Bowlby & Ainsworth: Ethological Approach to Attachment Theory, Study notes of Psychology

Download Bowlby & Ainsworth: Ethological Approach to Attachment Theory and more Study notes Psychology in PDF only on Docsity! The distinguishing characteristic of the theory of attachment that we have jointly developed is that it is an ethological approach to personality develop- ment. We have had a long and happy partnership in pursuing this approach. In this article we wish to give a brief historical account of the initially sepa- rate but compatible approaches that eventually merged in the partnership, and how our contribu- tions have intertwined in the course of developing an ethologically oriented theory of attachment and a body of research that has both stemmed from the theory and served to extend and elaborate it. Before 1950 Even before beginning graduate training, each of us became keenly interested in personality develop- ment and the key role played in it by the early inter- action between children and parents. In Bowlby's case this was kindled by volunteer work in a resi- dential school for maladjusted children, which fol- lowed his undergraduate studies in medicine at Cambridge University. Two children especially im- pressed him. One was an isolated, affectionless ado- lescent who had never experienced a stable relation- ship with a mother figure, and the other was an anx- ious child who followed Bowlby around like a shadow. Largely because of these two children, Bowlby resolved to continue his medical studies to- ward a specialty in child psychiatry and psychother- apy, and was accepted as a student for psychoana- lytic training. From early in his training he believed that analysts, in their preoccupation with a child's fantasy life, were paying too little attention to actual events in the child's real life. His experience at the London Child Guidance Clinic convinced him of the significant role played by interaction with parents in the development of a child's personality, and of the ways in which this interaction had been influenced by a parent's early experiences with his or her own parents. His first systematic research was begun also at the London Child Guidance Clinic, where he compared 44 juvenile thieves with a matched control group and found that prolonged experiences of mother-child separation or deprivation of maternal An Ethological Approach to Personality Development Mary D. Salter Ainsworth University of Virginia John Bowlby Tavistock Clinic, London England This is a historical account of the partnership in which Bowlby and Ainsworth participated to develop attach- ment theory and research. Beginning with their separate approaches to understanding personality development before Ainsworth joined Bowlby's research team at the Tavistock Clinic in London for 4 years, it describes the origins of the ethological approach that they adopted. After Ainsworth left London, her research in Uganda and in Baltimore lent empirical support to Bowlby's theoretical constructions. The article shows how their contribu- tions to attachment theory and research interdigitated in a partnership that endured for 40 years across time and distance. This article was originally presented as a Distinguished Scientific Contributions award address at the 98th Annual Conven- tion of the American Psychological Association in Boston in August 1990. Author's note. John Bowlby's death on Septem- ber 2, 1990, at his summer home on the Isle of Skye in Scotland, prevented him from completing all that he intended to do in preparing this article for publication. As his coauthor I am greatly saddened by his death, but am secure in the knowledge that he would have wished me to complete the task. American Psychologist. Vol. 46 (4) April 1991, pp. 333-341. 2 care were much more common among the thieves than in the control group, and that such experiences were especially linked to children diagnosed as af- fectionless (Bowlby, 1944). The outbreak of war in 1939 interrupted Bowlby's career as a child psychiatrist but brought him useful research experience in connection with officer selection and with a new group of congenial associates, some of whom at the end of the war joined together to reorganize the Tavistock Clinic. Soon afterward the clinic became part of the Na- tional Health Service, and Bowlby served as full- time consultant psychiatrist and director of the De- partment for Children and Parents. There he also picked up the threads of his clinical and research interests. Unfortunately, the Kleinian orientation of sev- eral members of the staff made it difficult to use clinic cases for the kind of research Bowlby wanted to undertake. He established a research unit of his own, which began operations in 1948. Convinced of the significance of real-life events on the course of child development, he chose to focus on the effects of early separation from the mother because separa- tion was an event on record, unlike disturbed family interaction, of which, in those days, there were no adequate records. Members of the research team began two re- search projects, one retrospective, the other prospec- tive. The