personality personality trait = 1.) heritable (i.e., genetically influenced; approximately half of...

69
Personality PERSONALITY TRAIT = 1.) HERITABLE (I.e., genetically influenced; approximately half of variation is due to genetic differences) 2.) INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES 3.) REASONABLY STABLE 4.) RELATING TO A PERSON'S EMOTIONAL, INTERPERSONAL, EXPERIENTIAL, ATTITUDINAL, AND MOTIVATIONAL STYLES.

Post on 22-Dec-2015

216 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Personality

PERSONALITY TRAIT = 1.) HERITABLE (I.e., genetically influenced;

approximately half of variation is due to genetic differences)

2.) INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES 3.) REASONABLY STABLE 4.) RELATING TO A PERSON'S

EMOTIONAL, INTERPERSONAL, EXPERIENTIAL, ATTITUDINAL, AND MOTIVATIONAL STYLES.

Personality

1.) EACH PERSONALITY DIMENSION REPRESENTS VARIATION IN AN EVOLVED SYSTEM. EVERYONE HAS THE SYSTEM, BUT SOME PEOPLE ARE HIGHER ON THE DIMENSION THAN OTHERS; E. G., WE ALL HAVE THE MECHANISMS

UNDERLYING FEAR, BUT SOME PEOPLE ARE MORE FEARFUL THAN OTHERS

2.) EACH EVOLVED SYSTEM IS A BIOLOGICAL ADAPTATION WITH A SPECIFIC SURVIVAL FUNCTION. E.G., FEAR FUNCTIONS TO AVOID DANGERS

Personality

3.) EXTREMES TEND TO BE MALADAPTIVE BEING AFRAID OF DANGEROUS THINGS IS

ADAPTIVE, BUT BEING AFRAID OF EVERYTHING ISN'T

Personality

4.) PERSONALITY TRAITS OR SYSTEMS ARE NOT TYPES OF PEOPLE. Individuals are high or low on a given

personality system, but it’s misleading to describe people as “the shy type” or the conscientious type as if they don’t have other facets to their personality.

Behavioral Approach System

(1) BEHAVIORAL APPROACHVARIATION IN: SOCIAL DOMINANCE, ATTRACTION TO REWARD, SENSATION SEEKING, IMPULSIVITY, RISK-TAKING, ASSERTIVENESS, AGGRESSION

EMOTIONS: POSITIVE AROUSAL, EXHILARATION, HAPPINESS, CONFIDENCE,POSITIVE SELF-REGARD, ANGER

SURVIVAL FUNCTION: ACTIVE INTERFACE WITH ENVIRONMENT (Get stuff): Mates, status, other resources

Behavioral Approach (Go) System EXTREMES MALADAPTIVE

High extreme: Extreme on sensation seeking, impulsivity and reward sensitivity.

Low extreme: Depression, lack of interest in rewards. PHYSIOLOGICAL MECHANISM:

REWARD SENSITIVITY; AROUSAL REGULATION; SENSATION SEEKING GENES Emotion centers of the left cortex; the left cortex has inhibitory

connections to right cortex responsible for negative emotions (Table 3.1)

SEX DIFFERENCES: MALES > FEMALES AGE CHANGES: HIGHEST IN LATE ADOLESCENCE, YOUNG

ADULTHOOD: THE "YOUNG MALE SYNDROME"

Behavioral Approach (Go) System: “Young Male Syndrome”

Murder arrests by age

STOP SYSTEM (BEHAVIORAL INHIBITION SYSTEM)

VARIATION IN: FEAR, CAUTION, WORRY ABOUT THREATS TO SELF OR NOVELTY

THERE IS VARIATION IN FEAR AND ANXIETY IN NOVEL (SCARY) SITUATIONS OR WITH UNFAMILIAR PEOPLE BEGINNING IN SECOND HALF OF FIRST YEAR

KAGAN: 15% OF 2-YEAR-OLDS ARE BEHAVIORLY INHIBITED;CONSIDERABLE STABILITY OF BEHAVIORAL AND PHYSIOLOGICAL MEASURES (HIGH AND STABLE HEART RATE, STRESS HORMONES)

