I will attempt to clarify my earlier statement about attachment theory being “an operationalization of Freud, ” but allow me to preface my comments by saying I am neither an expert in behaviorism nor psychoanalytic theory.
One of the most common critiques of Freudian theory is that it is untestable due to his reliance on the unconscious and repressed urges. (By Freudian theory, I am referring more generally to the impact of our early lives and not specific theories such as the Oedipal complex.) I see attachment theory as providing a kind of "operational definition" of this impact of early life. An infant's attachment style (which can be measured, defined, and categorized) should develop in a predictable fashion and should have a measurable and predictable impact on the child's (and later the adult's) life. To some extent, one's attachment style is unconscious, but this does not mean it cannot be measured, categorized, and further examined. So, what I mean by "operationalization" is that it allows the idea that our parents and our early life impact us greatly to be clearly tested by a method other than case study (or some may argue that it allows this idea to be clearly tested period). Adults with a secure attachment style should have children with a secure attachment style, and that should result in those children having X, Y, and Z characteristics. Adults with a preoccupied should have children with an ambivalent attachment style, and that should result in those children having A, B, and C characteristics. (And so on for the other attachment styles.) If these predictions are not true (and in some cases they are not), the cases that veer from the predictions should be "lawfully" explained. If those cases cannot be explained, then attachment theory doesn't hold much water and/or needs some revision. It is a testable theory, built on measurable concepts, which is very different from what many people say about Freud's theory. Hope this helps -- Christine ~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~ Christine L. Glover Committee on Human Development University of Chicago [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Kind words do not cost much. They never blister the tongue or lips. They make other people good-natured. They also produce their own image on men's souls, and a beautiful image it is." -- Blaise Pascal --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
