THE ORIGINS OF ATTACHMENT THEORY: JOHN BOWLBY AND MARY AINSWORTH
作者: INGE BRETHERTON / 35912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

kXp oM P5{0REFINING ATTACHMENT THEORY AND RESEARCH: 心理学空间/C5{t0@`SB

O"ZDk1Y0BOWLBY AND AINSWORTH 心理学空间%M5kD X!w(^2Q

:Yx"R*g-hr0Before the publication of “The Nature of the Child’s Tie to His Mother” in 1958, Mary
%I&qH-g;s bH0Ainsworth received a preprint of the paper from John Bowlby. This event led Bowlby and 心理学空间6hM;\{E o
Ainsworth to renew their close intellectual collaboration. Ainsworth’s subsequent analysis of data
o;z#t}/yvB^9Bmr"g0from her Ganda project (Ainsworth 1963, 1967) influenced and was influenced by Bowlby’s 心理学空间+OOA.fX y3uWW)s
reformulation of attachment theory (published in 1969). In this sharing of ideas, Ainsworth’s
)S-y@ e _$X0theoretical contribution to Bowlby’s presentation of the ontogeny of human attachment cannot be 心理学空间2K4F rI9Zg(g
overestimated.
IHhtO%S9f Y!W:O0心理学空间o#{cwL
Findings From Ainsworth’s Ganda Project 心理学空间}6kd8@w"C FR(` s

,X8KD%E8x5Y-Jk+fz!F0The Ganda data (Ainsworth, 1963, 1967) were a rich source for the study of individual
(T!wG!T.pM*Q%n0differences in the quality of mother - infant interaction, the topic that Bowlby had earlier left aside 心理学空间 SA%ohk+r
as too difficult to study. Of special note, in light of Ainsworth’s future work, was an evaluation of 心理学空间?R^5}y?+D*J-?
maternal sensitivity to infant signals, derived from interview data. Mothers who were excellent
8Pw2?I8h$~0informants and who provided much spontaneous detail were rated as highly sensitive, in contrast 心理学空间T_&_0O:hhai:x
to other mothers who seemed imperceptive of the nuances of infant behavior. Three infant 心理学空间 s1U7O_9qp0\9z

