Watson J S
Department of Psychology at the University of California at Berkeley, USA.
Bull Menninger Clin. 2001 Summer;65(3):296-320. doi: 10.1521/bumc.65.3.296.19848.
A theoretical analysis is presented in which the four major attachment patterns (A, B, C, and D) are viewed as adaptations to particular forms of early contingency experience. The author proposes that human infants analyze contingency experience on the basis of two computations of conditional probability, one prospective and one retrospective. Ideally, when these computations do not agree, the direction of disagreement provides information as to how the infant should adjust effective behavior and/or how potential contingent consequences should be redefined. The author also proposes that the specific patterns of insecure attachment (A, C, and D) are a result of parental responsiveness that is by nature inconsistent or out of balance and that the infant interprets this imbalance as his or her misperception of a balanced contingency. The observed symptoms of attachment insecurity are seen as consistent with specific attempts by infants to adjust behavior and/or discrimination according to the direction of imbalance in conditional probabilities they have experienced in interactions with their caretakers.
本文提出了一种理论分析，其中四种主要的依恋模式（A、B、C和D）被视为对特定形式的早期偶然性经历的适应。作者提出，人类婴儿基于两种条件概率计算来分析偶然性经历，一种是前瞻性的，一种是回顾性的。理想情况下，当这些计算结果不一致时，不一致的方向会提供有关婴儿应如何调整有效行为和/或应如何重新定义潜在偶然后果的信息。作者还提出，不安全依恋的特定模式（A、C和D）是父母反应本质上不一致或失衡的结果，婴儿将这种失衡理解为自己对平衡偶然性的误解。观察到的依恋不安全感症状被视为与婴儿根据在与照顾者互动中所经历的条件概率失衡方向来调整行为和/或辨别力的特定尝试相一致。