retrospective project was a follow-up study of 66 school-age children who had experienced separation from their families in a tuberculosis sana- torium at some time between the ages of one and four years, and who had subsequently returned home. The prospective project was undertaken sin- gle-handedly by James Robertson, then a social worker, who had had experience in Anna Freud's wartime nursery. Robertson observed young chil- dren's behavior as they underwent separation in three different institutional settings. Where possible, he observed the children's behavior in interaction with parents at home, both prior to the separation and after they were reunited with them. Bowlby himself undertook a third project, in response to a request by the World Health Organization (WHO) to prepare a report on what was known of the fate of children without families. This request led him to read all the available literature on separation and maternal deprivation, and to travel widely to find out what was being done elsewhere about the care of motherless children. The report was published both by WHO as a monograph entitled Maternal Care and Mental Health (Bowlby, 1951) and subse- quently in a popular Penguin edition with the title Child Care and the Growth of Love (Bowlby & Ainsworth, 1965). Let us turn now to the beginnings of Ainsworth's career. She entered the honor course in psychology as an undergraduate at the University of Toronto, hoping (as many do) to understand how she had come to be the person she was, and what her parents had to do with it. She was interested in the whole wide range of courses available to her, but in two particularly. One was run as a class experiment by S. N. F. Chant, in which she learned that research is a fascinating pursuit. The other, taught by William E. Blatz, focused on Blatz's newly formulated theory of security as an approach to understanding personality development. After graduation Ainsworth continued on at the University of Toronto as a graduate stu- dent, and was delighted when Blatz proposed that she base her dissertation research on his security theory. Because she carried some highlights of security theory with her into attachment theory, it is appro- priate here to say something about it (Blatz, 1966). 1 Security, as its Latin root—sine cura—would sug- gest, means "without care" or "without anxiety. " According to Blatz, there are several kinds of secu- rity, of which the first to develop is what he called immature dependent security. Infants, and to a de- creasing extent young children, can feel secure only if they can rely on parent figures to take care of them and take responsibility for the consequences of their behavior. Children's appetite for change leads them to be curious about the world around them and to explore it and learn about it. But learning itself involves insecurity. If and when children become uneasy or frightened while exploring, they are nev- ertheless secure if they can retreat to a parent figure, confident that they will receive comfort and reassur- ance. Thus the parent's availability provides the child with a secure base from which to explore and learn. As children gradually gain knowledge about the world and learn skills to cope with it, they can in- creasingly rely on themselves and thus acquire a gradually increasing basis for independent security. By the time of reaching maturity, according to Blatz, 1 Blatz's security theory was largely embedded in an oral tradition, from which those who listened drew different mean- ings. Ainsworth has dwelt on those aspects that particularly influenced her at the time. Blatz's own 1966 account contained much that is at variance with what Ainsworth carried into attachment theory. 5 to and close bodily contact with a mother figure that cements the infant's attachment rather than the pro- vision of food. On the other hand, the connection with Bowlby led Hinde to study both the interaction of infant rhesus monkeys with their mothers and the effects of mother-infant separation; his findings lent experimental support to Bowlby's position. Al- though much influenced by the ethologists' observa- tions of other species, Bowlby remained a clinician, continuing to see children and families and to prac- tice individual and family psychotherapy. Moreover, for 20 years he ran a mother's group in a well-baby clinic, learning much from his informal observations of mother-child interaction there, and from the re- ports of mothers about their children's behavior. Several classic papers emerged from this theo- retical ferment, in each of which his new ethological approach was contrasted with then current psycho- analytic theories: first, "The Nature of the Child's Tie to His Mother" (Bowlby, 1958), then in rapid succession two papers on separation anxiety (Bowlby, 1960b, 1961b), and three on grief and mourning (Bowlby, 1960a, 1961a, 1963). In the first paper he proposed that a baby's attachment came about through a repertoire of genetically based be- haviors that matured at various times from birth to several months of age, and became focused on the principal caregiver, usually the mother. This