FJ_F7_w%S s0t0
b0qT6EN6gdd0attachment patterns were observed: Securely attached infants cried little and seemed content to 心理学空间u%_jbv f8V
explore in the presence of mother; insecurely attached infants cried frequently, even when held by
#p.?4V[Z8X0their mothers, and explored little; and not-yet attached infants manifested no differential behavior 心理学空间G;}ypi}I
to the mother.
~x~3AVDEW0心理学空间o6HxeC(y
It turned out that secure attachment was significantly correlated with maternal sensitivity.
Y~1jsN0Babies of sensitive mothers tended to be securely attached, whereas babies of less sensitive
%~P*D\*Ua0mothers were more likely to he classified as insecure. Mothers’ enjoyment of breast-feeding also 心理学空间t&|.BX!r1re
correlated with infant security. These findings foreshadow some of Ainsworth’s later work,
/S)y.A?*C0although the measures are not yet as sophisticated as those developed for subsequent studies.
~ lv R,[c"b0心理学空间h0]t'X%_S Bp \2\
Ainsworth presented her initial findings from the Ganda project at meetings of the Tavistock 心理学空间v?.b;w{k
Study Group organized by Bowlby during the 1960s (Ainsworth, 1963). Participants invited to 心理学空间t)|H3TI
these influential gatherings included many now-eminent infant researchers of diverse theoretical
j'G s O)d#r0backgrounds (in addition to Mary Ainsworth, there were Genevieve Appell, Miriam David, Jacob
[,EL+Y%PI-V)ax0Gewirtz, Hanus Papousek, Heinz Prechtl, Harriet Rheingold, Henry Ricciuti, Louis Sander, and
#W4m\w ^S]EE0f0Peter Wolff), as well as renowned animal researchers such as Harry Harlow, Robert Hinde,
{%x.Pp2h1`or0Charles Kaufmann, Jay Rosenblatt, and Thelma Rowell Their lively discussions and ensuing
QZQ)^'E q Zx B4GW/v$t0studies contributed much to the developing field of infant social development in general. 心理学空间 {'hp@epuq
Importantly for Bowlby, they also enriched his ongoing elaboration of attachment theory. Bowlby 心理学空间 ]D9~0E%t3?'VmM
had always believed that he had much to gain from bringing together researchers with different
8V2EF]9Eq4SA0theoretical backgrounds (e.g., learning theory, psychoanalysis, and ethology), whether or not thy
)a,G-E t B2A0agreed with his theoretical position. Proceedings of these fruitful meetings were published in four
6y,m9{0@gyNn0volumes entitled Determinants of Infant Behaviour (1961, 1963, 1965, and 1969, edited by Brian
^1Y#ah%U_T0Foss). 心理学空间Iv.s{&Y%I+q;OnV4i
心理学空间{h t'L;e~F1B*Z#ou&H
The Baltimore Project
t1G Tdwj/H,k0
)C?]Fu0In 1963, while still pondering the data from the Ganda study, Mary Ainsworth embarked on
}c7R&m? vG0a second observational project whose thoroughness no researcher has since equaled. Again, she
`(@+VTJ0opted for naturalistic observations, hut with interviews playing a somewhat lesser role. The 26
Pb1lZ.a6oz E0participating Baltimore families were recruited before their babies were horn, with 18 home visits
B,ec-FW0beginning in the baby’s first month and ending at 54 weeks of age. Each visit lasted 4 hours to
+oe!Pbtj/?,m0make sure that mothers would feel comfortable enough to follow their normal routine, resulting 心理学空间*{3s7C:Pw9?"P
in approximately 72 hours of data collection per family.
)~*hs[J+z5I0心理学空间PS{/sK3m9z
Raw data took the form of narrative reports, jotted down in personal shorthand, marked in 心理学空间[C*ZN(K9?8|
5-minute intervals, and later dictated into a tape recorder for transcription. Typed narratives from
d(n^3K+Qe0all visits for each quarter of the first year of life were grouped together for purposes of analysis.
J;uQIK0心理学空间FSf ~4V+[$x2r9mD
A unique (at the time) aspect of Ainsworth’s methodology was the emphasis on meaningful 心理学空间i&ko3k}-k0u&vy
behavioral patterns in context, rather than on frequency counts of specific behaviors, This 心理学空间cac jpo6p:G}
approach had roots in her dissertation work, in which she classified patterns of familial and 心理学空间BdiujQ i_
extrafamilial dependent and independent security, in her expertise with the Rorschach test, and in 心理学空间P Gr7rP4O6C&be U
her work at the Tavistock Institute with Bowlby and Robertson. 心理学空间Z9Xc#Fm
心理学空间2@8L J9sF?-?#je
Close examination of the narratives revealed the emergence of characteristic mother-infant 心理学空间D6f#d+I$o\
interaction patterns during the first 3 months (see Ainsworth et al., 1978; see also Ainsworth, 心理学空间3~?9St9YyM3d
1982, 1983). Separate analyses were conducted on feeding situations (Ainsworth & Bell, 1969), 心理学空间{|v2]:GK qx`J!`-M
mother-infant face-to-face interaction (Blehar, Lieberman, & Ainsworth, 1977), crying (Bell & 心理学空间a{*|0I4K:D;t
Ainsworth, 1972), infant greeting and following (Stayton & Ainsworth, 1973), the attachment-心理学空间/] gl.? p%]6x ?;q&q
exploration balance (Ainsworth, Bell, & Stayton, 1971), obedience (Stayton, Hogan, & 心理学空间"E[0M%|;w&a
Ainsworth, 1973), close bodily contact (Ainsworth, Bell, Blehar, & Main, 1971), approach 心理学空间C%jPG G"O4V:l|
behavior (Tracy, Lamb, & Ainsworth, 1976), and affectionate contact (Tracy & Ainsworth,
,{9Ij/wS}4J01981).
f/M:h~,H"v0心理学空间#Zj [z ?'SgI\
Striking individual differences were observed in how sensitively, appropriately, and 心理学空间6y0X'f`/q ^6B5D/?U
promptly mothers responded to their infants’ signals. For some mother-infant pairs, feeding was 心理学空间8s` Pw+J/v
an occasion for smooth cooperation. Other mothers had difficulties in adjusting their pacing and
9k e8K#].D#[Ppj1na @0behavior to the baby’s cues. In response, their babies tended to struggle, choke, and spit up, 心理学空间 G:t%t6_"a0_A
hardly the sensuous oral experience Freud had had in mind. Similar distinctive patterns were
7CA$wTB}-H0observed in face-to-face interactions between mother and infant during the period from 6 to 15 心理学空间(z'R[+x8\$Y
weeks (Blehar et al,, 1977). When mothers meshed their own playful behavior with that of their 心理学空间e.g@2oMC-k
babies, infants responded with joyful bouncing, smiling, and vocalizing. However, when mothers 心理学空间%k*h-x'Vd2?
initiated face-to-face interactions silently and with an unsmiling expression, ensuing interactions 心理学空间EG zKmTMN"P
were muted and brief. Findings on close bodily contact resembled those on feeding and 心理学空间9EZ%D"GV'a
face-to-face Interaction, as did those on crying. There were enormous variations in how many
/G*T&M ^ nE0crying episodes a mother ignored and how long she let the baby cry. In countering those who
;Y:aZ ZA ?b_0argued that maternal responsiveness might lead to “spoiling,” Bell and Ainsworth (1972) 心理学空间4Q5ZKv6G4` z fm
concluded that “an infant whose mother’s responsiveness helps him to achieve his ends develops 心理学空间uO6yQ@$}VtN#r
confidence in his own ability to control what happens to him” (p. 1188).
^1u7Y4sM8_1h4{0
*eu[gFiu,b"\0Maternal sensitivity in the first quarter was associated with more harmonious mother-infant 心理学空间 ?'xI J7yq0G;I,_MM
relationships In the fourth quarter. Babies whose mothers had been highly responsive to crying
^_bHft*l0during the early months now tended to cry less, relying for communication on facial expressions, 心理学空间0lgA5D?e~8g]
gestures, and vocalizations (Bell & Ainsworth, 1972). Similarly, infants whose mothers had 心理学空间2dO1D(J9Tm*R*M
provided much tender holding during the first quarter sought contact less often during the fourth 心理学空间Bci UW5YzIw
quarter, hut when contact occurred, it was rated as more satisfying and affectionate (Ainsworth,
hJ:V1V+ld*~0Bell, Blehar, et al,, 1971), Ainsworth (Ainsworth et al., 1978) explains these findings by recourse 心理学空间!gx"IM#YR
to infants’ expectations, based on prior satisfying or rejecting experiences with mother. 心理学空间 \ W1P!j2t X zLI

