Investigators from diverse behavioral fields have long recognized the strong attachment of the neonatal and infantile animal to its mother. Although this affectional behavior has been commonly observed, there is, outside the field of ethology, scant experimental evidence permitting identification of the factors critical to the formation of this bond. Lorenz (1) and others have stressed the importance of innate visual and auditory mechanisms which, through the process of imprinting, give rise to persisting following responses in the infant bird and fish. Imprinting behavior has been demonstrated successfully in a variety of avian species under controlled laboratory conditions, and this phenomenon has been investigated systematically in order to identify those variables which contribute to its development and maintenance [see, for example, Hinde, Thorpe, and Vince (2), Fabricius (3), Hess (4), Jaynes (5), and Moltz and Rosenblum (6)]. These studies represent the largest body of existent experimental evidence measuring the tie between infant and mother. At the mammalian level there is little or no systematic experimental evidence of this nature.Observations on monkeys by Carpenter (7), Nolte (8), and Zuckermann (9) and on chimpanzees by Kohler (10) and by Yerkes and Tomilin (11) show that monkey and chimpa velop strong ties to the that these affectional at persist for years. It is, c mon knowledge that form strong and persiste mothers.Although students fror tific fields recognize this ment, there is considerab about the nature of its de its fundamental underlyii A common theory amon sociologists, and anthrop of learning based on d This theory proposes th attachment to the moth the association of the me form with the alleviation mary drive states, parti and thirst. Thus, throug fection becomes a self-s rived drive (12). Psycho; other hand, have stressed of various innate needs, to suck and orally pos, (2), or needs relating to ment, temperature (13) to the mother (14).The paucity of experin concerning the developr tional responses has led to derive their basic h, deductions and intuitions servation and analysis o reports. As a result, the ; vational evidence is oftei SCIENCE preconceived theoretical framework. An exception to the above generalization is seen in the recent attempt by Bowlby (14) to analyze and integrate the avail-_S able observational and experimental evidence derived from both human and subhuman infants. Bowlby has concluded ,Y that a theory of component instinctual responses, species specific, can best account for the infant's tie to the mother.?nt He suggests that the species-specific responses for human beings (some of these responses are not strictly limited to human beings) include contact, clinging, .nn sucking, crying, smiling, and following. He further emphasizes that these responses are manifested independently of primary drive reduction in human and subhuman infants. nzee infants deThe absence of experimental data ir mothers and which would allow a critical evaluation tachments may of any t...

The development of object permanence was investigated in a longitudinal study of two infant rhesus monkeys in a human analogue testing situation and two subhuman analogue testing situations. The ages at which certain object-related behaviors were demonstrated by the subjects as stable responses were found by the presentation of tasks that involved various manipulations of objects. In each testing situation was found a sequence of development of object permanence that was very similar to the one described by Piaget for the child, and in each case the sequence culminated in behaviors nearly as complex as those described by Piaget for the 2year-old human infant. Piaget (1954) outlined the child's progression to a concept of object permanence. He described a developmental sequence composed of six stages culminating when the child is approximately 2 years of age. This description was derived from observations of the behaviors of his three children in relation to objects that were made to disappear in different ways. Some longitudinal and cross-sectional studies have supported Piaget's description (Gorman & Escalona, 1969;Gouin Decarie, 1965). Other investigators have considered the effects of variables such as attention and memory (Miller, Cohen, & Hill, 1970), perceptual processes (Bower, 1967), environmental background (Golden & Birns, 1968, and specific experience (Landers, 1968) on object permanence.In two recent studies (Gruber, Girgus, & Banuazizi, 1971;Vaughter, Smotherman, &

No abstract