CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,461Attachment and Relationship DynamicsPsychoanalysis and Psychopathology ResearchChild and Animal Learning Development

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 85 of the 86 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Object Relations, Dependency, and Attachment: A Theoretical Review of the Infant-Mother Relationship

Ainsworth, Mary D. Salter·1969·Child Development
DOI 10.2307/1127008
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

3 theoretical approaches to the origin and development of the infant-mother relationship are reviewed: psychoanalytic theories of object relations, social learning theories of dependency (and attachment), and an ethologically oriented theory of attachment. "Object relations, " "dependency, " and "attachment, " although overlapping, are seen to differ substantially. Among the concepts in regard to which there are significant intertheoretical differences, the following are discussed: genetic "biases, " reinforcement as compared with activation and termination of behavioral systems and with feedback, strength o f attachment behavior versus strength of attachment, inner representation of the object, intra-organismic and environmental conditions of behavioral activation, and the role of intra-organismic organization and structure. Finally, the relation between theory and research methods is considered. Three terms have been commonly used to characterize the infant's relationship with his mother: "object relations, " "dependency, " and "attachment. " Although they overlap somewhat in their connotations, these terms are not synonymous. Each is more or less closely tied to a distinctive theoretical formulation of the origin and development of

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2307/1127008

Cites

85 of 85 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 86 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Ainsworth, M. D. S.
Affiliations
Johns Hopkins University (US)
Corresponding author
Ainsworth, Mary D. Salter
Venue
Child Development
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Published
1969-12
Volume
40
Issue
4
Pages
969
ISSN
0009-3920 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.2307/1127008
OpenAlex
W2060051277
Cited by
1,461
References
86
Citations by year
2026: 34 · 2025: 38 · 2024: 100 · 2023: 80 · 2022: 65 · 2021: 55 · 2020: 92 · 2019: 58 · 2018: 53 · 2017: 61 · 2016: 46 · 2015: 39 · 2014: 59 · 2013: 56 · 2012: 37
FWCI
20.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Child Development (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Attachment and Relationship Dynamics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Child and Animal Learning Development
Keywords
mother-infant relationship, object relations, dependency, attachment, psychoanalytic theory, social learning theory, attachment behavior, behavioral systems, reinforcement, feedback, behavioral activation
MeSH terms
Adult, Behaviorism, Child, Child Development, Child, Preschool, Discrimination, Psychological, Drive, Ethology, Female, Humans, Infant, Infant, Newborn, Learning, Love, Mother-Child Relations, Object Attachment, Orientation, Personality Development, Psychoanalytic Theory, Psychological Theory, Reinforcement, Psychology, Social Behavior

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review