?in ]+l }0All first-quarter interactive patterns were also related to infant behavior in a laboratory procedure
H8zuz!G-kt(['t P6F9u0known as the Strange Situation (Ainsworth & Wittig, 1969). This initially very controversial
{)Ys'tk7Hs0laboratory procedure for 1 -year-olds was originally designed to examine the balance of attachment
n+_pT.`Vru0and exploratory behaviors under conditions of low and high stress, a topic in which
Pc&Mn`]8T;t|0Harlow (196!) had aroused Ainsworth’s interest during meetings of the Tavistock group, but 心理学空间.LlRGk
which also reminded her of an earlier study by Arsenian (1943) on young children in an insecure 心理学空间AW+q4^:d A[C]
situation and of her dissertation work on security theory.
)H @ sVt!@8J.Ub0
uo#_7b Y0The Strange Situation is a 20-minute miniature drama with eight episodes. Mother and
?&Z/@1FgY0infant are introduced to a laboratory playroom, where they are later joined by an unfamiliar 心理学空间f*B8y:S4~%J q
woman. While the stranger plays with the baby, the mother leaves briefly and then returns. A 心理学空间j1Ss Q1VL
second separation ensues during which the baby is completely alone. Finally, the stranger and then
F{+O gOAPa0the mother return.
rfK*u.mpi/F(\m`0
[-~7L)R)lc3P-uy0As expected, Ainsworth found that infants explored the playroom and toys more vigorously
[ ai;P MQ0in the presence of their mothers than after a stranger entered or while the mother was absent 心理学空间J I?*j9r,y [0Y
(Ainsworth & Bell, 1970). Although these results were theoretically interesting, Ainsworth
|*c!|y~U0became much more intrigued with unexpected patterns of infant reunion behaviors, which 心理学空间R4zi'Db Z
reminded her of responses Robertson had documented in children exposed to prolonged
4|&A U&S3_*Km0separations, and about which Bowlby (1959) had theorized in his paper on separation.
^+e |&}c0~ c'G0
F:T\:q7I0A few of the I -year-olds from the Baltimore study were surprisingly angry when the mother
|~6Pb&^CY0returned after a 3-minute (or shorter) separation. They cried and wanted contact but would not
K7c7uh6r%d+pp0simply cuddle or “sink in” when picked up by the returning mother. Instead, they showed their 心理学空间;R/j gF0Ec%z,W H4X
ambivalence by kicking or swiping at her. Another group of children seemed to snub or avoid the
O-v?]'FRq ]7e5ly0mother on reunion, even though they had often searched for her while she was gone. Analyses of 心理学空间 dY7Mnc G
home data revealed that those infants who had been ambivalent toward or avoidant of the mother 心理学空间.[ A ^1m(Z"i
on reunion in the Strange Situation had a less harmonious relationship with her at home than 心理学空间'xlW2tX7AN
those (a majority) who sought proximity, interaction, or contact on reunion (Ainsworth, Bell, & 心理学空间*c9C!K!B` P A$F+{n
Stayton, 1974). Thus originated the well-known Strange Situation classification system 心理学空间0e'tG(?;H8ui W
(Ainsworth et al., 1978), which, to Ainsworth’s chagrin, has stolen the limelight from her
P9X;yK6fP!Xk(A0observational findings of naturalistic mother-infant interaction patterns at home.
g$qmV @J[KC0
5w*A.u:X&w0The First Volume in the Attachment Trilogy: Attachment and Ethology
Vf:}#c*_u([0
q"kP,rL4kx0While Ainsworth wrote up the findings from her Ganda study for Infancy in Uganda (1967) and
(|aKNv`!|,t)J0was engaged in collecting data for the Baltimore project, Bowlby worked on the first volume of
7f0OK p8?*Z,q"J0the attachment trilogy, Attachment (1969). When he began this enterprise in 1962, the plan had 心理学空间tyR\8O6c,Y7G6V-e
been for a single hook. However, as he explains in the preface: “As my study of theory progressed 心理学空间,F%Mi5Y2}P:\
it was gradually borne in upon me that the field I had set out to plough so light-heartedly
Q5i0E4Mk8n0was no less than the one Freud had started tilling sixty years earlier.” In short, Bowlby realized 心理学空间u9C+qyc5]0EO
that he had to develop a new theory of motivation and behavior control, built on up-to-date science
/^\-X:a5C+`W&w0rather than the outdated psychic energy model espoused by Freud. 心理学空间2r k3G{c:q