reper- toire included crying, sucking, smiling, clinging, and following—of which he considered the latter two the most central. He also discussed how these behaviors were activated and terminated, at first independently before an attachment was formed, but afterward as organized together toward the attachment figure. Finally, he emphasized the active nature of attach- ment behavior, contrasting it with the passive con- ception of dependence. Whereas in traditional the- ory, dependence is considered inevitable in infancy, regressive and undesirable in later years, and having no biological value, he conceived of attachment be- havior as a major component of human behavioral equipment, on a par with eating and sexual behavior, and as having protection as its biological function, not only in childhood but throughout life. Its pres- ence in humans, as in many other species, could be understood in terms of evolution theory. The papers on separation anxiety were based partly on research by a new member of the team, Christoph Heinicke (e. g. , Heinicke, 1956; Heinicke & Westheimer, 1966), but chiefly on Robertson's observations, which were discussed earlier. Bowlby reviewed six psychoanalytic explanations of separa- tion anxiety, but rejected them in favor of his own hypothesis. He beleived that separation anxiety oc- curs when attachment behavior is activated by the absence of the attachment figure, but cannot be ter- minated. It differs from fright, which is aroused by some alarming or noxious feature of the environ- ment and activates escape responses. However, fright also activates attachment behavior, so that the baby not only tries to escape from the frightening stimulus but also tries to reach a haven of safety— the attachment figure. Later in infancy, the baby is capable of expectant anxiety in situations that seem likely to be noxious or in which the attachment fig- ure is likely to become unavailable. He emphasized that only a specific figure, usually the mother figure, could terminate attachment behavior completely once it had been intensely activated. He went on to point out that hostility toward the mother is likely to occur when attachment behavior is frustrated, as it is when the child is separated from her, rejected by her, or when she gives major attention to someone else. When such circumstances are frequent or pro- longed, primitive defensive processes may be acti- vated, with the result that the child may appear to be indifferent to its mother (as in the detachment attrib- utable to separation) or may be erroneously viewed as healthily independent. Whereas separation anxiety dominates the pro- test phase of response to separation, with its height- ened but frustrated attachment behavior mingled with anger, grief and mourning dominate the despair phase, as the frustration of separation is prolonged. Bowlby disagreed with the psychoanalytic theorists who held that infants and young children are incapa- ble of mourning and experiencing grief, and also with those who, like Melanie Klein, believed that the loss of the breast at weaning is the greatest loss in infancy. In his papers on grief and mourning he pointed to the similarities between adults and young children in their responses to loss of a loved one: thoughts and behavior expressing longing for the loved one, hostility, appeals for help, despair, and finally reorganization. Many fellow psychoanalysts have vigorously rejected his views on grief and mourning, as indeed they have protested his etho- logical approach to the child's tie to the mother and his interpretation of separation anxiety. Having been trained in another theoretical paradigm, they have found it difficult to break out of it enough to enter- tain a new way of viewing old problems. Meanwhile, in Uganda, Ainsworth had begun her study of Ganda babies. She assembled a sample of 28 unweaned babies and their mothers from sev- eral villages near Kampala and, with a splendid in- 6 terpreter-assistant, visited their homes every two weeks over a period of nine months. They inter- viewed the mother about her infant-care practices and about the infant's development, and observed their behavior in interaction, and that of the rest of the household. What she saw did not support the Freudian notion of a passive, recipient, narcissistic infant in the oral phase. Rather, she was impressed by the babies' active search for contact with the mother when they were alarmed or hurt, when she moved away or left even briefly, and when they were hungry—and even then she was struck by their initiative in seeking the breast and managing the feeding. There was impressive evidence of the use of the mother as a secure base from which to explore the world and as a haven of safety. She observed the very beginnings of the infant's formation of attach- ment to the mother in differential termination of cry- ing, and differential smiling and vocalization. Indi- cations that an attachment had clearly been formed were distress and following when separation oc- curred or threatened, and forms of greeting when mother returned from an absence. She divided the babies into three groups: se- curely