STOP SYSTEM (BEHAVIORAL INHIBITION SYSTEM)

EMOTIONS: FEAR, ANXIETY, TENSION

SURVIVAL FUNCTION: RESPOND TO DANGERS

EXTREMES MALADAPTIVE: High end: Phobic; Low end: fearless

SEX DIFFERENCES: FEMALES > MALES

Affectional (Love/Nurturance) System 3.) AFFECTIONAL SYSTEM VARIATION IN:

TENDENCIES TOWARD LOVE, WARMTH, ALTRUISM, SYMPATHY, COMPASSION, TRUST, COMPLIANCE, EMPATHY

EMOTIONS: LOVE, SYMPATHY, EMPATHY SURVIVAL FUNCTION:

FAMILY AS UNIT OF REPRODUCTION; PAIR BONDING; BRING FATHER INTO FAMILY: Paternal

Investment RAISING HIGH QUALITY CHILDREN

Affectional (Love/Nurturance) System EXTREMES MALADAPTIVE: Sociopathy on

low end, dependency disorder on high end.

PHYSIOLOGICAL MECHANISM: DOPAMINERGIC REWARD SYSTEM; OXYTOCIN

SEX DIFFERENCES: FEMALES > MALES; females more likely to have dependency disorder, males more likely to be sociopathic

Conscientiousness

4.) CONSCIENTIOUSNESS SYSTEM VARIATION IN: DEPENDABILITY, RESPONSIBILITY, PLANFULNSS,THOROUGHNESS, ATTENTION TO DETAIL, DUTIFULNESS,ACHIEVEMENT STRIVING, DELIBERATENESS, EFFICIENT,LACK OF SELF-INDULGENCE, ABILITY TO DELAYGRATIFICATION, FOCUSED EFFORT

Mechanism: Prefrontal inhibitory mechanisms control output of sub-cortical mechanisms

EMOTIONS: GUILT, SELF-ESTEEM; HOPE FOR GOAL ATTAINMENT

SURVIVAL FUNCTION: TAKING CARE OF BUSINESS; ACHIEVE LONG- TERM GOALS BY ENGAGING IN BEHAVIOR WHICH IS NOT INTRINSICALLY FUN, OR PLEASURABLE;FORM COHESIVE GROUPS

Conscientiousness

EXTREMES MALADAPTIVE: High extreme: Obsessive/compulsive; low extreme: ADHD

SEX DIFFERENCES: FEMALES > MALES AGE CHANGES: BECOMES STRONGER

WITH AGE

Reactivity/Emotionality

5.) REACTIVITY/EMOTIONALITY: VARIATION IN THE TENDENCY TO BECOME EMOTIONALLY AROUSED FOR ALL OF THE EMOTIONS.

HIGH REACTIVE CHILD: Low Threshold for Arousal

POSITIVE AFFECT

NEUTRAL AFFECT ________________________________________________

NEGATIVE AFFECTLOW MEDIUM HIGH

LEVEL OF STIMULATION

Reactivity/Emotionality

5.) REACTIVITY/EMOTIONALITY: VARIATION IN THE TENDENCY TO BECOME EMOTIONALLY AROUSED FOR ALL OF THE EMOTIONS.

LOW REACTIVE CHILD: High Threshold for Arousal

POSITIVE AFFECT

NEUTRAL AFFECT ________________________________________________

NEGATIVE AFFECTLOW MEDIUM HIGH

LEVEL OF STIMULATION

Reactivity/Emotionality

A.) MODALITY SPECIFICITY: DIFFERENT SENSORY SYSTEMS MAY HAVE DIFFERENT REACTIVITIES

B.) ETHNIC DIFFERENCES IN REACTIVITY:MONGOLOID < CAUCASIAN OR AFRICAN-AMERICAN

C.) DEVELOPMENTAL SHIFTS: TERRIBLE TWO'S ANDADOLESCENCE

Reactivity/Emotionality

D.) ENVIRONMENTAL INFLUENCES(E. G., PREMATURITY, PRENATAL DRUG EXPOSURE)

SURVIVAL FUNCTION: MOBILIZE BEHAVIORAL RESOURCES

EXTREMES MALADAPTIVE: High end: Bipolar affective disorder;

SEX DIFFERENCES: FEMALES > MALES AGE CHANGES: CHILDREN BECOME LESS

EMOTIONAL WITH AGE; young children “wear their emotions on their sleeve”; can’t inhibit expressions of displeasure when they are upset.