5f+U4pe c;O HHd#K0In the first half of Attachment, Bowlby lays the groundwork for such a theory, taking pains
J:eiNq5~|U0to document each important statement with available research findings. He begins by noting that
ga R!nx0organisms at different levels of the phylogenetic scale regulate instinctive behavior in distinct
l#n [4E*E0ways, ranging from primitive reflex-like “fixed action patterns” to complex plan hierarchies with
~'q#V&L Gn)h'nW0subgoals. In the most complex organisms, instinctive behaviors may be “goal-corrected” with
.`Q EeR0continual on-course adjustments (such as a bird of prey adjusting its flight to the movements of 心理学空间rE QlH G Kz!VlK
the prey). The concept of cybernetically controlled behavioral systems organized as plan 心理学空间 _#gr{8e!HF*JFc
心理学空间6aw"sK n+U'X
心理学空间cR:V7EV] v*M
hierarchies (Miller, Galanter, & Pribram, 1960) thus came to replace Freud’s concept of drive and
%_L$c;Yv'M0instinct. Behaviors regulated by such systems need not be rigidly innate, hut-depending on the
,n W*T1q~Fun,T-P0organism- can adapt in greater or lesser degrees to changes in environmental circumstances, 心理学空间,[#~(Z7adk q
provided that these do not deviate too much from the organism’s environment of evolutionary
(@aY W zKV*M!g{n/U0adaptedness. Such flexible organisms pay a price, however, because adaptable behavioral systems
-XtQ0Y\#@:r0can more easily be subverted from their optimal path of development. For humans, Bowlby
:Q!p:f4@m(p8Eb _0speculates, the environment of evolutionary adaptedness probably resembles that of present-day 心理学空间3{7}n{,~:r
hunter-gatherer societies.
,y-VCKM0心理学空间"ku0^8Ck s
The ultimate functions of behavioral systems controlling attachment, parenting, mating,
h"EW#\L1E*?\0feeding, and exploration are survival and procreation. In some cases, the predictable outcome of
f.M!q5u^ M0system activation is a time-limited behavior (such as food intake); in others it is the time-extended 心理学空间kn:Pv,nuG
maintenance of an organism in a particular relation to its environment (e.g., within its own 心理学空间Zok SwZ/S0K"Jv
territory or in proximity to particular companions). 心理学空间 ?3Q,yH0tU!Q.~0e

