Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
John Bowlby
Psychoanalyst John Bowlby is a pioneer into child psychology who closely followed the work of Freud. He also believed
that the most important years were those first few in life. As an infant, Bowlby never saw much of his mother during the
day as he was looked after by a nanny, and was sent to boarding school at aged 7 years. These experiences have affected
his views on the importance of attachments in childhood.
www.a2biology101.wordpress.com
Evolutionary theory
Evolutionary psychology is an entirely separate branch of psychology which is based upon the knowledge and principles
of biological evolution, which refers to increasing changes that occur in a population over time, produced at a genetic
level as organisms’ genes mutate and recombine in different ways during reproduction, so that certain variations and
adaptations can be passed on to future generations. When these adaptations help an organism to survive, this process is
known simply as evolution.
Evolution suggests that, according to Darwin’s theory of natural selection (1859), these adaptive traits will help an
organism to survive in their environment. This concept is applied in evolutionary psychology, and Bowlby used this idea to
help him devise his attachment theory. Evolutionary psychology stresses the importance of genes in biology in affecting
behaviour, and so is mainly nature-focused, but does not reject the importance of the environment, and appreciates the
fact that there is an interaction between genes and environment.
humans and other higher mammals have a when a vulnerable child, you need someone there to protect you, and
strong innate need to form attachments an attachment means you will have someone to look out for you
All of these characteristics are said to be innate, rather than learnt, which acts as evidence that they have evolved and are
passed along biologically. Each of them maximises the chances of living into adulthood and being able to reproduce,
which is why they are all considered evolutionary characteristics.
Bowlby has a rather significant interest in ethology – the study of animal behaviours in their environments – and he tried
to use some of these aspects of sciences to bring in to his studies of child psychology.
The term monotropy was devised by Bowlby to describe this warm, loving relationship which was shared with only one
person, i.e. the attachment is made with one person only. He claimed that social, emotional and intellectual development
would be irreversibly affected causing problems later in life if anything should happen to cause the mother-child bond to
break prematurely. This hypothesis is called the maternal deprivation hypothesis.
www.a2biology101.wordpress.com
The first 18-24 months of life are particularly important, and this is when Bowlby believed the attachment with the
mother was most crucial to socialisation – learning the rules of society and how to interact with others, including
understanding spoken language and appropriate body language. His hypothesis stated that a child needs the continuous
presence of the mother throughout this critical period.
If an attachment is not formed, or the development of it is disrupted, he believed that there would be two serious
consequences:
affectionless psychopathy – the inability to experience guilt or deep feelings for others, which can lead to delinquency
developmental retardation – simply meaning improper development (Bowlby suggested that those who do not form
a strong bond with their primary caregiver will always suffer from low intelligence)
However, a big criticism of Bowlby’s maternal deprivation hypothesis is that he does not clearly distinguish between
deprivation and privation. The hypothesis clearly states that these consequences arise from either the failure of forming a
bond or if a bond forms and is broken, but in fact if a bond is never made, that is privation, not deprivation – so Bowlby is
often criticised for not having suggested a separate consequences for the two, as privation would most likely have more
serious consequences than deprivation.
Social releasers
One of the main features of deprivation is the loss of the primary caregiver. This separation causes separation anxiety
(distress caused due to the separation of the primary carer and the child), which triggers some sort of response in the
infant which is designed to bring the mother back to the infant. These actions are called social releasers. They are innate
and instinctive behaviours infants are born with which aid survival. They involve species-specific behaviours to shape and
control the behaviour of the caregivers, so in humans, there are various examples, including:
sucking – it has been shown that this is also a thing of comfort, as it can reduce the level of stress in an infant
cuddling – in humans, a baby will mould its body to its mother’s, which enhances the attachment
looking – studies have shown that if an infant looks at their mother and the mother does not respond, the infant’s
level of distress is increased (so looking is seen as an invitation to provoke a reaction from the mother)
smiling – an innate social releaser which looks for a response (social smiling is not learnt until later on)
crying – associated with pain and needing help (for example, immediately after childbirth when the baby cannot move
or do anything, so it cries out)
It is claimed that mothers are born with a genetic blueprint which enables them to appropriately respond to these various
social releasers. It is important to understand that: social releasers are a consequence of separation anxiety (due to
maternal deprivation); and also that social releasers aid survival because they aim to reunite the mother and infant, as a
social releaser should draw the attachment figure back to the infant.
Bowlby was fairly controversial in his claims. He suggested that a child who internalises a working model of attachment as
kind and reliable will tend to bring those qualities to future relationships, and should succeed as a parent themselves. On
the other side, he suggested that those who internalise a negative working model (children who are neglected or abused),
will have a chance of reproducing those patterns in future relationships, which means they will not be able to be in any
future long-term relationships, and their own parenting will not be successful.
Whilst it is something of a myth that only those who have had the ‘model upbringing’ can be successful parents, as
Bowlby did suggest, it would seem that for everyone, the attachment which they first form with the primary caregiver will
have some sort of effect on the way in which they form an attachment with their own children. This was demonstrated by
Fonagy et al (1993), who assessed pregnant women’s internal working models using the AAI (adult attachment interview)
which measured how securely attached their babies were at 12 and 18 months. It emerged that those mothers who
reported insecure attachments to their own mothers had the least secure attachments to their own babies.
www.a2biology101.wordpress.com