General Principles

1.) ALL PERSONALITY TRAITS ARE HERITABLE (Heritability = 0.50)

2.) ACTIVE AND EVOCATIVE G→E EFFECTS; ACTIVE G→E EFFECTS IMPLY SELF-REGULATION; EVEN EMOTIONALITY (REACTIVITY)

HAS SELF-REGULATORY EFFECTS

3.) EXTREMES TEND TO BE MALADAPTIVE

General Principles

4.) PERSONALITY TRAITS OR SYSTEMS ARE NOT TYPES OF PEOPLE. INDIVIDUALS ARE HIGH OR LOW ON A GIVEN PERSONALITY SYSTEM.

5.) DIFFERENT SITUATIONS BRING OUT DIFFERENT PERSONALITY SYSTEMS: CONTEXTUAL TRIGGERS GO: PARTY STOP: DARK ALLEY CONSCIENTIOUSNESS: FINALS AFFECTIONAL SYSTEM: FAMILY LIFE

General Principles

REACTIVITY/EMOTIONALITY: not triggered by a particular context.

It is a general behavioral energizer.

Go Stop Conscientiousness Love

Reactivity/Emotionality

General Principles

6. There may be conflicts between personality systems in particular situations. E.g., deciding to go to a party (GO) or

study for finals (Conscientiousness). Paradigm: Approach/Withdrawal conflict

THE HERMAN'S HEAD THEORY OF PERSONALITY: CONFLICT AMONG THE

INDEPENDENT PERSONALITY SYSTEMS

1. Mutual Inhibitory Connections between Approach Systems (Go) and Withdrawal Systems (Stop)

2. Conscientiousness involves inhibitory connections to Approach (Go) system and Affectional (Nurturance/Love) System.

THE HERMAN'S HEAD THEORY OF PERSONALITY: CONFLICT AMONG THE

INDEPENDENT PERSONALITY SYSTEMS

G S A CBalanced

G S A CProne to conflicts between G and C

G S A C

One system dominant: A Fearful Person

Levels of an Evolutionary Perspective on Personality

I. Personality Systems as Universal Psychological Mechanisms: A. Personality Systems as Universal

Design Features of Humans Homologous with Similarly-Functioning Systems in Other Vertebrates

B. System X Context Interactions: Contexts trigger systems

C. System X System Interactions: Mutual inhibitory connections between systems

Levels of an Evolutionary Perspective on Personality

I. Personality Systems as Universal Psychological Mechanisms: D. System X Context X Trait Interactions: The

outcome of System x System interactions influenced by individual differences: A person with a strong Go system will be biased on the side of approach in conflicts between Go and Stop Systems

E. System-Specific Environmental Influences During Development: Environments during development that influence the Stop system have no effect on the Affectional system.

Levels of an Evolutionary Perspective on Personality

II. Approaches to Group Differences in Universal Mechanisms Based on Evolutionary Theory A. The Evolutionary Theory of Gender

Differences in Personality B. Evolutionary Approaches to Age

Differences in Personality Systems C. Evolution and Birth Order Differences in

Personality D. Life History Theory and Personality

Levels of an Evolutionary Perspective on Personality

III. Evolutionary Perspectives on Individual Differences A. Individual Differences within the Normal

Range seen as Variation in Viable Strategies

B. Individual Differences at the Extreme Ends of the Normal Range as Maladaptive (phobias) or High-Risk Strategies (High Sensation Seeking)

Levels of an Evolutionary Perspective on Personality

III. Evolutionary Perspectives on Individual Differences C. Social Evaluation: Individual Differences in

Others' Personalities as a Resource Environment: We evaluate others’ personalities depending on

our interests. D. Self-Evaluation and Self-Presentation of

Personality Traits as Mechanisms for Maximizing One's Resource Value in the Social Environment:

Putting your best foot forward, as on a first date or job interview.

