What Role Do Early Experiences Play in Determining an Individual's Personality?

If ever one finds oneself swaying towards the nature side of the ever-present nature vs nurture argument in any discipline, one need only review the literature of abusive tendencies in child development and the consequences thereof to be snapped right back into the reality of the critical importance of environmental factors. In psychology today there are a multitude of differing theories as to how these environmental factors come into play and what affects they have on the personalities of children as they mature and in adulthood. Learning theorists ascribe importance to the conditioning of behavior, asserting that only through the observance of actions can we predict and understand personality. Psychoanalytic believers, in direct counterpoint, argue that we ought to focus on understanding that which we cannot even begin to quantify - the unconscious - and this needs be done via examination of behavior by indirect mechanisms, such as slips of the tongue, free association, and other "accidental" behavior. Somewhere in the middle of these two extremes attachment theorists urge us to pay attention and care to the scientifically studied and accepted theory that infants in the second half of their first year of life attach themselves to one or more caretakers, typically beginning with the mother, with whom they develop primarily emotional but also physical requirements. The quality of this attachment, they say, is absolutely critical to later personality development. There are many other branches of psychology that have offered explanations of personality development as well as differing methods of interpretation for the various experiences that children encounter during growth. All of these, excepting the psychoanalytic belief system, offer scientifically credible notions, which psychology can benefit from as a science. The psychoanalysts also contribute to the study of personality but only on cultural and religious, and not scientific, levels. Above all else, it must be remembered that all theories agree - even the controversial psychoanalytic one - that early experiences and environmental factors play a profound role in the development of the personality of every child.

It is the "unthinking confidence and the unfailing accessibility and support of attachment figures," that is, in the words of John Bowlby, "the bedrock on which stable and self-reliant personalities are built" (Bowlby, 1973). John Bowlby is regarded as the founder of the attachment theory, and in this theory there are three classifications. Only one is desirable, the secure attachment. A securely attached infant, Bowlby believed, viewed the mother (or other attachment figure) as a 'secure base' from which the child draws support while he explores the world around him. When either the child or attachment figure becomes distressed, a securely attached infant, Bowlby believed, returns to the attachment figure for comfort. On the other hand, a child who is insecurely attached will either avoid or become ambivalent towards the attachment figure when distressed. These two descriptors of insecure attachment - avoidant and ambivalent - are the other two of the three major descriptors used in attachment theory. Mary Salter Ainsworth, by employing her famous 'Strange Situation', in 1969 gave these descriptors empirical support which has stood to this day. Beneficial personality traits, including acceptable introversion/extroversion levels, listening skills, empathy, the ability to socialize and communicate well as well as others have all been linked, by Ainsworth and others, to secure attachment in childhood. Combining this research with common sense, it is not surprising or difficult to reach the conclusion that children of mothers or other attachment figures who can afford them a secure attachment by both caring for their emotional and physical needs in a consistent manner have the best chance of developing not only socially accepted personalities, but ones that allow them to thrive in their environments.

Contrarily, it has been shown that negative childhood experiences - such as physical abuse, neglect, and sexual abuse - have severe effects on personality development, as measured after-the-fact in terms of academic test scores, self-esteem ratings, and disciplinary issues. The research in this area is undisputed. One would be extremely hard pressed to find a credible psychologist who would debate statements such as, "[R]esearch on juvenile delinquency reveals that physically abused adolescents demonstrate more legal problems than do non-abused comparison groups" (Malinosky-Rummel, 72) or "Maltreated children scored significantly below their non-maltreated peers in both reading and math. The mean unadjusted percentile score in reading was 46.6 for maltreated children and 56.2 for non-maltreated... The comparable percentile scores in math were 49.5 for maltreated children and 60.3 for control children" (Eckenrode, 56). Empirically validated and theoretically sound, the issue lies not with the accepted fact that poorly treated children become poorly adapted adults with abnormal personalities. The true debate lies in the typical one word questions: why and how. Why do children become maladapted, and how ought they to be treated. None question that poor parenting leads to a serious disadvantage for children, but precisely what poor parenting is is questioned. As we have seen briefly summarized, attachment theorists have concluded - based on scientifically valid and reliable data - that the attachment figure, typically but not necessarily the mother, is of great importance for personality development. Howes puts it perfectly, "A child who has a history of secure attachment relationships is more likely to see him or herself as worthy of love and to approach others, including peers, with positive expectations" (Howes et al, 264). There is another approach, however, that everyone living in the Western world is aware of, psychoanalysis.

