12 Matching Annotations
  1. Jul 2021
    1. It is cheering in view of this trend to realize that the American male is physically endowed with all the really essential equipment to compete with the American female on equal terms in one essential activity: the rearing of infants.

      Yes, I feel this experiment did prove that this is possible I feel as humans of course a mother's love and affection and need is favorable, but to those that don't get that and instead find those characteristics in any other adult figure can be just as attached and feeling safe. It's important as well to the history because it also in a way isn't just classify moms/women in one category. And again eye opening that why can't a dad or any other figure help in that area.

    2. xpanded for the analysis and developmental study of father-infant and infant-infant affection.

      this would have been neat to read if they did it together to see how infants are with fathers and other babies as opposed to being just with mother.

    3. But by 30 days of age ever-increasing responsiveness to the mother's face appears -- whether through learning, maturation, or both -- and we have reason to believe that the face becomes an object of special attention.

      Yes, like humans get to start to recognize their own mothers faces and their faces are give us some sort of comfort and safety (i'm still trying to make the connection or similarities to us humans).

    4. During the last two years we have observed the behavior of two infants raised by their own mothers. Love for the real mother and love for the surrogate mother appear to be very similar. The baby macaque spends many hours a day clinging to its real mother. If away from the mother when frightened, it rushes to her and in her presence shows comfort and composure. As far as we can observe, the infant monkey's affection for the real mother is strong, but no stronger than that of the experimental monkey for the surrogate cloth mother, and the security that the infant gains from the presence of the real mother is no greater than the security it gains from a cloth surrogate. Next year we hope to put this problem to final, definitive, experimental test. But, whether the mother is real or a cloth surrogate, there does develop a deep and abiding bond between mother and child. In one case it may be the call of the wild and in the other the McCall of civilization, but in both cases there is "togetherness."

      I believe this too in the sense of that no matter real mom or not the monkeys felt some sort of connection and safety and felt the love it thought it was getting the same as a baby monkey with is real mom. It's important as well to show that we can attach ourselves to someone that shows some sort of mother or parent figure to us humans.

    5. The little we know about love does not transcend simple observation, and the little we write about it has been written better by poets and novelists

      So, would a thought be that we tend to know what love is based more on what we read and think rather than what we truly know?

    6. These authors and authorities have stolen love from the child and infant and made it the exclusive property of the adolescent and adult.

      I truly never thought about this till now "have stolen love from the child and infant", I would say that love started as that we love child and babies then turned into something adults obsessing over.

    7. Contrariwise, human affection does not extinguish when the mother ceases to have intimate association with the drives in question. Instead, the affectional ties to the mother show a lifelong, unrelenting persistence and, even more surprising, widely expanding generality.

      You could tie this to "why is this important in the history of psychology" because the cliche about a mother's love being different and special. It's been looked at and for it to start somewhere (looking into love) i think a mother's love was a good one.

    8. They have discovered the overwhelming importance of the breast and related this to the oral erotic tendencies developed at an age preceding their subjects' memories. Their theories range from a belief that the infant has an innate need to achieve and suckle at the breast to beliefs not unlike commonly accepted psychological theories. There are exceptions, as seen in the recent writings of John Bowlby, who attributes importance not only to food and thirst satisfaction, but also to "primary object-clinging," a need for intimate physical contact, which is initially associated with the mother.

      I immediately thought of Freud and his theory/stages, but I also thought this is important too because you can easily try to study the difference (if there is any) to a child and mother that breast feeds to a child and mother that bottle feed. Is there a different connection?

    9. hese data make it obvious that contact comfort is a variable of overwhelming importance in the development of affectional response, whereas lactation is a variable of negligible importance. With age and opportunity to learn, subjects with the lactating wire mother showed decreasing responsiveness to her and increasing responsiveness to the nonlactating cloth mother, a finding completely contrary to any interpretation of derived drive in which the mother-form becomes conditioned to hunger-thirst reduction. The persistence of these differential responses throughout 165 consecutive days of testing is evident in Figure 6.

      This was important because it also pretty much answered my first questions if there are differences. I think this was big time important because it proved that a love between mom and baby went beyond just being attached due to being fed. It was for nurture and warmth, just in general needing to be around "mom" and feeling "loved".

    10. n this situation, the variable of nursing appears to be of absolutely no importance: the infant consistently seeks the soft mother surrogate regardless of nursing condition.

      Again I think important in supporting that it isn't just about being fed=love it's needing a mother to protect or make one feel comfortable. More so that children go to mom for the comfort due to attachment than from dad, which dad didn't share a body with a child like mom does.

    11. No difference between the cloth-mother-fed and wire-mother-fed infants was demonstrated under either condition. Four control infants never raised with a mother surrogate showed the same emotionality scores when the mother was absent as the experimental infants showed in the absence of the mother, but the controls' scores were slightly larger in the presence of the mother surrogate than in her absence.

      Poor monkeys, but this could also be tested out to prove for humans as in having a mother present with new things and taken away to see the reactions. But what is harder would have humans do it because these monkey were taken away and raised differently, so how could you take away a human? You necessarily couldn't.

    12. In the last five retention test periods, an additional test was introduced in which the surrogate mother was placed in the center of the room and covered with a clear Plexiglas box. The monkeys were initially disturbed and frustrated when their explorations and manipulations of the box failed to provide contact with the mother. However, all animals adapted to the situation rather rapidly. Soon they used the box as a place of orientation for exploratory and play behavior, made frequent contacts with the objects in the field, and very often brought these objects to the Plexiglas box. The emotionality index was slightly higher than in the condition of the available cloth mothers, but it in no way approached the emotionality level displayed when the cloth mother was absent.

      This part was a little mean and sad to do that to them but at the same time it did show how they eventually got brave enough to be alone in a new room with new objects but being able to see "mom" made it okay.