Attachment vs. Nurturance/Love/Warmth: Part 1: Nurturance/Love/Warmth

Dimensions of Parenting

Permissive Authoritative

Neglectful Authoritarian

Uninvolved

Control

Warmth

Low High

high

low

Authoritative Parenting

AUTHORITATIVE PARENT CHILDREN'S BEHAVIOR

Firm enforcement of rules Energetic, friendly Confronts disobedience Good peer relations Shows pleasure at child’s Accepts adult values

constructive behavior Considers child’s wishes and

opinions Warm, involved, responsive Achievement-oriented Expects mature, age-appropriate

behavior Family activitiesEducational standards

Authoritarian Parenting

Authoritarian Parent Child’s BehaviorRules rigidly enforced Fearful ApprehensiveConfronts Disobedience Shy Shows Anger Aggression Views child as evil Harsh, punitive discipline Passively hostile,

guileful No family activities Does not accept

parental valuesNo educational demands

Permissive Parenting

Permissive Parent Child’s BehaviorRules not enforced Non-compliant Yields to child coercion Low in self-reliance

Low in achievement strivingInconsistent discipline Lack of self-controlFew demands for mature, Aggressive, impulsive

independent behavior Moderate warmth Hides annoyance Domineering

child’s behavior Does not accept adult valuesGlorifies free expression

Neglectful Parenting

Neglectful Parent Child’s BehaviorMinimize costs of parentingRejects adult valuesUninvolved with children Peer group orientationFocus on own needs Fails to monitor children’s

delinquent activities,impulsivity, or school performance Aggression

Psychopathology Alienated from family (e.g., depression, drug use) Poor school achievement

Parents dislike friends Drug and alcohol use, precocious

sexual activity

WARMTH AS A MOTIVATOR

"PART OF THE CHALLENGE IS TO TEACH CHILDREN THE RULES. PART IS TO HELP THEM GAIN GRATIFICATION [=intrinsic motivation] BY OBEYING THE RULES"

WARMTH AS A MOTIVATOR: INTRINSIC (WARMTH) VERSUS EXTRINSIC (PUNISHMENT) MOTIVATION IN PARENTING

HOW WARMTH MOTIVATES: • WARM PARENT-CHILD RELATIONSHIP IS MUTUALLY

REWARDING• CHILD IN WARM PARENT-CHILD RELATIONSHIP

THEREFORE VALUES RELATIONSHIP AND BEHAVES IN A MANNER WHICH PARENT APPROVES.

• CHILD THUS ACCEPTS ADULT VALUES, IS COMPLIANT, CHILD VALUES PARENTAL APPROVAL.

WARMTH AS A MOTIVATOR

WARMTH AS A MOTIVATOR: INTRINSIC VERSUS EXTRINSIC MOTIVATION IN PARENTING

AUTHORITATIVE PARENTING: PARENT HAS STANDARDS, CHILD HAS INTERNAL MOTIVATION TO CONFORM TO THE STANDARDS

INDULGENT/PERMISSIVE PARENTING: PARENT FAILS TO SET STANDARDS; CHILDREN MORE DRAWN TO THE PEER WORLD

AUTHORITARIAN PARENTS HAVE STANDARDS, BUT MOTIVATION IS EXTERNAL

NEGLECTFUL/INDIFFERENT PARENTS: NO STANDARDS, NO MOTIVATION; STRONG PULL TO PEER WORLD

WARMTH AS A REWARD SYSTEM The brain has several reward centers that make

various behavior pleasurable. For example there are reward systems for food, drugs (cocaine, heroin), sex. The result is that these behavior are pleasurable and people are therefore motivated to engage in them.

Warmth/love also depends on its own reward centers that make close, intimate relationships pleasurable. People high on the personality system of warmth/love are therefore motivated to seek out and maintain close relationships.

Warmth as a Reward System

                   

Low motivation High motivation

Warmth as a Reward System

                   

Warm parenting results in making the child more sensitive to the reward value of positive social interaction: Moves child to the right on the curve. Lack of warm parenting may more child to the left. This is a system-specific environmental influence.

