child’s unconscious representation of the parents does more than provide the in-
fant with an object to relate to in the physical absence of the mother or father.
The way the child internalizes the parent ’s image serves as a basis for how the
child thinks of others when he or she enters into future relationships. In other
words, the kind of attachment children feel with their parents influences their
ability to develop meaningful attachments with significant others as adults.
Object relations theory became the springboard for what has been called
attachment theory. Perhaps the two biggest contributors to this theory were
John Bowlby (1969, 1973, 1980) and Mary Ainsworth (1989; Ainsworth,
Blehar, Waters, & Wall, 1978). These psychologists examined the emotional
bonds between infants and their caregivers, again usually the mother. Bowlbyreferred to these as attachment relationships because they meet our human
need to form attachments with a supportive and protective other. Bowlbywas particularly interested in the reactions of infants who are physically sepa-rated from their primary caregiver. Some children deal with the separation
quite well. These infants seem to understand that mother is gone for the mo-
ment but that she will return and that the love and nurturance they need willnot be lost. However, Bowlby observed that other children seem to protest
the separation by crying. Still other infants react to their mother ’sa b s e n c eb y
falling into a type of despair, and some respond with a kind of detachment to
the mother even when she returns.
Ainsworth and her colleagues made similar observations in their studies
with infants and mothers. They identified three types of parent –child relation-
ships (Ainsworth et al., 1978). First, there are secure infant-mother pairs.
Mothers in these dyads are attentive and responsive to their child. Infants
who experience this type of attachment understand that mother is responsive
and accessible even if she is not physically present. Secure children tend to be
happy and self-confident. In contrast, we sometimes find anxious-ambivalent
relationships. Mothers in these dyads are not particularly attentive or respon-
sive to the child’ s needs. The children are anxious whenever mother leaves,
sometimes breaking into tears as soon as they are separated. These childrenare not easily calmed by other adults and may be afraid in unfamiliar situa-tions. Finally, there are avoidant relationships. Mothers in these relationships
also are not very responsive to the child. However, the child reacts to thistreatment by developing a type of aloofness or emotional detachment fromthe mother. These children do not become anxious when mother leaves and
are not particularly interested in her attention when she returns.
Attachment theorists then took their observations about different attach-
ment styles one step further. Like the object relations theorists, they argue thatthese different infant –parent relationships have long-term implications for the
child’s ability to enter into relationships later in life. Bowlby argues that the in-
fant forms unconscious “working models ”for interpersonal involvement. If the
child experiences love and trust in this early relationship, the child will come to
see him- or herself as lovable and trustworthy. However, if the infant ’sa t t a c h -
ment needs are not met, the child will develop a less healthy self-image.
“An unwanted child is likely not only to feel unwanted by his parents but to
believe that he is essentially …unwanted by anyone, ”Bowlby (1973) explained.140 CHAPTER 6 The Neo-Freudian Theories