cried and wanted contact but would not 心理学空间'`)pu)|9F*N)k
simply cuddle or “sink in” when picked up by the returning mother. Instead, they showed their 心理学空间.JJ)S(T#P
ambivalence by kicking or swiping at her. Another group of children seemed to snub or avoid the 心理学空间 N p&K9z,aXo%f"f|
mother on reunion, even though they had often searched for her while she was gone. Analyses of
? M RFnf0home data revealed that those infants who had been ambivalent toward or avoidant of the mother 心理学空间 ox"?/Xm
on reunion in the Strange Situation had a less harmonious relationship with her at home than
z@Rv(` Sk0^0those (a majority) who sought proximity, interaction, or contact on reunion (Ainsworth, Bell, &
A6WFi9fd j0Stayton, 1974). Thus originated the well-known Strange Situation classification system 心理学空间)s1q!z-_x A
(Ainsworth et al., 1978), which, to Ainsworth’s chagrin, has stolen the limelight from her
5G$~5?] k0observational findings of naturalistic mother-infant interaction patterns at home. 心理学空间6@ r|*{&p&]J"S

E \/tt#Dg0The First Volume in the Attachment Trilogy: Attachment and Ethology 心理学空间F\p CI&MV
心理学空间I ^H3o%Fj tBWb
While Ainsworth wrote up the findings from her Ganda study for Infancy in Uganda (1967) and 心理学空间$m%`F#F2Q+V_q6b
was engaged in collecting data for the Baltimore project, Bowlby worked on the first volume of 心理学空间Ua2uy;u.W(nZ
the attachment trilogy, Attachment (1969). When he began this enterprise in 1962, the plan had
(C!o(l t ]8m0been for a single hook. However, as he explains in the preface: “As my study of theory progressed 心理学空间0R1C_)V&YM/vg];@jO
it was gradually borne in upon me that the field I had set out to plough so light-heartedly 心理学空间z:Z_ rt l[t
was no less than the one Freud had started tilling sixty years earlier.” In short, Bowlby realized
*r3x8~r!?0that he had to develop a new theory of motivation and behavior control, built on up-to-date science 心理学空间wi(Ls'K_([
rather than the outdated psychic energy model espoused by Freud.
`0T%rc%u9v'y:RD q0心理学空间OZmU _ S#qA \'`
In the first half of Attachment, Bowlby lays the groundwork for such a theory, taking pains 心理学空间.M3@.GF,^e_
to document each important statement with available research findings. He begins by noting that
Qo }:fXU0organisms at different levels of the phylogenetic scale regulate instinctive behavior in distinct
TU-mcw(v0ways, ranging from primitive reflex-like “fixed action patterns” to complex plan hierarchies with 心理学空间T"Z4} TD{"CI+l
subgoals. In the most complex organisms, instinctive behaviors may be “goal-corrected” with 心理学空间4\?c#_;F#{.c~c&U
continual on-course adjustments (such as a bird of prey adjusting its flight to the movements of 心理学空间#f Xr"msUT/l$X;K
the prey). The concept of cybernetically controlled behavioral systems organized as plan 心理学空间S*?q9{+Rrl

b'w9EC2K+wS)zk0心理学空间b*G[;PY/G%u
hierarchies (Miller, Galanter, & Pribram, 1960) thus came to replace Freud’s concept of drive and 心理学空间}:H r N;YXp
instinct. Behaviors regulated by such systems need not be rigidly innate, hut-depending on the
s#Sr)fa0kw1Dw"e0organism- can adapt in greater or lesser degrees to changes in environmental circumstances,
k#g8\$o7u(^NE4? bb0provided that these do not deviate too much from the organism’s environment of evolutionary
TCB+XW0adaptedness. Such flexible organisms pay a price, however, because adaptable behavioral systems 心理学空间'bt)_,k8PUwp&P
can more easily be subverted from their optimal path of development. For humans, Bowlby
s{ wxQW9K Z0speculates, the environment of evolutionary adaptedness probably resembles that of present-day 心理学空间0tYS e'f?
hunter-gatherer societies.
d)_ W(z4x-OV u6GG0
dc2G\ Kg0The ultimate functions of behavioral systems controlling attachment, parenting, mating, 心理学空间S~ VU4bdL
feeding, and exploration are survival and procreation. In some cases, the predictable outcome of
DEc'U$]a2x0system activation is a time-limited behavior (such as food intake); in others it is the time-extended
0X0iaI/N8{)h$eN0maintenance of an organism in a particular relation to its environment (e.g., within its own
Ur \/UA;_[K0territory or in proximity to particular companions). 心理学空间*Ph|-Eg*{

