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 APPROACH
VARIATION 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 DELAY
GRATIFICATION, FOCUSED EFFORT

Mechanism: Prefrontal inhibitory mechanisms control output of subcortical 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 AFFECT
LOW
MEDIUM
LEVEL OF STIMULATION
HIGH
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 AFFECT
LOW
MEDIUM
LEVEL OF STIMULATION
HIGH
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 AND
ADOLESCENCE
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
Reactivity/Emotionality
Love
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
G
G
S
A
Balanced
C
S
A
C
Prone to conflicts between G and C
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
high
Permissive
Authoritative
Control
High
Low
Warmth
Neglectful
Uninvolved
Authoritarian
low
Authoritative Parenting
AUTHORITATIVE PARENT
CHILDREN'S BEHAVIOR
Firm enforcement of rules
Confronts disobedience
Shows pleasure at child’s
constructive behavior
Considers child’s wishes and
opinions
Warm, involved, responsive
Expects mature, age-appropriate
behavior
Family activities
Educational standards
Energetic, friendly
Good peer relations
Accepts adult values
Achievement-oriented
Authoritarian Parenting
Authoritarian Parent
Rules rigidly enforced
Confronts Disobedience
Shows Anger
Views child as evil
Harsh, punitive discipline
No family activities
No educational demands
Child’s Behavior
Fearful Apprehensive
Shy
Aggression
Passively hostile,
guileful
Does not accept
parental values
Permissive Parenting
Permissive Parent
Rules not enforced
Yields to child coercion
Inconsistent discipline
Few demands for mature,
independent behavior
Moderate warmth
Hides annoyance
child’s behavior
Glorifies free expression
Child’s Behavior
Non-compliant
Low in self-reliance
Low in achievement striving
Lack of self-control
Aggressive, impulsive
Domineering
Does not accept adult values
Neglectful Parenting
Neglectful Parent
Minimize costs of parenting
Uninvolved with children
Focus on own needs
Fails to monitor children’s
delinquent activities,
impulsivity, or school
performance
Psychopathology
(e.g., depression, drug use)
Child’s Behavior
Rejects adult values
Peer group orientation
Aggression
Alienated from family
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
A. FAMILY CONTEXT
 MARITAL DISCORD
SINGLE PARENTING
NEGLECTFUL PARENTING
SIBLING REARING
HIGH INVESTMENT
SPOUSAL HARMONY
PATERNAL COMMITMENT
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
MATURATION/PUBERTY
LATER
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
B
M
 MOTHER WITHIN SET POINT: BABY EXPLORES
M
B
 MOTHER EXCEEDS SET POINT: ATTACHMENT
BEHAVIORS TRIGGERED, EXPLORATION CEASES
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 RESPONSIVE
WHEN 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
1. Assessment
2. Emotions
3. Function
WARMTH
Security of ATTACHMENT
Observation, Questionnaire
Strange Situation
4. Mechanism
5. Environmental
Love, Sympathy, Empathy
Pair-bonding, Nurturance,
Investment in Children
Physiological reward system
Parental warmth
influences
6. Heritable
Yes
7. Five Factor Model
8. Sex Differences
9. Distribution Among
Yes, Factor II
Yes (females > males)
Pair-bonding rare
Primates
Felt Security or Anxiety
Protection
Proximity Maintenance
IWM (Cognitive)
Sensitivity &
Responsiveness
No (Temperament may
influence)
No
No
Very common