Pathological Defenses in Infancy

Fraiberg, Selma

doi:10.1080/21674086.1982.11927012

Cited by 207 publications

(101 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Bowlby published a paper in 1960 intended for a psychoanalytic audience based on his observations of these behaviors in his clinical practice with families, which were similar to those of other clinicians working with child patients with histories of trauma (e.g. Fraiberg, 1982). Having emphasized the value of the concept of “disorganization”, he then promised, “this is a concept to which we shall be returning in a paper to follow” (Bowlby, 1960, p. 110).…”

Section: Issues Of Terminologymentioning

confidence: 96%

Disorganized attachment and defense: exploring John Bowlby’s unpublished reflections

Reisz

Duschinsky

Siegel³

2017

Attachment & Human Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Main and Solomon were the first to create a formal infant Strange Situation classification of attachment disorganization. Bowlby’s reflections on the underlying psychological processes of such behaviors, however, began early in his career, including the term “disorganization.” Most of these remained unpublished but are available through the John Bowlby Archive. Bowlby saw affective experiences as the source of the attachment behavioral system’s organization and regulation, and he introduced the term “effector equipment” to describe the emergent organization of attention, expectation, affect, and behavior to orchestrate responses to the environment. In his thinking, disorganization results from threat conflict, safe haven ambiguity, and/or activation without assuagement, which interfere with coordination and integration across a behavioral system. Bowlby’s unpublished writings also amplify his published work on segregated systems and defensive exclusion. Bowlby’s insights are relevant today and can provide greater background and clarity to current work, as researchers and clinicians consider the origins, manifestations, and meaning of disorganization.

show abstract

Section: Issues Of Terminologymentioning

confidence: 96%

Disorganized attachment and defense: exploring John Bowlby’s unpublished reflections

Reisz

Duschinsky

Siegel³

2017

Attachment & Human Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Menahem (1984) described two infants with possible Conservation -Withdrawal reaction arising from grossly inadequate feeding and suggested that many infants with NOFTT can be better understood within the concept of Conservation -Withdrawal. Fraiberg (1982) described a group of pathological defenses observed between 3 and 18 months of age infants who experienced severe danger and deprivation. These early defenses, avoidance, freezing and fighting are, following Selma Fraiberg, apparently summoned from a biological repertoire.…”

Section: From Sustained Withdrawal Reaction To Depression In Infantsmentioning

confidence: 99%

From early withdrawal reaction to infant depression: A baby alone does exist

Guédeney¹

1997

Infant Ment. Health J.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Withdrawal is a feature of most attachment disorders (Zeanah, Boris, Baskshi & Lieberman, 2000). Fraiberg (1982) described the "freezing reaction," observed among infants when they are faced with very adverse conditions. Recently, infant withdrawal has been recognized as an element of the clinical picture of attachment disorganization (Solomon & George, 1999).…”

mentioning

confidence: 98%

A validity and reliability study of assessment and screening for sustained withdrawal reaction in infancy: The Alarm Distress Baby scale

Guédeney

Fermanian

2001

Infant Mental Health Journal

173

186

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sustained withdrawal behavior in infancy is an important alarm signal to draw attention to both organic and relationship disorders. A withdrawal scale, the Alarm Distress Baby scale (ADBB), for infants between 2 and 24 months of age was built. This article describes the construction of the scale and the assessment of its psychometric properties. The ADBB has good content validity, based on the advice of seven experts. The scale has good criterion validity: first, as a measure of the infant's withdrawal reaction, with a very good correlation between nurse and pediatrician on the ADBB (r ϭ 0.84), and s second, as a screening procedure for detecting the developmental risk of the infant. The cutoff score of 5 with a sensitivity of 0.82 and a specificity of 0.78 was determined to be optimal for screening purposes. The scale has good construct validity, with good convergent validity with both the Spitz (1951) and the Herzog & Rathbun (1982) lists of symptoms of infant depression (r ϭ 0.61 and 0.60, respectively). s Exploratory factor analysis showed two different factors, consistent with the scale's construct. Reliability was satisfactory with good internal consistency for both subscales (the Cronbach ␣ ϭ 0.80 for the first subscale and 0.79 for the second) and for the global scale (␣ ϭ 0.83). The test-retest procedure showed good stability over time (r ϭ 0.90 and 0.84 for the two different raters). The scale could be used in 560• A. Guedeney and J. Fermanian relatively brief period of time. The scale can be used by nurses and psychologists or by medical doctors after a short period of training.RESUMEN: Cuando la conducta de ensimismarse o apartarse es sostenida durante la infancia nos encontramos frente a una importante señal de alarma que nos hace dirigir la atención hacia los trastornos orgánicos y los que se presentan dentro de una relación. Se ha establecido una escala para determinar el ensimismamiento en infantes entre los 2 y 24 meses de edad, la cual se denomina "Alarm Distress Baby scale" (ADBB). Este ensayo describe la estructuración de dicha escala y la evaluación de sus propiedades sicométricas. La ADBB tiene una muy buena validez de contenido, basándose en el consejo de siete expertos. La escala también posee una validez en cuanto al buen criterio: primero como una forma de medir la reacción de ensimismamiento del infante, con una buena correlación entre enfermera y pediatra en la ADBB (rs ϭ 0.84); y segundo, como un procedimiento investigativo para detectar el riesgo de desarrollo del infante. Se determinó que un puntaje máximo de 5, con una sensibilidad de 0.82, y una especifidad de 0.78, era el puntaje óptimo para los propósitos investigativos. La escala tiene asímismo una buena validez de estructuración, con buena validez convergente con referencia a las listas de síntomas de la depresión infantil de Spitz (1951) y de Herzog & Rathbun (1982) (rs: 0.61 y 0.60). El análisis del factor de exploración mostró dos diferentes factores, consistentes con la estructuración de la escala. La fiabilidad...

show abstract

Pathological Defenses in Infancy

Cited by 207 publications

References 3 publications

Disorganized attachment and defense: exploring John Bowlby’s unpublished reflections

Disorganized attachment and defense: exploring John Bowlby’s unpublished reflections

From early withdrawal reaction to infant depression: A baby alone does exist

A validity and reliability study of assessment and screening for sustained withdrawal reaction in infancy: The Alarm Distress Baby scale

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About