Analogy with effects of experience on nerve cells? Stimulation results in elaboration of neural networks Lack of stimulation results in atrophy

EVOLUTION OF THE NUCLEAR FAMILY

EVOLUTIONARY TRENDS IN PARENTING: 1.) PRIMITIVE MAMMALIAN PATTERN: LOW

INVESTMENT: MANY YOUNG LARGE LITTERS SHORT LIFESPAN SMALL BRAINS COMPARED TO BODY SIZE, SHORT PERIOD OF DEPENDENCE ON PARENTS MALES NOT INVOLVED IN PARENTING:

MOTHER AND OFFSPRING IS FAMILY UNIT

EVOLUTION OF THE NUCLEAR FAMILY

EVOLUTIONARY TRENDS IN PARENTING 2.) HUMANS: HIGH INVESTMENT:

FEW YOUNG, LONG LIFESPAN LARGE BRAINS LONG PERIOD OF DEPENDENCE ON PARENTS HIGH LEVEL OF PLASTICITY AND LEARNING

ABILITY NEEDED TO DO WELL IN COMPETITIVE OR HARSH

ENVIRONMENTS MALE INVOLVEMENT IN PARENTING

WARMTH IS PARTLY A MECHANISM FOR FACILITATING MALE INVOLVEMENT (ALSO FACILITATES MOTHERING/NURTURANCE).

DEVELOPMENT OF DIFFERENT REPRODUCTIVE STRATEGIES

LOW INVESTMENT HIGH INVESTMENT

A. FAMILY CONTEXT MARITAL DISCORD SPOUSAL HARMONY

SINGLE PARENTING PATERNAL COMMITMENT NEGLECTFUL PARENTING SIBLING REARING

B. CHILDREARING IN INFANCY/EARLY CHILDHOOD HARSH, REJECTING WARM, RESPONSIVE

INSENSITIVE STIMULATING UNSTIMULATING NO PARENT-CHILD PLAY PARENT-CHILD PLAY

DEVELOPMENT OF DIFFERENT REPRODUCTIVE STRATEGIES

LOW INVESTMENT HIGH INVESTMENT

C. PSYCHOLOGICAL/BEHAVIORAL DEVELOPMENT INSECURE ATTACHMENT SECURE ATTACHMENT

MISTRUSTFUL INTERNAL WORKING MODEL RECIPROCALLY REWARDING OPPORTUNISTIC INTERPERSONAL STYLE INTERPERSONAL STYLE

D. SOMATIC DEVELOPMENT EARLY LATER

MATURATION/PUBERTY MATURATION/PUBERTY

E. REPRODUCTIVE STRATEGY EARLIER SEXUAL ACTIVITY LATER SEXUAL ACTIVITY

UNSTABLE PAIR BONDS STABLE PAIR BONDS LOW INVESTMENT HIGH INVESTMENT PARENTING PARENTING

Attachment vs. Nurturance/Love/Warmth: Part 2: Attachment

DETERMINING ATTACHMENT STATUS: 1. STRANGE SITUATION TEST (See

Table 6.9, p. 150) 2. REUNION EPISODES ARE

PARTICULARLY IMPORTANT for scoring

Attachment vs. Nurturance/Love/Warmth: Part 1: Attachment

DETERMINING ATTACHMENT STATUS: 3. CATEGORIES OF ATTACHMENT:

A. INSECURE AVOIDANT (A BABIES): OFTEN DO NOT CRY MUCH AT

SEPARATION; DO NOT SEEK PROXIMITY AND ACTIVELY

AVOID THE MOTHER AT REUNION; DO NOT RESIST CONTACT IF MOTHER

INITIATES IT; DO NOT CRY MUCH AT REUNION

Attachment vs. Nurturance/Love/Warmth: Part 1: Attachment

DETERMINING ATTACHMENT STATUS: 3. CATEGORIES OF ATTACHMENT:

B. SECURE ATTACHMENT (B BABIES): ACTIVELY SEEK PROXIMITY AND

CONTACT AT REUNION; OFTEN DISTRESSED DURING

SEPARATION, BUT CALM DOWN QUICKLY AT REUNION

Attachment vs. Nurturance/Love/Warmth: Part 1: Attachment

DETERMINING ATTACHMENT STATUS: 3. CATEGORIES OF ATTACHMENT: C. INSECURE AMBIVALENT (C BABIES)

