John Bowlby’s research in, not only introduced into our understanding of child development one earliest theories that influence of social relationships on development, in an era dominated by bitter inner-feuding among Freud’s disciples (including his own daughter), as to was the true bearer of the master’s often flip-flopping, contradicting and or even acknowledged, leaps of contradicting truths, and own meanderings.
that the notion of the, was considered to be radical .As widely accepted as his statement in ?? conference that there is such a thing as a bad mother. his there is such a thing a a bad mother It’s kind of hard to believe now,but his was a time when his statement — / bad mother were considered to be radical notions about the influence of the kinds of attachments children share with their with caregivers can influence have a positive child on child development.
The developmental musings of John Locke and Henri Rousseau are generally regarded as the starting starting point of a tradition of inquiry, that share similar notions about human developmental stages and critical environmental influences, now representing set of theories that explains the cognitive, emotional, physical, social and educational growth that children go through from birth to early adulthood.
Ever expanding and continuously evolving, it spans from from Sigmund Freud’s stages of psychosexual development; to Eric Erikson’s ideas about the importance of psychosocial development; and Jean Piaget’s theory of cognitive development; to Pavlov’s behavioral experiments with classical and operant conditioning ; to Albert Bandura’s famous Bobo Doll studies and his theory of social learning.
It goes like this — children are hard-wired to behave in certain ways that encourage lively reciprocal social interactions between them and those upon whom they depend for their survival and security in an ongoing dance that has evolved over millions of years. Be mindful, that it isn’t just the babies with the strongest “social releasers” that have been selected out, it is also, the adults who respond to them.
Inconsistencies, disruptions, or disappointments in the formation and maintenance of securely felt attachment bonds signal the dissolution of the social (survival) bond, trigger distress and are perceived as traumatic, since closeness to emotionally significant caregivers is equated with one’s well being, and what is desired most of all. It has even been shown that infants’ biological homeostasis (code for baby-comfortable) is influenced simply by physical proximity to one’s caretakers.
Psychological attachment is understood to be the deep and enduring emotional bonds that become structured around these relationships, shaping our perceptions, emotions, thoughts and expectations, first of the expected availability of the desired attachment figure, and then later, of all future interpersonal and social interactions.
Bonding patterns form the basis of mental and emotional reflections of early attachment relationships — becoming the template through which one determines one’s perceptions of self, others, and the world. This includes our values and outlook on life, and may look like, I am good/bad, lovable/unlovable, competent/helpless; caregivers are responsive/unavailable, trustworthy/untrustworthy; the world is safe/unsafe and so on.
We all have formed beliefs and expectations about ourselves, others, and life in general. These beliefs and expectations develop in a complementary fashion intrinsically linked to how we perceive our attachment figures. Children make sense of their internal and external worlds based on what they see and experience reflected back to them through their caretaker’s eyes and actions. A mosaic of other’s either accurate or distorted reflections, and as Peter Fonagy suggests, the contingency and markedness or lack thereof.