attached, insecurely attached, and nonat- tached. Insecurely attached babies cried a lot even when the mother was present, whereas securely at- tached babies cried little unless mothers were absent or seemed about to leave. Nonattached babies were left alone for long periods by unresponsive mothers but, because they were the youngest in the sample, Ainsworth now believes that they may merely have been delayed in developing attachment. She devised several rather crude scales for rating maternal be- havior, of which three significantly differentiated the mothers of secure babies from the others. In retro- spect she sees how all three reflected some facet of mother's accessibility and responsiveness to infant behavioral signals. At the time she was pleased that her data meshed with what she had learned about Bowlby's new attachment theory, and also with as- pects of Blatz's security theory. However, it was not for some years, after having both begun a second longitudinal study and followed later developments of Bowlby's attachment theory, that the full findings of the Ganda study were published (Ainsworth, 1967). The Ainsworths left Uganda late in the summer of 1955 and went to Baltimore, where Leonard had found a position. Early in 1956, Mary asked Wendell Garner, then chairman of the Department of Psychology at Johns Hopkins University, about job possibilities in Baltimore. To her surprise and delight he patched together a job for her there as a clinical psychologist, although there was no official vacancy in the department. She was expected to teach the scheduled courses on personality and as- sessment in this experimental department, and to give to interested students a taste of clinical experi- ence at the Sheppard and Enoch Pratt Hospital, where a part-time appointment for her had been ar- ranged. To supplement her low salary, she began a part-time private practice in diagnostic assessment, mostly with children, aided enormously by her re- search experience at the Tavistock Clinic. Ainsworth's desire to begin another longitudinal study of the development of attachment had to be put on hold, but her subsequent work greatly bene- fited from the clinical experience she obtained meanwhile. She did, however, publish some review papers on maternal deprivation and separation (e. g. , Ainsworth, 1962), coauthor with her husband a book on security measurement (Ainsworth & Ains- worth, 1958), and begin work on the data collected in Uganda. In the spring of 1959 John Bowlby vis- ited Baltimore, and she had an opportunity to fill him in on the details of what she was finding in the Ganda data. This served to revive their association, which had lapsed somewhat, and he included her in the Tavistock Mother-Infant Interaction Study Group that had just begun to meet biennially. At the second meeting she gave a preliminary report of her Ganda study (Ainsworth, 1963). The meetings of this interdisciplinary, international group reignited her eagerness to pursue developmental research, and provided a stimulating scientific support network. In 1961 she sought successfully to be released from her clinical role at Johns Hopkins, and to focus on de- velopmental research and teaching. In 1962 she ob- tained a grant to begin the second longitudinal study that she had so long wanted to do, and in 1963 she was promoted to full professor with tenure. 1963 to 1980 Having hired Barbara Wittig as a research assis- tant, Ainsworth located a sample of 15 infant- mother pairs through pediatricians in private prac- tice, usually before the baby's birth. Data collection proceeded during 1963 and 1964. Visits were made to the families every 3 weeks from 3 to 54 weeks after the baby's birth. Each visit lasted for approxi- mately 4 hours, resulting in about 72 hours of obser- vation altogether for each dyad. In 1966-1967, with two new assistants (Robert Marvin and George Al- lyn), 11 more dyads were added to the sample. Di- rect observation of behavior was supplemented by information yielded in informal conversations with 7 the mother. Notes made during the visit were later dictated in a narrative account, and then transcribed; these raw data took up two full drawers in a filing cabinet. (Needless to say the data took years to ana- lyze, even with the help of many valued research associates and student assistants. ) The home visitor had been alerted to note infant behaviors that had been earlier identified as attach- ment behaviors by both Bowlby and Ainsworth, and to pay particular attention to situations in which they were most likely to occur, and to the mother's re- sponse to them. Data reduction procedures included event coding, rating, and classification. The data analysis yielded information about both normative development and how individual differences in the security or insecurity of the infants' attachment to their mothers were related to the mothers' behavior. At the end of the baby's first year, baby and mother were introduced to a 20-minute laboratory situation—the strange situation—a preliminary re- port of which was made by Ainsworth and Wittig (1969). Although this situation was originally de- signed