VERY UPSET AND DISTRESSED DURING SEPARATION;

ACTIVELY SEEK PROXIMITY AND CONTACT AT REUNION;

RESIST CONTACT AT REUNION, OFTEN SHOWING ANGER;

CONTINUE CRYING AT REUNION; THEY DO NOT CALM DOWN EASILY AT

REUNION

ATTACHMENT THEORY

1.) LEARNING THEORY: a.) OLD VIEW: LOVE AS GENERALIZED

CONDITIONED RESPONSE; MOTHER SATISFIES BASIC DRIVES FOR

FOOD, ETC., BABY THEREFORE DEVELOPS POSITIVE

ATTITUDES LOVE (ALSO FREUDIAN); ETHOLOGICAL CRITIQUE: HARLOW'S MONKEY

STUDY

ATTACHMENT THEORY

1.) LEARNING THEORY: b.) MORE RECENTLY: MOTHERS AND BABIES

AS MUTUALLY REINFORCING, INCLUDING PLEASURE OF SOCIAL INTERACTION

ETHOLOGICAL CRITIQUE: 1.) THE THEORY IS INCOMPLETE BECAUSE IT

DOESN'T EXPLAIN WHY SOCIAL INTERACTIONS ARE SO PLEASURABLE IN THE FIRST PLACE

2.) THEORY CAN'T EXPLAIN ATTACHMENT IN ABUSED INFANTS

ATTACHMENT THEORY

2.) COGNITIVE-DEVELOPMENTAL MODELS: a.) ATTACHMENT AS INVOLVING COGNITIVE

MODEL (SCHEMA) OF "MOMMY & ME"; IF SEPARATED, BABY BECOMES FEARFUL AND DISTRESSED BECAUSE OF DISCREPANCY WITH SCHEMA OF 'MOMMY & ME'

b.) ATTACHMENT INVOLVES INTERNAL WORKING MODEL OF MOTHER'S TYPICAL BEHAVIOR; the IWM is a cognitive model of relationships based on relationship with mother as a prototype

ATTACHMENT THEORY

2.) COGNITIVE-DEVELOPMENTAL MODELS: CRITIQUE: CAN'T ACCOUNT FOR THE

AFFECTIVE INTENSITY OF ATTACHMENT PHENOMENA

WHY NOT DEVELOP SUCH SCHEMAS ABOUT BOOKS OR TOYS?

WHY SHOULD VIOLATING A SCHEMA OF "MOMMY AND ME" WHEN MOM LEAVES RESULT IN SUCH INTENSE DYSPHORIA, BUT VIOLATION OF OTHER SCHEMAS IS NO BIG DEAL?

ETHOLOGICAL THEORY OF ATTACHMENT: JOHN BOWLBY

A HYBRID THEORY: (1) BIOLOGICAL SYSTEMS (2) LEARNING (3) COGNITIVE SCHEMES

Ethological Theory of Attachment: Biological Systems

1.) ATTACHMENT AS AN ADAPTATION ADAPTATION = A BEHAVIOR OR

MORPHOLOGICAL FEATURE DESIGNED BY NATURAL SELECTION IN ORDER TO PERFORM A PARTICULAR FUNCTION

FUNCTION OF ATTACHMENT IS TO PROVIDE PROTECTION FOR HELPLESS INFANTS.

ATTACHMENT IS AN ADAPTATION DESIGNED BY NATURAL SELECTION TO KEEP THE BABY CLOSE TO THE MOTHER AS A SOURCE OF PROTECTION; IT IS A PROXIMITY MAINTAINING SYSTEM

Ethological Theory of Attachment: Biological Systems

2.) ETHOLOGICAL IDEA OF 'NATURAL CLUE' = AN INNATE CONNECTION BETWEEN A STIMULUS AND AN AFFECTIVE (EVALUATIVE) RESPONSE STIMULUS AFFECTIVE, EVALUATIVE

