The US was oral gratification; the UR was pleasurable drive reduction. The CS was mother’s presence preceding the oral gratification (UR). Eventually, the mother (CS) released hopeful

contentment (CR): the conditionable component of tension decrca.se/Iherefore, the infant attached to the mother as a need gratifier. It struck me that perhaps early separation anxiety was not like anticipatory anxiety, but due to an evolutionarily distinct process. Similarly, a learning theory of attachment via reinforcement, Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical seemed dubious. Bowlby also argued that the child’s tie to the mother did not depend on learning that she was a need gratifier but antedated such learning, thus resembling the ethological notion of imprinting. Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical Furthermore, separation anxiety did not

depend on learning that the mother’s absence was associated with distress, but was an evolved innate protest mechanism, instinctively released by separation during the appropriate helpless developmental phase. Distress after separation from nest or mother occurs in infant animals who could not yet have learned that separation means failure to gain relief from instinctual tension. The early lost piping of chicks separated from their nests and whining of puppies separated from the mother are clear examples. Separation anxiety occurs when infant monkeys raised in peer groups are Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical separated from each other, although mothering does not exist in such groups. Harlow’s experimental work demonstrated Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical that the developmental!} isolated monkey attached to the contact comfort of a terry cloth model rather than to a wire feeder. Oral gratification was not the basis for object attachment. Naturalistic observation could never have produced this trenchant conclusion. Separation anxiety, to the degree that

it is learned, builds on an innate adaptive mechanism that causes an alarm, intense psychic distress, under conditions of naive separation. The evolutionary “purpose” is to cause the vulnerable infant to emit anguished signals that elicit maternal retrieval. Obviously, the helplessly dependent lost, infant is fair game for predators. Rven in the absence of predators, if the Inhibitors,research,lifescience,medical mother cannot find the infant, a dehydrated, weakened infant, results. If hunger pain was necessary before emitting distress cries, many infants would die or be impaired. Rvolutionarily, a built-in (unlearned) early warning alarm system for maternal recall makes good sense. secondly It is better to cry before being actually hurt. Any biological control mechanism has a wide range of Selleck Wortmannin variations in strength and threshold. Perhaps some children have constitutional, familial, or pathogenic vulnerabilities. If antidepressants specifically raise this alarm threshold, panic is prevented, but no immediate effect on anticipatory anxiety should occur. It. is striking that the only drugs that have this specific antipanic action are certain antidepressants (and morphine). High-potency benzodiazepines affect both processes.