for a normative exploration, it turned out to provide a relatively quick method of assessment of infant-mother attachment. This procedure soon be- came widely used, if not always wisely and well, and has quite overshadowed the findings of the re- search project that gave rise to it and on which its validity depended. However, the longitudinal home visit data, (which include information about how mother's behavior is linked to the course of infant development) and the strange situation together have yielded important information about the develop- ment of attachment in infancy. The findings of the data analyses of both the strange situation and the home visits were published in a series of articles beginning in 1969 as each analysis was completed. The original research re- ports were coauthored by the research associate or assistant who was chiefly involved in each piece of data analysis. Ainsworth is deeply indebted to their dedicated and creative contributions. Highlights of the findings are as follows. Moth- ers who fairly consistently responded promptly to infant crying early-on had infants who by the end of the first year cried relatively little and were securely attached. Indeed, mothers who were sensitively and appropriately responsive to infant signals in general, including feeding signals, fostered secure infant- mother attachment (Ainsworth & Bell, 1969; Ains- worth, Blehar, Waters, & Wall, 1978; Bell & Ains- worth, 1972). As Bowlby implied from the begin- ning, close bodily contact with the mother termi- nates attachment behavior that has been intensely activated. Full-blown crying indicates such intense activation, and indeed our mothers' most usual re- sponse to such crying was to pick the baby up (Bell & Ainsworth, 1972). It was not the total amount of time that the baby was held by the mother that pro- moted secure attachment so much as the contin- gency of the pick-up with infant signals of desire for contact, and the manner in which the mother then held and handled the baby. Babies who were se- curely attached not only responded positively to be- ing picked up, being readily comforted if they had been upset, but also they responded positively to being put down, and were likely to turn toward ex- ploration. Timely and appropriate close bodily con- tact does not "spoil" babies, making them fussy and clingy (Ainsworth, 1979). About the middle of the first year the babies had clearly become attached, and one of the signs of this was that they began to show distress when mother left the room (separation anxiety). However, babies whose attachment was secure seemed to build up a working model of mother as being available even though out of sight, and thus came to protest little everyday departures at home less often than did in- fants who were insecurely attached. On the other hand, they were more likely than insecure babies to greet the mother positively upon reunion, and less likely to greet her grumpily or with a cry (Stayton & Ainsworth, 1973; Stayton, Ainsworth, & Main, 1973). However, if the mother left when the baby was mildly stressed by an unfamiliar situation, as in the strange situation, even a secure child was likely to protest her departure. A useful paradox that emerged was that some infants who were clearly insecure at home, showing frequent separation pro- test or crying a lot in general, were apparently indif- ferent to their mothers' departure in the strange situation and avoided them upon reunion. Our inter- pretation was that under the increased stress of the unfamiliar situation a defensive process is activated, akin to the detachment that develops in young chil- dren undergoing major separations (Ainsworth & Bell, 1970; Ainsworth et al. , 1978). Although the avoidant infants had themselves experienced no ma- jor separations, their mothers had tended to be re- jecting at home during the first year, especially when their babies sought contact, as well as being generally insensitive to infant signals. In regard to socialization, the findings suggest that infants have a natural behavioral disposition to comply with the wishes of the principal attachment 10 accounted for his psychological symptoms in terms of attachment theory (Bowlby, 1990). Ainsworth in 1975-1976, nearing the completion of the publication of the findings of her Baltimore study, accepted an appointment at the University of Virginia and began work with a new generation of students, and continued her interest (sometimes par- ticipation) in the work of former students and col- leagues. This subsequent research has substantially extended the field, inspired by the larger vistas opened by the latter two volumes of Bowlby's tril- ogy. Attachment research, which usually used infant attachment classification as a base line, has been moving increasingly into the preschool years, ado- lescence, and adulthood. Two sets of researchers should be mentioned especially. Alan Sroufe of the University of Minnesota and his students and col- leagues have been undertaking long-term longitudi- nal follow-ups to ascertain the effect of the security or insecurity of Infant-mother attachment on chil- dren's