q%Kp/} SL!V4g0Complex behavioral systems of the kind proposed by Bowlby can work with foresight in organisms
a~_y_y.Y0that have evolved an ability to construct internal working models of the environment and of
$^R8R!pyY[0their own actions in it (a concept taken over from (Craik, 1943, through the writings of the biologist 心理学空间aaL4X tM.Rg$PW
J. Young, 1964). The more adequate an organism’s internal working model, the more accurately 心理学空间%Y$kg:mu&}9r JKt
the organism can predict the future, However, adds Bowlby, if working models of the 心理学空间;|_4z)H9GN3D
environment and self are out of date or are only half revised after drastic environmental change,
q/t*xw R*}0pathological functioning may ensue. He speculates that useful model revision, extension, and 心理学空间_%e a[,l
consistency checking may require conscious processing of model content. In humans, communicative
:Z.f~F-]q6a c#e$vk0processes-initially limited to emotional or gestural signaling and later including language 心理学空间Rh1p2]x:Ce6KZ
心理学空间 b$Yfz$M
-also permit the inter-subjective sharing of model content. On an intrapsychic level, the same 心理学空间 ~"S6T a:_r
processes are useful for self-regulation and behavioral priority setting. 心理学空间S}l \jF"} n \a3y F
In mammals and birds, behavioral systems tend to become organized during specific 心理学空间g%f"{(I;J2i | Ey
sensitive developmental periods. As initial reflex-like behavior chains come under more complex,
V aSb\0cybernetically controlled organization, the range of stimuli that can activate them also becomes
iKW?A6u ?,Q0more restricted, This is the case in imprinting, broadly defined as the restriction of specific 心理学空间#|-c np k4~J
instinctive behaviors to particular individuals or groups of individuals during sensitive phases of
#xS/g(DpVk0
?*q;Cm_!X,~0
/P,Ar!o L q2L_0development, as in filial, parental, and sexual imprinting.
f*d[OH+FGv:Z-d0
XR#x8Bk;g`V@6j(K0Having laid out this general theory of motivation and behavior regulation in the first half of
c(sHs$Xo0the volume, Bowlby goes on, in the second half, to apply these ideas to the specific domain of 心理学空间Z}TFM&sKR4pC
infant-mother attachment. He defines attachment behavior as behavior that has proximity to an 心理学空间W5wtKa8e;[0K
attachment figure as a predictable outcome and whose evolutionary function is protection of the 心理学空间XUAxR7U4p~
infant from danger, insisting that attachment has its own motivation and is in no way derived from 心理学空间#q-f7E*KBK*g8lb%A
systems subserving mating and feeding.
|a9?0Yq~"^s8W.n`0心理学空间 _FVf I2LM+R(a
Although human infants initially direct proximity-promoting signals fairly indiscriminately to
Gm9DtaQ0all caregivers, these behaviors become increasingly focused on those primary figures who are 心理学空间!V ?U[4R%Q9{
responsive to the infant’s crying and who engage the infant in social interaction (Schaffer & 心理学空间`^7|;DR)mH&Y
Emerson, 1964). Once attached, locomotor infants are able to use the attachment figure as a 心理学空间O~#j0~|)f RP-bS
secure base for exploration of the environment and as a safe haven to which to return for 心理学空间e a WQZ2]w
reassurance (Ainsworth, 1967; Schaffer & Emerson, 1964). How effectively the attachment 心理学空间!Vj4hAYn
figure can serve in these roles depends on the quality of social interaction-especially the 心理学空间M5~1xp"Z)g
attachment figure’s sensitivity to the infant’s signals-although child factors also play a role.
/c,r ].H;wN0Building on Ainsworth’s Ganda study (1967) and preliminary findings from her Baltimore 心理学空间S3R(]`DM+~R
project, Bowlby (1969) comments that:
|a[W1s"Ne0心理学空间7K;CNY~i)fX`DB+g@
when interaction between a couple runs smoothly, each party manifests intense pleasure in 心理学空间v!Es'B!GK
the other’s company and especially in the other’s expression of affection. Conversely, 心理学空间v:{6u0G$I{dm
whenever interaction results in persistent conflict each party is likely on occasion to exhibit 心理学空间/fYO PE|wl#h
intense anxiety or unhappiness, especially when the other is rejecting. Proximity and 心理学空间D%l)Bv*L]
affectionate interchange are appraised and felt as pleasurable by both, whereas distance and
@PrZWx sP v0expressions of rejection are appraised as disagreeable or painful by both. (p. 242) 心理学空间+`B,l k4z

9lRQJ$|j` A0During the preschool years, the attachment behavioral system, always complementary to 心理学空间dg1hv*aa
the parental caregiving system, undergoes further reorganization as the child attains growing insight 心理学空间,Y/JxR2uu
into the attachment figure’s motives and plans. Bowlby refers to this stage as goal-
I%B,o#k1Dx1XH0corrected partnership. However, in emphasizing infant initiative and sensitive maternal responding, 心理学空间5FCd8NH%^
Bowlby’s (1951) earlier theorizing on the mother as the child’s ego and superego was regrettably 心理学空间|F1^$uxx'R x
lost. 心理学空间f3h;q.E+|)S

