Customer Service | Help | FAQ | PEP-Easy | Report a Data Error | About
:
Login
Tip: To see translations of this article…

PEP-Web Tip of the Day

When there are translations of the current article, you will see a flag/pennant icon next to the title, like this: 2015-11-06_11h14_24 For example:

2015-11-06_11h09_55

Click on it and you will see a bibliographic list of papers that are published translations of the current article. Note that when no published translations are available, you can also translate an article on the fly using Google translate.

 

For the complete list of tips, see PEP-Web Tips on the PEP-Web support page.

Wakefield, J.C. (2007). Little Hans and Attachment Theory: Bowlby's Hypothesis Reconsidered in Light of New Evidence from the Freud Archives. Psychoanal. St. Child, 62:61-91.

(2007). Psychoanalytic Study of the Child, 62:61-91

Little Hans and Attachment Theory: Bowlby's Hypothesis Reconsidered in Light of New Evidence from the Freud Archives

Jerome C. Wakefield, Ph.D., D.S.W.

Bowlby (1973), applying attachment theory to Freud's case of Little Hans, hypothesized that Hans's anxiety was a manifestation of anxious attachment. However, Bowlby's evidence was modest; Hans was threatened by his mother with abandonment, expressed fear of abandonment prior to symptom onset, and was separated from his mother for a short time a year before. Bowlby's hypothesis is reassessed in light of a systematic review of the case record as well as new evidence from recently derestricted interviews with Hans's father and Hans in the Freud Archives. Bowlby's hypothesis is supported by multiple additional lines of evidence regarding both triggers of separation anxiety preceding the phobia (e.g., a funeral, sibling rivalry, moving, getting his own bedroom) and background factors influencing his working model of attachment (mother's psychopathology, intense marital conflict, multiple suicides in mother's family) that would make him more vulnerable to such anxiety. Bowlby's hypothesis is also placed within the context of subsequent developments in attachment theory.

[This is a summary or excerpt from the full text of the book or article. The full text of the document is available to subscribers.]

Copyright © 2019, Psychoanalytic Electronic Publishing, ISSN 2472-6982 Customer Service | Help | FAQ | Download PEP Bibliography | Report a Data Error | About

WARNING! This text is printed for personal use. It is copyright to the journal in which it originally appeared. It is illegal to redistribute it in any form.