6K2_!rW3e2AL IaS/q \0Complex behavioral systems of the kind proposed by Bowlby can work with foresight in organisms 心理学空间e%\ gB(P2b*m N
that have evolved an ability to construct internal working models of the environment and of
-Xlx3y.~o Skl0their own actions in it (a concept taken over from (Craik, 1943, through the writings of the biologist 心理学空间&?TL%^0Nx
J. Young, 1964). The more adequate an organism’s internal working model, the more accurately
\%la6W6m M+X!b?P4C0the organism can predict the future, However, adds Bowlby, if working models of the
lA ]+^/s0environment and self are out of date or are only half revised after drastic environmental change, 心理学空间*[*mNQz3|Ft^TS
pathological functioning may ensue. He speculates that useful model revision, extension, and 心理学空间*OK7UpR2qLZ!g
consistency checking may require conscious processing of model content. In humans, communicative
:l{+i@ A+n/\t0processes-initially limited to emotional or gestural signaling and later including language
+E7m q/M%?1Z_a3S&R0
8i]["y*R"@Y0-also permit the inter-subjective sharing of model content. On an intrapsychic level, the same 心理学空间+^*O5L0QJ5G8~%m3\
processes are useful for self-regulation and behavioral priority setting.
:AB,S|u9x.}/V#r0In mammals and birds, behavioral systems tend to become organized during specific
j"el \)R V b%? y0sensitive developmental periods. As initial reflex-like behavior chains come under more complex, 心理学空间/bJR$T#x
cybernetically controlled organization, the range of stimuli that can activate them also becomes
T-k/A0dC @0more restricted, This is the case in imprinting, broadly defined as the restriction of specific 心理学空间6t]b:VMa!mcbO
instinctive behaviors to particular individuals or groups of individuals during sensitive phases of
$U}*F[ k KUqm8F0
^C7t S/_(P6t*h"h h \0
&||:^Z:^U,[P0development, as in filial, parental, and sexual imprinting. 心理学空间D#\`8Es9P'th
心理学空间/Rf L&lE\ S
Having laid out this general theory of motivation and behavior regulation in the first half of 心理学空间'I v+wn4k"DRR
the volume, Bowlby goes on, in the second half, to apply these ideas to the specific domain of
M3mcr*_sZ)k1u0infant-mother attachment. He defines attachment behavior as behavior that has proximity to an 心理学空间$bbq%v S _ \~
attachment figure as a predictable outcome and whose evolutionary function is protection of the 心理学空间9U}o1CfMA%kp
infant from danger, insisting that attachment has its own motivation and is in no way derived from 心理学空间4f9F"`0T[3UR)yn!?U
systems subserving mating and feeding. 心理学空间RG{$z2S^ y