RESPONSE S R+ (CONTACT COMFORT,

AFFECTIONATE TOUCHING, MUTUAL GAZING AND SMILING) SWEET TASTES

S R -- (MOTHER ABSENT; STRANGER PRESENT; BITTER TASTES)

Ethological Theory of Attachment: Biological Systems

Natural Clues: THE CONNECTION BETWEEN THE

STIMULUS AND THE AFFECTIVE RESPONSE IS INNATE, UNLEARNED;

Bottom line: BABIES COME INTO THE WORLD WITH LIKES AND DISLIKES

Ethological Theory of Attachment: Biological Systems

3.) MOTHER AND BABY ARE BIOLOGICALLY PROGRAMMED FOR SOCIAL INTERACTION a.) BABIES' BEHAVIORS FOR MAINTAINING

CONTACT: CRYING, LOCOMOTION, "MOLDING TO MOTHER'S BODY";

b.) FOR FACILITATING INTERACTION: APPEARANCE OF BABY, SMILING,VOCALIZING, MAKING EYE CONTACT

SOCIAL INTERACTION IS INNATELY PLEASURABLE FOR MOTHER AND BABY(INVOLVES NATURAL CLUES)

Ethological Theory of Attachment: Cognition and Learning

1.) MOTHER AS SECURE BASE FOR EXPLORATION:THE SET POINT: Changes with Development and with

the Situation

MOTHER WITHIN SET POINT: BABY EXPLORES

M MOTHER EXCEEDS SET POINT: ATTACHMENT

BEHAVIORS TRIGGERED, EXPLORATION CEASES

B

M

B

Ethological Theory of Attachment: Cognition and Learning

DISCRETE SYSTEMS IDEA: ATTACHMENT SYSTEM INTERACTS WITH

THE EXPLORATION SYSTEM, THE PLAY SYSTEM, AND OTHER SYSTEMS. IF SAFE, THEN PLAY, EXPLORE IF STRANGER IS PRESENT, THEN

STOP PLAY, LOOK FOR MOTHER IF HUNGRY, STOP PLAY AND

EXPLORATION, SEEK FOOD

DISCRETE SYSTEMS IDEA: Evolutionary Psychology

Evolutionary Psychology: Many Different Mechanisms, Each Designed to Solve a Specific Problem

Ethological Theory of Attachment: Cognition and Learning

2.) INTERNAL WORKING MODEL (IWM) OF MOTHER = A MODEL (SCHEMA) OF WHAT MOTHER IS LIKE a.) BUILT UP FROM EXPERIENCE

(LEARNING) b.) EMPHASIS ON SENSITIVITY AND

RESPONSIVITY c.) RESULTS IN A MODEL OF FUTURE

RELATIONSHIPS; RESISTANT TO CHANGE

Ethological Theory of Attachment: Cognition and Learning

IWM FOR A (AVOIDANT) CHILD: PEOPLE ARE NOT AVAILABLE WHEN I NEED HELP

IWM FOR B (SECURE) CHILD: PEOPLE WILL BE SENSITIVE AND RESPONSIVEWHEN I NEED HELP

IWM FOR C (AMBIVALENT, RESISTANT) CHILD: PEOPLE ARE UNRELIABLE WHEN I NEED HELP; SOMETIMES THEY ARE RESPONSIVE,

SOMETIMES NOT.

EVOLUTIONARILY EXPECTED ENVIRONMENT

CHILD IS BORN WITH “EXPECTATIONS” ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENT. Expectations can be physical (oxygen, food) or

psychological (adequate mother) IF EXPECTATIONS MET, THEN THE CHILD IS HAPPY,

DEVELOPMENT IS NORMAL IF EXPECTATIONS ARE NOT MET, THEN THE CHILD

IS UNHAPPY, DEVELOPMENT IS PATHOLOGICAL

THE BIOLOGY OF ATTACHMENT IS UNIVERSAL (NORMATIVE) (SPECIES-TYPICAL), BUT ATTACHMENT STATUS IS THE RESULT OF ENVIRONMENTAL VARIATION (IDIOGRAPHIC DEVELOPMENT)

ENVIRONMENT OF EVOLUTIONARY ADAPTEDNESS

THE ENVIRONMENT OF EVOLUTIONARY ADAPTEDNESS (EEA) IS THE ENVIRONMENT THAT HUMANS EVOLVED IN AND WHICH PRESENTED THE PROBLEMS SOLVED BY OUR ADAPTATIONS. Example: THE HUMAN EEA INCLUDED

ENVIRONMENTS WITH PREDATORS AND OTHER DANGERS TO INFANTS.