Widespread and often the subject matter of witticisms, the most central proposition to psychoanalytic thinking, according to Western, is that "much of mental life - including thoughts, feelings, and motives - is unconscious, which means that people can behave in ways or develop symptoms that are inexplicable to themselves" (Western, 334). As such, psychoanalytic thinkers believe that there are a series of sexual conflicts that occur in every child's unconscious that must be solved in order for a socially functioning personality to emerge. The problem lies in that the unconscious cannot be studied, cannot be proved, and also cannot be disproved. It is a matter of faith. Pervin tells us that "Analysts often respond to criticism of the [psychoanalytic] theory by suggesting that the critics are being defensive in not recognizing and accepting the importance of phenomena such as infantile sexuality" (Pervin, 160). But what critic who is also a scientist can recognize and accept that a child who has not gone through puberty, who has not developed secondary sex characteristics, and who does not have the hormones associated with sexual development in their system has sexual conflicts of interest similar to those of a dating teenage couple - all of this without a shred of empirical proof? The acceptance and recognition that the psychoanalysts desire is precisely the same acceptance and recognition that religions seek out in new members, and, indeed, psychoanalysis is much like a religious group. The history of psychoanalysis behaves much like that of religious groups: members were shunned when they advertised their disagreements with fundamental "doctrines," offshoots became numerous, all regarding themselves as the true psychoanalysts. One commonality among all religions is an attempt to explain the depraved human condition. In psychoanalysis, the supposed "theories" are the scapegoats for the immorality of humans. Psychoanalyst Pennington makes an outrageously bold statement, saying that "To a greater or lesser extent, the ideas of irrationality and unconscious thoughts have been accepted as part of what it means to be human" (Pennington, 43). No doubt there is a working part of the mind that is not always available to conscious senses, but to imply that such unconscious thoughts have power above that of reason is only an argument that a psychoanalyst would attempt. The absurdity of this notion is illustrated in one of Sigmund Freud's - the founder of psychoanalysis - case studies. The patient was named Dora, and she apparently had symptoms of "depression, apohnia, persistent coughing fits, and suicidal feelings" (Pennington, 69). Dora, one day, accused an older man - a friend of her family - of sexual advances made on her during a walk when they were alone. Her symptoms began when, after she had made her confrontation, her father refused to believe her. Freud, with only the knowledge of these symptoms and information from her father, concludes, using his mysterious reaction formation defense mechanism, that everything that Dora told him and her father about the sexual advances of this old man are false, and that in truth she desires to have sex with him. And with her father. And with Freud himself. This is quite a remarkable discovery for Freud, since it is not exactly quite common that 18 year old girls unthinkingly and unknowingly want to have sex with not one or two, but three old men.

Psychologists are supposed to be supportive. It is unfortunate for Dora that she encountered a psychoanalyst. The concern of psychology must always be on that of the treatment of the patients, and in cases of sexual abuse, it has been shown that "A key variable in recovery was family support... Children who had maternal support recovered more quickly... the least symptomatic children (5 years after disclosure) were those whose mothers were most supportive and whose families had less strain, enmeshment, and expressions of anger" (Kendal-Tackett, 172). Dora lacked family support and support from a place - the psychologist's office - where it should have come unceasingly. Pennington tells us that "Whatever you think of Freud's theories, concepts, and ideas he has been enormously influential for the development of psychology" (72). This is indeed an unfortunately true statement. Not only has Freud and psychoanalysis been detrimental to the development of psychology, but it has been detrimental to the development of humanity. Many have caught onto it, because it supposedly offers an easy and sexual understanding of the human mind. Looking back at history - at the inquisition, at the mob of Rome cheering acts of outrageous violence, at the corruption of the feudal system and loss of nobility, at the acceptance of the death camps of Hitler - this isn't surprising, for the wicked and evil ideas, those which appeal to the darkest side of human nature, always seem to spread the fastest. Psychoanalysis is faulty and deceptive science; it is religion, and a poor one at that. It has proved extremely detrimental to the furtherance of personality psychology; for the energy spent in examining and refuting it could have been much better spent in other areas. One of these, and an admirable one, is in attachment theory, for there promise lies not only for theoretical understanding of early childhood experiences on later adolescent and adult personality, but also for the development of treatments for those abused children and, perhaps more importantly, pre-emptive treatments for at-risk families. There, in attachment theory, and not in the far-fetched notions of psychoanalysis, lies a beneficial future for personality psychology.

Bibliography

Ainsworth, M.D.S., Bell, S.M., Stayton, D.J. (1974) Infant-mother attachment and social development: 'socialisation' as a product of reciprocal responsiveness to signals. In Richards, M.P.M. (ed) The Integration of a Child into a Social World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp 99-135.

Bowlby, J. (1988) A Secure Base: Clinical applications of attachment theory. London: Tavistock/Routledge. Pp 20-38 & 119-138.

Eckenrode, John, Laird, Molly, and Doris, John (1993). School performance and disciplinary problems among abused and neglected children. Developmental Psychology, 29, 53-62.

Howes, Carollee, Matheson, Catherine C., and Hamilton, Claire E. (1994) Maternal, teacher, and childcare history correlates of children's relationship with peers. Child Development, 65, 264-273.

Kendall-Tackett, Kathleen A., Williams, Linda Meyer, Finkelhor, David (1993) Impact of sexual abuse on children: A review and synthesis of recent empirical studies. Psychological Bulletin, 113, 164-180.

Malinosky-Rummel, Robin and Hansen, David J. (1993) Long-term consequences of child physical abuse. Psychological Bulletin. 114, 68-79.

Pennington, D. (2003) Essential Personality. London: Arnold, pp 42-77.

Pervin, L. and John, O.P. (2001) (7^th ed) Personality. Theory and Research. New York: John Wiley, pp 63-134.

Westen, D. (1998) The scientific legacy of Sigmund Freud: toward a psychodynamically informed psychological science. Psychological Bulletin. 124, 333-371.