Dr Porpavai Kasiannan So, let us look at  the theories that help us understand infant   development, and thereby help parents understand  their role as parents and also influence their   parenting. So, if we look at broad theoretical  formulations, there are two broad domains,   one domain surrounds the childhood, the beliefs  around childhood and child development, and the   other domain focuses on the social context in  which childrearing takes place. There are theories   that focus on the child, there are theories that  focus on the interaction between the child and the   environment, and there are broader theories  that focus on multi-dimensional influences. The theories that focus on the child might focus  on the infant and child as a passive recipient,   and also might focus on the infant and child as an  active participant. I will discuss these theories   in a little bit more detail as we go on.  The British Empiricist Philosopher John   Locke considered that a child came into the  world as a "tabula rasa" or blank slate. That   he thought that the child's experiences in  the world determined what was written on the   slate and shaped the person they became. This  kind of mechanistic worldview saw the child as   essentially passive in the developmental process  and the environment as the active agent. So,   in John Locke's view, the majority of the infant  development depended on the nurture hypothesis. The Behaviourist formulations are in - sort  of, based on John Locke's blank slate concept.   John Watson, who was influenced by Thorndike  and Pavlov, coined the term "behaviourism" as   a scientific study in human behaviour. And he is  well-known for the controversial Little Albert   experiment, in which nine-month-old Albert, who  was not fearful of playing with any sort of toys,   while playing with a white rat or mouse,  he was exposed to aversive stimuli,   thereby creating a fear response in Little Albert,  which got generalised to anything that was white   and furry. And Skinner, another Behaviourist,  focused on reinforcement theory. He saw children's   development as an outcome of rewards and  punishments that are operating in their   environment. So, children's behaviours increased  if they had - if they were reinforced, either   positively or negatively, and the behaviours  could be reduced or made to reduce by punishments.   In the Behaviourist worldview, the onus for  childrearing is focused solely on the child's   social environment, in which parents occupy  a central place, and it was the parents' task   to mould or shape the child out of the unformed  clay, again, a purely nurture-based hypothesis. An alternative vision by French Philosopher  Rousseau was regarded - who regarded that   the child as a noble savage, with natural  virtues and an innate capacity for reason.   So, when we char - when we view the child  having natural virtues and innate capacity,   the role of the parents and others was to nurture  and encourage the child in the natural process of   the growth, with the child as a critical  active agent in their own development,   unless otherwise it was ruined by the  adult world. So, in this worldview,   there is both nature and nurture at  play in the infant's development. Arnold Gesell, who was a Psychologist and  Paediatrician, who also developed the Maturational   Theory, essentially saw infants and babies as  purely a genetic constructions. They were just   made of genes and the genes dictated how they  were going to develop in their life. Although the   Maturational Theory does include environmental  factors, Gesell focused mostly on the gene -   genetic construction of babies. According to him,  children will be pretty much - be what they will   be, regardless how they are raised, because  they were - those characters were determined   by genes. At the turn of 20th century, a common,  but not universal, view was that the child was   inherently flawed, very similar to Gesell's view.  For example, the Christian notion of original sin,   social Darwinism, views on born criminals and  brad - bad breeding, focusing solely on nature. Then comes the psychoanalytic theories developed  by Freud initially. Psychoanalytic thinking   stressed the hereditary makeup, again nature, in  particular, the strength of sexual and aggressive   drives in infant development. Freud theorised that  the child was driven by the id, the repository   of desire and animal passions, as well as the  source of creativity, which needed to be quelled   or repressed so that the social relations could  be established, which was governed by the ego and   superego. And in his psychosexual developmental  theory, infancy is defined in the oral phase,   when experiences and activities are centred  around pleasures that are derived from the mouth,   notably feeding. If the baby's needs for oral  gratification are overindulged or underindulged,   then the baby will grow into an adult  who continually seeks oral gratification,   or otherwise. Freud's theory have not been -  have not stood the test of time and research. Following Freud, another Psychoanalyst, Erikson,  focused on the child's changing sense of   identity. So, his theory focused on not only the  child's innate drives, but also the interaction   with the environment. So, in infancy, again,  infants are focused on oral sensory experiences,   they develop basic trust or mistrust in others.  And whether infants develop basic trust has   implications for the way they negotiate the next  stage, which is the anal stage of development,   in which the key issue is establishing autonomy  or shame, and which happens in toddlerhood.   More modern propellants of psychodynamic schools  of thinking, which includes Winnicott and Bowlby,   continue to see infancy as a critical - as  critical for the basic differentiation of self. Let us look at infant as a psychological  being, so in the - in other theoretical,   sort of, understandings. So, when we look at  infant as a psychological being, we focus on   cognitive development, mother-child relationship  and the individual differences amongst infants.   