gl*c~ P'ZNP0Although human infants initially direct proximity-promoting signals fairly indiscriminately to 心理学空间d1`({b R&hb
all caregivers, these behaviors become increasingly focused on those primary figures who are
riWP;Vd0responsive to the infant’s crying and who engage the infant in social interaction (Schaffer & 心理学空间%Y Az,F0Nlg.[D
Emerson, 1964). Once attached, locomotor infants are able to use the attachment figure as a
1j@)`w j3L9n?%FXPh0secure base for exploration of the environment and as a safe haven to which to return for
5OM$c'~ a@/M7c @0reassurance (Ainsworth, 1967; Schaffer & Emerson, 1964). How effectively the attachment
0o@$m"r p p} H0`0figure can serve in these roles depends on the quality of social interaction-especially the
kLfa0|PX0attachment figure’s sensitivity to the infant’s signals-although child factors also play a role. 心理学空间.\4Sb%?6}+w9AB0AQ)[
Building on Ainsworth’s Ganda study (1967) and preliminary findings from her Baltimore
#f%F8r_D+a Bn0project, Bowlby (1969) comments that: 心理学空间blR"@ w`.otR

pu'[o|J ch Y0when interaction between a couple runs smoothly, each party manifests intense pleasure in 心理学空间 dR#W$v)x }xK
the other’s company and especially in the other’s expression of affection. Conversely, 心理学空间6}:sGz8q$k9Sl1R
whenever interaction results in persistent conflict each party is likely on occasion to exhibit 心理学空间.{)ZF9D:M)`;B9|
intense anxiety or unhappiness, especially when the other is rejecting. Proximity and
xI)b0l$fWFM0affectionate interchange are appraised and felt as pleasurable by both, whereas distance and 心理学空间pCG(LUDj
expressions of rejection are appraised as disagreeable or painful by both. (p. 242)
;M*Y4U r@ j gV3x @g"]0心理学空间 G}UG w tS$b,gQ*_
During the preschool years, the attachment behavioral system, always complementary to
6\3\z"}'J'olFD0the parental caregiving system, undergoes further reorganization as the child attains growing insight 心理学空间ZM*e_#V F
into the attachment figure’s motives and plans. Bowlby refers to this stage as goal-
1\3v8{'c@.V0corrected partnership. However, in emphasizing infant initiative and sensitive maternal responding,
]b*E7TH-_y0Bowlby’s (1951) earlier theorizing on the mother as the child’s ego and superego was regrettably 心理学空间2`Hy1^ HJ%i&N
lost.
3h2a dyT!T~0心理学空间#e b&[?{5r
Consolidation 心理学空间S#?L9t)gEf(D){ i

N:u2n!J W`0心理学空间9G)oMK.W3YW2F3b:qN
The publication of the first volume of the attachment trilogy in 1969 coincided with the 心理学空间2uU-MLK;C2x
appearance in print of initial findings from Ainsworth’s Baltimore project (reviewed earlier).
s5y;G7y0vQ},o XTJ(Q0However, many investigators strongly contested Ainsworth’s claims regarding the meaning of 心理学空间RJMBD'E+s mH H)G
Strange Situation behavior, often because they failed to note that Strange Situation classifications
#an q7^ |1cy`0had been validated against extensive home observations. Some interpreted avoidant infants’ 心理学空间W `EPd&v
behavior as independence. The controversy lessened somewhat after the publication of Patterns 心理学空间#J-E,c+M&Ez
of Attachment (Ainsworth et al., 1978), which drew together the results from the Baltimore 心理学空间n-b![ h)wQe
project and presented findings from other laboratories on the sequelae of attachment classifications 心理学空间 Iv3h0V6QM$AB n.y3a
in toddlerhood and early childhood (e.g., Main, 1973; Matas, Arend, & Sroufe, 1978). 心理学空间9J9B'B0nC8Dv