ATTACHMENT EVOLVED IN ORDER TO DEAL WITH THESE PROBLEMS.

IT SOLVED THE PROBLEM BY MAKING THE BABY WANT TO STAY CLOSE TO MOM.

SENSITIVE PERIODS FOR ATTACHMENT

ISOLATION STUDIES WITH RHESUS MACAQUES: ISOLATION FOR THE FIRST SIX MONTHS OF LIFE RESULTS IN "SUICIDALLY" AGGRESSIVE ANIMALS. FEMALES WHO ARE ISOLATED BECOME ABUSIVE MOTHERS

SPECIES DIFFERENCES: CRAB-EATING MACAQUES AND WOLVES SHOW MINIMAL DYSFUNCTION AS A RESULT OF ISOLATION.

SENSITIVE PERIODS FOR ATTACHMENT

THE TIZARD ORPHANAGE STUDY: AVERAGE 1 DIFFERENT CAREGIVER per MONTH

AFTER ADOPTION AT AGES 2-4), OBSERVED AT AGE 8:

1.) MORE BEHAVIOR PROBLEMS—DISOBEDIENCE, LYING, REJECTED BY OTHER CHILDREN;

2.) "AFFECTIONLESS PSYCHOPATHY"—SUPERFICIAL OVERFRIENDLINESS TOWARD ADULTS

MONOTROPY VERSUS MULTIPLE ATTACHMENTS THE IDEA OF AN ATTACHMENT HIERARCHY INDEPENDENCE OF ATTACHMENT STATUS WITH

MOTHERS AND FATHERS

ISSUES IN ATTACHMENT RESEARCH

1.) ASSOCIATIONS BETWEEN CAREGIVER CHARACTERISTICS AND ATTACHMENT STATUS: SENSITIVE, RESPONSIVE, AFFECTIONATE CAREGIVING ASSOCIATED WITH SECURE ATTACHMENT;

CHILD ABUSE IS ASSOCIATED WITH INSECURE ATTACHMENT

2.) STABILITY: DEPENDS ON SITUATION: a.) LESS IF THERE IS STRESS OR OTHER SOURCES OF

CHANGE b.) INSTABILITY CAN RESULT IN 'RENEGOTIATION'

OF ATTACHMENT STATUS

ISSUES IN ATTACHMENT RESEARCH

3.) PREDICTIVE VALIDITY:

a.) PRESCHOOL: SOCIAL COMPETENCE, POSITIVE AFFECT, COMPLIANCE; "EGO RESILIENT" = ADAPTABLE AND FLEXIBLE IN CHANGING CIRCUMSTANCES

b.) LATER CHILDHOOD AND ADOLESCENCE: CLOSER FRIENDSHIPS

c.) AVOIDANT INFANTS MORE LIKELY TO BE AGGRESSIVE

TEMPERAMENT AND ATTACHMENT

a.) KAGAN: BEHAVIORAL INHIBITION SYSTEM EXPLAINS VARIATION IN ATTACHMENT CLASSIFICATION

b.) OTHER SYSTEMS? SOCIABILITY/POSITIVE EMOTIONALITY, REACTIVITY

Comparing warmth and attachment

WARMTH                         Security of ATTACHMENT 1. Assessment Observation, Questionnaire Strange Situation

  2. Emotions Love, Sympathy, Empathy         Felt Security or Anxiety 3. Function Pair-bonding, Nurturance,         Protection

           Investment in Children     Proximity Maintenance 4. Mechanism Physiological reward system     IWM (Cognitive) 5. Environmental Parental warmth      Sensitivity &

influences Responsiveness 6. Heritable Yes                                        No (Temperament may

influence) 7. Five Factor Model Yes, Factor II No 8. Sex Differences Yes (females > males)              No 9. Distribution Among Pair-bonding rare                      Very common

Primates