Dear Annete Thanks a lot for your efforts on clarifying this topic. Even without see what you saw exploring the background of the author I want to second your Bottom Line.
But for me the interest on the question is keeping in the sense that I admit we can get different grounded answers to the question originally raised In a quick search I found the following paper that makes justice to the complexity of the question Celia L. Moore (2006) Maternal Behavior, Infant Development, and the Question of Developmental Resources. Developmental psychobiology, 49, 1 I copy-past the abstract ABSTRACT: The natural development of maternal and infant behavior occurs in a dyad characterized by synchrony and reciprocal interactions. Major concepts used to describe and analyze this synchrony were reviewed. It was concluded that the dyad undergoes a developmental progression in which each part of the dyad is both a developing organism and a reliably changing milieu forming part of the extended inheritance of the other. The reliability of inherited resources is rooted in interactions essential to life, such as those used to transfer metabolic needs to dependent offspring; to stimulation (incidentally but necessarily) associated with life-supporting mechanisms; and to perceptual, motor, or learning mechanisms used to extract specific resources from the available milieu. The diverse resources in extended inheritance contribute to the construction of new traits through opportunistic shaping or regulating interactions among them that are unrestricted by their function at earlier stages My best Jose -----Mensagem original----- De: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Enviada: quarta-feira, 18 de Junho de 2008 14:31 Para: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS) Assunto: Re: [tips] allowing infants to cry OK: I received corrected info on Lisa Spiegel backlist. I googled her and found ONLY her own website. There she provides personal anecdotes, testimonials to her advice and a blog on various aspects of baby-rearing. NOTHING SCIENTIFIC, NOTHING ACADEMIC, NOTHING WITH ANY EVIDENCE OTHER THAN ANECDOTE TO SUPPORT IT. Ok, so I went to the scientific side of a search, and I can't believe I just wasted an hour on this, but I wanted to put closure on this avenue of information. I searched academic search premier, psychinfo and eric. I FOUND NOTHING published at all, in any journal, magazine, etc. (Eric will often drift from science). NOTHING. So, whatever she has to say, it's her opinion. I have mine. Oh, the clincher is that if you want to see more than the first page of her information on baby issues you have to sign up and join the website--the benefits of which include: *Share your MomSense by asking and answering questions in MomAnswers *Share photos and win daily prizes in the ClubMom Scrapbook *Indulge daily in over 30 MomBlogs *Sign up for the newsletters and stay plugged in with other moms I AM SO SICK AND TIRED OF THESE PEOPLE GETTING ALL THE MEDIA ATTENTION (AND MONEY!!!!!!!!!) BY PROMOTING PABLUM THAT PROBABLY DOESN'T WORK FOR MOST PEOPLE AND ONLY MAKES WOMEN FOR WHOM IT DOESN'T WORK FEEL BAD ABOUT THEMSELVES AS "BAD MOMS" (or bad whatevers, in this case it happens to be about moms, but this psychobabble is pervasive. Are we losing all the battles AND the war? Bottom Line: Forget about anything she has to say, no matter her high profile in the media. Annette Annette Kujawski Taylor, Ph.D. Professor of Psychology University of San Diego 5998 Alcala Park San Diego, CA 92110 619-260-4006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