T$p6gtPU!m"G^,? O0During this period, many of Ainsworth’s graduate students began to publish their own work.
$G*y@9ks}&s!VV]0Silvia Bell (1970) examined the relationship between object permanence and attachment. Mary
8DFn9ci0Main (1973) studied secure and insecure toddlers’ capacity to become invested in play activities
-d*I#v0V7O c]cny0and problem solving. Mary Blehar (1974) undertook the first study of attachment and nonmaternal 心理学空间Z:RIcQ6S%j'aX'e5d
care, and Alicia Lieberman (1977) investigated attachment and peer relationships in
8_P|d i#@0preschoolers. Mary Ainsworth’s influence is also evident in the fact that many Johns Hopkins 心理学空间Ck"S_~ zMQ-Ty
undergraduate students who had helped with the analysis of data from the Baltimore project later 心理学空间E u}4b3Rj }J9q
produced innovative dissertations on attachment-related topics at their respective graduate
5P7hwCE jg0institutions. Among these students were Robert Marvin (1972, 1977), who wrote on the 心理学空间Bq}F \#]y
goal-corrected partnership; Milton Kotelchuck (1972), who studied father attachment; Mark 心理学空间*{8qR&XHd
Cummings (1980), who investigated attachment and day care; Mark Greenberg (Greenberg & 心理学空间X3A pO)XF*l'\+[ IC
Marvin, 1979), who examined attachment in deaf children; and Everett Waters (1978), who
)|6}a9PB'B0documented the longitudinal stability of attachment patterns from 12 to 18 months.
7U O)Jx6R%FW Se0心理学空间FK8hZ eKx&z8^8U
Everett Waters’ entry into graduate study at the University of Minnesota in 1973 had a 心理学空间!Xg*te-pr/t
profound effect on Alan Sroufe, who had read Mary Ainsworth’s (1968) theoretical article about 心理学空间0J7x9`G-_`%T6R
object relations and dependency but had not heard of the Strange Situation or the Baltimore project
*jnl5B v.M0(Sroufe, personal communication, 1988). Sroufe’s contact with Waters led to significant empirical 心理学空间y1ks2b]`m
and theoretical collaborations. In 1977, Sroufe and Waters wrote an influential paper that 心理学空间 HE&q5D/hE
made attachment as an organizational construct accessible to a large audience. At the same time,
0UBV"['C0Sroufe and Egeland, together with many of their students, undertook a large-scale longitudinal 心理学空间ng6l J+fW+O%g
心理学空间 |[)|6vOf4Ev

6k!^,L%Sl-f0study of attachment with an at-risk population (disadvantaged mothers), The Minnesota study, 心理学空间P}@Dsd:k
summarized in Sroufe (1983) but still ongoing, stands as the second major longitudinal study of
nDZAUE.`0the relationship between quality of caregiving and security of attachment.
V7i_.X \3Qe df0
^$?vV|+n!rm3i }#{0Elsewhere across the United States, much time was spent testing the predictive validity of
"H+m;PCYO$K7U0Strange Situation reunion classifications. Many researchers sought to train with Mary Ainsworth 心理学空间 bV@7e(`Zz4?
or her former students to learn the procedure and classification system. Hundreds of studies using 心理学空间jw$J,sEH9|
the Strange Situation appeared in print. It often seemed as if attachment and the Strange Situation 心理学空间e*Z8{"~.q{Ad
had become synonymous. 心理学空间O)x;k;LI{

A"N&C;V-K$[c!{b4n0www.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