1994
DOI: 10.1037/h0079530
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Representation and internalization in infancy: Three principles of salience.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
29
0
1

Year Published

1998
1998
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 271 publications
(46 citation statements)
references
References 117 publications
1
29
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…These findings provide a more conservative test of infants’ processing of neutral expressions and suggest that while infants do consider context in the absence of emotional facial expressions (as suggested by Vaish et al, 2009), they are also sensitive to the salience of the appropriate facial expressions. These findings are in line with the literature that highlights the importance of emotional salience in infancy (Beebe & Lachmann, 1994; Brown, Robinson, Herbert & Pascalis; 2006; Gross, Hayne, Herbert, & Sowerby, 2002; Messinger, Mattson, Mahoor, & Cohn, 2012; Montague & Walker-Andrews. 2001).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 91%
“…These findings provide a more conservative test of infants’ processing of neutral expressions and suggest that while infants do consider context in the absence of emotional facial expressions (as suggested by Vaish et al, 2009), they are also sensitive to the salience of the appropriate facial expressions. These findings are in line with the literature that highlights the importance of emotional salience in infancy (Beebe & Lachmann, 1994; Brown, Robinson, Herbert & Pascalis; 2006; Gross, Hayne, Herbert, & Sowerby, 2002; Messinger, Mattson, Mahoor, & Cohn, 2012; Montague & Walker-Andrews. 2001).…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 91%
“…The chair-work (both their experience and that of the other participants) propelled them to focus on their emotions and process them moment-by-moment; hence, paying attention to, acknowledging and processing their emotions. In classic group therapy, sporadic "moments" of heightened affect are reported by group members to be particularly salient and critical in their personal discovery, healing, and growth (Beebe & Lachmann, 1994;Gray, 2001). It appears that beyond sporadic "moments" of heightened affect that are typical in classic group therapies, this group may have allowed for regular intervals of heightened affect (by way of chair-work), potentially promoting group members' emotional attunement, processing and consequential positive outcomes (Pascual-Leone & Greenberg, 2007).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…In particular, attachment theorists have emphasized the role of procedural representations, which are "rulebased representations of how to proceed, of how to do things" (Lyons-Ruth et al, 1998, p. 284; see Beebe & Lachmann, 1994;Main et al, 1985;Waters & Waters, 2006). After repeated interactions with their attachment figures, infants develop an implicit knowledge of the cause-effect contingency between their attachment behavior and their caregivers' subsequent sensitivity or insensitivity (Beebe & Lachmann, 1994). These procedural representations, which have been referred to as "implicit relational knowing" (Lyons-Ruth et al, 1998), require the infant to be in the original social context (i.e., interacting with their caregiver; Fogel, 2004) and they follow a script about what happens when the infant approaches an attachment figure (e.g., the caregiver responds insensitivity).…”
Section: Dichotomous Memory Systemsmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Although Bowlby (1969Bowlby ( /1982 focused on the role of explicit memory in attachment representations, it is likely that aspects of the attachment relationship are remembered through implicit memory processes and that these implicit memories contribute to the infants' IWM. In particular, attachment theorists have emphasized the role of procedural representations, which are "rulebased representations of how to proceed, of how to do things" (Lyons-Ruth et al, 1998, p. 284; see Beebe & Lachmann, 1994;Main et al, 1985;Waters & Waters, 2006). After repeated interactions with their attachment figures, infants develop an implicit knowledge of the cause-effect contingency between their attachment behavior and their caregivers' subsequent sensitivity or insensitivity (Beebe & Lachmann, 1994).…”
Section: Dichotomous Memory Systemsmentioning
confidence: 99%