performance of later developmental tasks, and to identify conditions that alter expected perform- ance. Mary Main of the University of California at Berkeley and her students and colleagues have fo- cused on devising new procedures for assessing at- tachment at later ages—specifically at age six and in adulthood. Her Adult Attachment Interview has proved to be useful with adolescents as well as adults, and promises to be very useful in clinical re- search. Another extension of attachment research of special interest to clinicians is the application of cur- rent techniques to understand the ways in which at- tachment develops in various at-risk populations. Thus, current attachment research has made pro- gress in elucidating conditions that affect the extent to which an individual remains on an initial develop- mental pathway or shifts direction at one or more points in development. It also is yielding support to Bowlby's emphasis on cross-generational effects. Ainsworth's own chief original contribution in re- cent years has been to extend ethologically oriented attachment theory to cover attachments and affec- tional bonds other than those between parents and their offspring, in the hope that this can be a theo- retical guideline for future research into other inter- personal aspects important in personality develop- ment (e. g. , Ainsworth, 1989; in press). In conclusion, we feel fortunate indeed in the outcome of our partnership in an ethological ap- proach to personality development. At first rejected by theoreticians, clinicians, and researchers alike, the intertwining of an open-ended theory and re- search both guided by it and enriching it has come to be viewed by many as fruitful. Focusing on intimate interpersonal relations, attachment theory does not aspire to address all aspects of personality develop- ment. However, it is an open-ended theory and, we hope, open enough to be able to comprehend new findings that result from other approaches. From its outset it has been eclectic, drawing on a number of scientific disciplines, including developmental, cog- nitive, social and personality psychology, systems theory, and various branches of biological science, including genetics. Although, at present, attachment theory leaves open many questions, both theoretical and practical, we are confident that attachment theo- rists will continue to be alert to new developments, in these and other areas, that will help to provide answers to problems still outstanding. References 1. Ainsworth, M. D. (1962). The effects of maternal deprivation: A review of findings and contro- versy in the context of research strategy. InDeprivation of maternal care: A reassessment of its effects( Public Health Papers, No. 15, pp. 87-195). Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Or- ganization. 2. Ainsworth, M. D. (1963). The development of mother-infant interaction among the Ganda.In B. M. Foss (Ed. ),Determinants of infant be- haviour(Vol. 2, pp. 67-112). London: Methuen. 3. Ainsworth, M. D. S. (1967). Infancy in Uganda: Infant care and the growth of love. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. 4. Ainsworth, M. D. S. (1969). Object relations, de- pendency and attachment: A theoretical review of the Infant-mother relationship. Child Devel- opment, 40, 969-1025. 5. Ainsworth, M. D. S. (1972). Attachment and de- pendency: A comparison.In J. L. Gewirtz (Ed. ),Attachment and dependency(pp. 97- 137). Washington, DC: Winston. 6. Ainsworth, M. D. S. (1977). Attachment theory and its utility in cross-cultural research.In P. H. Leiderman, S. R. Tulkin, & A. Rosenfeld (Eds. ),Culture and infancy: Variations in the human experience(pp. 49-67). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. 7. Ainsworth, M. D. S. (1979). Attachment as re- lated to mother-child interaction.In J. S. Rosen- blatt, R. A. Hinde, C. Beer, & M. Busnel 11 (Eds. ),Advances in the study of behavior(Vol. 9, pp. 1-51). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. 8. Ainsworth, M. D. S. (1989). Attachments beyond infancy. American Psychologist, 44, 709-716. 9. Ainsworth, M. D. S. (in press). Attachments and other affectional bonds across the life cycle.In C. M. Parkes, J. Stevenson-Hinde, & P. Marris (Eds. ),Attachment across the life cycle. New York: Routledge. 10. Ainsworth, M. D. & Ainsworth, L. H. (1958). Measuring security in personal adjustment. Toronto, Canada: University of Toronto Press. 11. Ainsworth, M. D. S. & Bell, S. M. (1969). Some contemporary patterns of mother-infant inter- action in the feeding situation.In A. Ambrose (Ed. ),Stimulation in early infancy(pp. 133- 170). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. 12. Ainsworth, M. D. S. & Bell, S. M. (1970). At- tachment, exploration, and separation: Individ- ual differences in strange-situation behavior of one-year-olds. Child Development, 41, 49-67. 13. Ainsworth, M. D. S., Bell, S. M. & Stayton, D. J. (1971). Individual differences in the strange- situation behavior of one-year-olds.In H. R. Schaffer (Ed. ),The origins of human social relations(pp. 17-58). San Diego, CA: Aca- demic Press. 