The Cognitive Development Theory was developed by  Piaget. Piaget's genetic epistemology and work,   from the 1920s through the 1970s, emphasised how  development, in particular cognitive development,   occurs through the natural progression of  biologically encoded stages. For Piaget,   the environment could play a facilitatory  or impeding role, but was less central to   the development. Hence, according to him,  nature played a stronger role than nurture. In his theory of development, infancy comes  under the sensory-motor stage, which is birth   to two years, during which stage infants  progress from simply - simple reflex-driven   behaviours to increasingly complex and intentional  actions, gradually constructing a foundational   understanding of objects, space, causality and  time, with attainment and representational thought   or symbolisation. This kind of symbolisation  actually can help us understand certain   developmental challenges in infancy, such as the  emergence of separation anxiety, from about seven   months of age. This is based on the infant's  new awareness of distinctions between self   and mother and between mother and other. So, it  helps us to understand some of those challenges. John Bowlby developed the attachment theory in the  1960s. Attachment is an enduring affective bond,   characterised by a tendency to maintain  close proximity to a specific figure,   particularly when distressed or when in  stress. The empirical roots for attachment   theory comes from studies on naturalistic  observations of animal behaviour and imprinting   studies by Konrad Lorenz. Attachment theory is  a psychological and evolutionary framework that   explains how humans form close emotional bonds  with caregivers. This is a developmental process   which includes quintessentially, the initial bond  between mother and infant, or any other primary   caregiver. And this bond helps further development  of relationships and widening social ties as the   infant grows older, such as relationships with  siblings, relationships with the extended family   members, peer relationships, intimate partner  relationships, and so on, into the future. So, again, we'll look a little bit into attachment  theory to understand it a little bit better.   This is a theory that looks at the mother-infant  relationship. Process of attachment unfolds in the   first years of life and it continues. So, newborns  can recognise mother's smell and sound soon after   birth, but express no preference for a particular  person to provide comfort of distress. Between two   and seven months of age, infants are motivated  to interact socially with a variety of partners,   familiar and unfamiliar. During this time, the  infant may be more readily comforted by a familiar   caregiver, although he or she is generally able  to be soothed by unfamiliar adults, as well. At around seven to nine months, infants begin  to exhibit reticence around unfamiliar adults,   so stranger wariness happens, and they  protest separations from familiar caregivers,   so the separation protest also happens. Once  these behaviours have appeared, the infant is   said to have formed an - a selective or preferred  attachment, which is usually with the mother,   in most cases. So, infants become attached  to caregivers with whom they have significant   amount of interaction, in terms of the quality of  interaction and also the quantity of interaction.   This attachment appears to be a relatively -  with a relatively small number of adults whom   the infant learns through experience that  she or he can count on to provide comfort,   support, nurturance, and protection,  especially in times of stress. And these attachment figures appear to be arranged  hierarchically by the infant in terms of the   strength of preference. So, they might have  a most preferred caregiver, say the mother,   the next most preferred caregiver, the father, and  so on and so forth. And this can - the - you know,   if we look at young children who are removed from  institutions or from neglecting families, they   rarely form attachments to the new caregivers.  However, the quality of the subsequent attachments   may be compromised because of their lack of  stable, secure attachment earlier in their lives. By about 12 months of age, it becomes possible  to assess the quality of an infant's attachment   to a preferred attachment figure through a  procedure that was developed by Mary Ainsworth,   called the Strange Situation Procedure. In  this procedure, the infant or the child is   observed during various phases of transition,  the particular transitions being playing with the   mother and mother leaving the scene and then later  on reuniting with the mother. And the observations   are carefully studied to understand the attachment  relationship between the infant and the mother. And based on research and observations  on Strange Situation Procedure,   the attachment patterns have been classified  into four categories. Secure attachment is   when - we call it "secure attachment" when  the infant has distress on mother leaving,   but seeks her proximity, affection and  contact on return. So, the baby is able to   share feelings easily and is readily comforted,  and most children show this type of attachment,   about two thirds of children. The other - the  three types of attachments are called "insecure   attachment patterns." In that, there's  avoidant, insecure attachment pattern,   in which the baby appears to ignore mother,  shows minimal distress on her living, avoids her   on reunion and seems detached from her mother.  So, that's the "avoidant attachment" pattern. The other one is "anxious-ambivalent or  resistant attachment," where the baby is   inconsistent in distress reunion responses.  