Z#C7}P f[n4S?;~0Consolidation 心理学空间S6_'Isnh _%z

$]D@l FoiQ0心理学空间 I];~1Of#a
The publication of the first volume of the attachment trilogy in 1969 coincided with the 心理学空间i\M)M/T7B \*T{
appearance in print of initial findings from Ainsworth’s Baltimore project (reviewed earlier). 心理学空间PJ?n%X0_F{
However, many investigators strongly contested Ainsworth’s claims regarding the meaning of
p T"L|1rS:mE0Strange Situation behavior, often because they failed to note that Strange Situation classifications 心理学空间#^p@xt Q
had been validated against extensive home observations. Some interpreted avoidant infants’
:RB4kk+_'g-j5rP|0behavior as independence. The controversy lessened somewhat after the publication of Patterns 心理学空间l,|O?/?
of Attachment (Ainsworth et al., 1978), which drew together the results from the Baltimore
uY$s U%sl0project and presented findings from other laboratories on the sequelae of attachment classifications
$WKL|)fd8S%|D-OR6Q0in toddlerhood and early childhood (e.g., Main, 1973; Matas, Arend, & Sroufe, 1978).
%| k:`(`#N0心理学空间B$b H-N tx5zKj2q1J2Y
During this period, many of Ainsworth’s graduate students began to publish their own work. 心理学空间Dc(F\4R^Zb7e"r
Silvia Bell (1970) examined the relationship between object permanence and attachment. Mary
5^5g(_fq:dx4u0Main (1973) studied secure and insecure toddlers’ capacity to become invested in play activities 心理学空间)H1KW/a`(P6mD
and problem solving. Mary Blehar (1974) undertook the first study of attachment and nonmaternal 心理学空间 @fd7r!f%tqa
care, and Alicia Lieberman (1977) investigated attachment and peer relationships in 心理学空间;[u l:WQM-p
preschoolers. Mary Ainsworth’s influence is also evident in the fact that many Johns Hopkins
#^utL!j8I0undergraduate students who had helped with the analysis of data from the Baltimore project later
W&hEu9R*o9[0q0produced innovative dissertations on attachment-related topics at their respective graduate
6F C0F4G-I#fS+k&zu0institutions. Among these students were Robert Marvin (1972, 1977), who wrote on the 心理学空间 S*e]\`
goal-corrected partnership; Milton Kotelchuck (1972), who studied father attachment; Mark 心理学空间y9f x wf3OR |eC
Cummings (1980), who investigated attachment and day care; Mark Greenberg (Greenberg & 心理学空间i:m*y6YmazY{
Marvin, 1979), who examined attachment in deaf children; and Everett Waters (1978), who
%K-| Fc?P0Z4r8x#t0documented the longitudinal stability of attachment patterns from 12 to 18 months. 心理学空间L0LRc JrHz[X

^2Q$IuFrK~ wT w c0Everett Waters’ entry into graduate study at the University of Minnesota in 1973 had a 心理学空间.y#Qk`9Q8t.Bx
profound effect on Alan Sroufe, who had read Mary Ainsworth’s (1968) theoretical article about 心理学空间{'c.x4i]9wl
object relations and dependency but had not heard of the Strange Situation or the Baltimore project
,@ e"ph9[HEa$X_0(Sroufe, personal communication, 1988). Sroufe’s contact with Waters led to significant empirical
v:j I.\ O1s0and theoretical collaborations. In 1977, Sroufe and Waters wrote an influential paper that 心理学空间 R f,k4s'c7@,[
made attachment as an organizational construct accessible to a large audience. At the same time, 心理学空间B!^$J8i^!])V)yN@
Sroufe and Egeland, together with many of their students, undertook a large-scale longitudinal
l y%X u,]"S5[z:V0
;L`@neq0心理学空间lE$k?#|l%G"it
study of attachment with an at-risk population (disadvantaged mothers), The Minnesota study,
8\)[ XG6E0r0summarized in Sroufe (1983) but still ongoing, stands as the second major longitudinal study of
jE%^ {g2E0the relationship between quality of caregiving and security of attachment. 心理学空间;y!uO@ I%mt

cj&f7T6}C)}u0Elsewhere across the United States, much time was spent testing the predictive validity of 心理学空间(f$|n(|,B'nl C
Strange Situation reunion classifications. Many researchers sought to train with Mary Ainsworth 心理学空间 ?;Xg? w
or her former students to learn the procedure and classification system. Hundreds of studies using 心理学空间*T ?u Z7y1g7Ne/et&x
the Strange Situation appeared in print. It often seemed as if attachment and the Strange Situation
[e8R#D)~ MP:Q{0had become synonymous. 心理学空间E9cbL7|*L1mB*O
心理学空间Le ^F+uQs u

www.psychspace.com心理学空间网

1234567
«玛丽·爱因斯沃斯的陌生情境测验 安思沃斯 Ainsworth
《安思沃斯 Ainsworth》
没有了»
查看全部回复