14. Ainsworth, M. D. S., Bell, S. M. & Stayton, D. J. (1974). Infant-mother attachment and social development: Socialisation as a product of re- ciprocal responsiveness to signals.In M. J. M. Richards (Ed. ),The integration of a child into a social world(pp. 99-135). London: Cam- bridge University Press. 15. Ainsworth, M. D. S., Blehar, M. C., Waters, E. & Wall, S. (1978). Patterns of attachment: A psychological study of the strange situation. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. 16. Ainsworth, M. D. & Bowlby, J. (1953). Re- search strategy in the study of mother-child separation. Paris: Courrier de la Centre Inter- national de l'Enfance. 17. Ainsworth, M. D. S. & Wittig, B. A. (1969). At- tachment and exploratory behavior of one- year-olds in a strange situation.In B. M. Foss (Ed. ),Determinants of infant behavior(Vol. 4, pp. 111-136). London: Methuen. 18. Bell, S. M. & Ainsworth, M. D. S. (1972). Infant crying and maternal responsiveness. Child De- velopment, 43, 1171-1190. 19. Blatz, W. E. (1966). Human security: Some re- flections. Toronto, Canada: University of To- ronto Press. 20. Bowlby, J. (1944). Forty-four juvenile thieves: Their characters and their home life. Interna- tional Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 25, 19-52, 107-127. 21. Bowlby, J. (1951). Maternal care and mental health. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization. 22. Bowlby, J. (1953). Some pathological processes set in train by early mother-child separation. Journal of Mental Science, 2, 265-272. 23. Bowlby, J. (1958). The nature of a child's tie to his mother. International Journal of Psycho- Analysis, 39, 350-373. 24. Bowlby, J. (1960a). Grief and mourning in in- fancy and early childhood. Psychoanalytic Study of the Child, 15, 9-52. 25. Bowlby, J. (1960b). Separation anxiety. Interna- tional Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 41, 89-113. 26. Bowlby, J. (1961a). Processes of mourning. In- ternational Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 42, 317-340. 27. Bowlby, J. (1961b). Separation anxiety: A criti- cal review of the literature. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 1, 251-269. 28. Bowlby, J. (1963). Pathological mourning and childhood mourning. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 11, 500-541. 29. Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and loss: Vol. 1. Attachment. New York: Basic Books. 30. Bowlby, J. (1973). Attachment and loss: Vol. 2. Separation: Anxiety and anger. New York: Ba- sic Books. 31. Bowlby, J. (1979). The making and breaking of affectional bonds. London: Tavistock. 32. Bowlby, J. (1980). Attachment and loss: Vol. 3. Loss: Sadness and depression. New York: Basic Books. 33. Bowlby, J. (1988a). A secure base. New York: Basic Books. 34. Bowlby, J. (1988b). Attachment, communica- tion, and the therapeutic process.In J. Bowlby,A 12 secure base(pp. 137-157). New York: Basic Books. 35. Bowlby, J. (1990). Charles Darwin: A new biog- raphy. London: Hutchinson. 36. Bowlby, J. & Ainsworth, M. D. S. (1965). Child care and the growth of love (2nd ed. ). Harmondsworth, England: Penguin Books. 37. Bowlby, J., Ainsworth, M. D., Boston, M. & Rosenbluth, D. (1956). Effects of mother-child separation. British Journal of Medical Psychol- ogy, 29, 169-201. 38. Bretherton, I. & Ainsworth, M. D. S. (1974). Responses of one-year-olds to a stranger in a strange situation.In M. Lewis & L. A. Rosen- blum (Eds. ),The origin of fear(pp. 131-164). New York: Wiley. 39. Brown, G. W. & Harris, T. (1978). The social origins of depression: A study of psychiatric disorder in women. London: Tavistock. 40. Heinicke, C. (1956). Some effects of separating two-year-old children from their parents. Hu- man Relations, 9, 105-176. 41. Heinicke, C. & Westheimer, I. (1966). Brief separations. New York: International Universi- ties Press. 42. Klopfer, B., Ainsworth, M. D., Klopfer, W. G. & Holt, R. R. (1954). Developments in the Ror- schach technique (Vol. 1).Yonkers-on-Hudson, NY: World Book. 43. Parkes, C. M. (1972). Studies of grief in adult life. New York: International Universities Press. 44. Robertson, J. (1952). A two-year-old goes to hospital [Film].New York: New York Univer- sity Film Library. 45. Robertson, J. & Bowlby, J. (1952). Responses of young children to separation from their mothers. Courrier de la Centre International de l'En- fance, 2, 131-142. 46. Salter, M. D. (1940). An evaluation of adjust- ment based on the concept of security (University of Toronto Studies, Child Develop- ment Series, No. 18).Toronto, Canada: Univer- sity of Toronto Press. 47. Stayton, D. J. & Ainsworth, M. D. S. (1973). Individual differences in infant responses to brief, everyday separations as related to other infant and maternal behavior. Developmental Psychology, 9, 226-235. 48. Stayton, D. J., Ainsworth, M. D. S. & Main, M. (1973). The development of separation behavior in the first year of life: Protest, following, and greeting. Developmental Psychology, 9, 213- 225. 49. Stayton, D. J., Hogan, R. & Ainsworth, M. D. S. (1971). Infant obedience and maternal behavior: The origins of socialization reconsidered. Child Development, 42, 1057-1069.