So, the baby might move towards the mother,   then away from her again on reunion, and they  may appear as if they're trying to punish her   mother for leaving her in the first place. And  many children, many infants, may go from - go   between different types of attachment, depending  upon the context, but in majority of the time,   they will be in one preferred type of  attachment based on their experiences of   the - their own experience of the relationship,  attachment relationship, with the parents. The fourth type of attachment pattern  is called "disorganised attachment." In   this attachment pattern, there is a lack of  coherent style or pattern for coping. I mean,   in the other two insecure attachment patterns we  have either avoidant or anxious ways of coping,   whereas in this, there is no coherent style, at  all. There will be a momentary breakdown of the   usual organised attachment strategies,  so they are unable to use any of these   strategies in a coherent way. This type  of attachment is thought to be caused   usually by frightening or frightened parental  behaviour, or loss or trauma in parents. So,   it's mainly caused by how the parents respond  to their infant s needs, and especially,   you know, when the parents are significantly  traumatised or when they have diagnosis such   as borderline personality disorder. This  is the most insecure type of attachment   pattern and has a high risk factor for a range  of psychopathologies as the infant grows older. So, we've looked at the cognitive development  and the theories, so the attachment theory,   which is the interactional theory, and then  we are looking at the individual differences   among children. So, Alexander Thomas and  Stella Chess, both Child Psychiatrists,   studied temperament in children in the 1950s. So,  temperament they define is as "a child's emotional   and behavioural style of responding to the world."  A child displays temperament style from birth,   so it might be - it is usually considered as an  innate characteristic of the child. According to   them, there are nine temperament traits, which is  activity, you know, it can be increased activity   or reduced activity, regularity, initial reaction,  adaptability, intensity, mood, distractibility,   persistence-attention span and sensory threshold.  Based on these traits, they developed three   general types of temperament patterns, but there  are others, but these are the three general   ones. One is easy going babies or easy going  children, slow to warm babies and active babies. So, according to Thomas and Chess, a goodness  of fit happens when the adult expectations,   or the parent's expectations, and the parenting,  matches the infant's temperament. For example,   it is generally easy to look after an easy-going  child, because they are more flexible,   they have regular rhythms in their day-to-day  functioning, and it's easier to look after them.   Say, for example, if it was a slow to warm  child, and if the parent understood the   temperament of that child, instead of putting  pressure on the infant to do activities,   they might allow the infant or the young child  to take time to do things, take time to learn   new skills, instead of putting  pressure. If they don't do that,   then that causes distress in the infant and  there is no goodness of fit in that situation. So, we've looked at these three different  theoretical understandings, but then there   are two other theories which look at, you know,  the social learning and also the multifaceted   influences on infant development. Russian  Psychologist Vygotsky, in his very short life,   proposed that "many experiences and capacities are  first mastered within the social relationships."   For examples, infants babble, but it is the  parent who encourages and shapes the babble   to engage in conversation. If that is not there,  then the babbling doesn't progress into language   development, but if it is there, it further  strengthens the parent-child relationship.   So, this is one of the first, you know,  Psychologists who talked about the "social   learning theory," and which was later  studied further by Bandura and others.   Current neurological research supports what  Vygotsky suggested in the early 20th century,   that human infants have an intense interest  in people and their behaviour and possess   powerful implicit learning mechanisms  that are affected by social interactions. And then we go to the - go to look at Urie  Bronfenbrenner's ecological systems theory.   I think this is - as far as I'm concerned, or my  - in my experience of working in mental health,   this theory encompasses - includes all the other  different theories and encompasses the multiple   layers that influence the human development and  how they interact with one another. In a way that,   you know, we can understand and try to develop  policies to help, you know, infants develop to   their optimum capacity. So, in this theory, infant  is right in the centre, or the child is right in   the centre, and all the individual characteristics  of the child are the individual factors that   influence their development. For example, the  health of the child, the gender of the - sex of   the child, the age of the child, and all those  things. You know, genetic makeup, whether they   have any, you know, genetic abnormalities, all  those things will influence a child's development. This is surrounded by what is called a  "microsystem," which involves family,   neighbourhood, and in infant's case, it will be  childcare or day-care settings, and, you know,   health services that - you know, a Child Health  Nurse or the General Practitioner, all those   people are in the microsystem. And mesosystem is  where the individual microsystem factors interact   with one another. For example, parents interacting  with the day-care centre would be a mesosystem,   parents interacting with the health system would  be a mesosystem, and so on. And this is surrounded   by the exosystem, which is constituted by the  neighbours, family and friends, mass media,   social welfare services, government policies,  parents' workplaces, and all those things will   impact on how well parents are supported and how  well that support impacts on the parenting of the   infants. And surrounding that is the macrosystem,  which includes the attitudes and ideologies of the   culture, which cannot be ignored in any aspect  of human development, let alone parenting. And transversing through all these  systems is the chronosystem, or the time,   sociohistorical conditions and time since  life events is very important. One example   that recently will highlight this is the COVID  time, during which the world was - the whole   world was impacted in unprecedented ways, in  terms of collective anxiety, social isolation,   and so on and so forth. Which impacted  chi - infants' and children's development,   and we are still, sort of, facing  the aftermath of that to this date. So, that, kind of, sort of,  completes our understanding   of the psychological and social,  sort of, developmental theories.