↓ Skip to main content

Toward a radically embodied neuroscience of attachment and relationships

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (93rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (87th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
20 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
50 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
193 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Toward a radically embodied neuroscience of attachment and relationships
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, May 2015
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2015.00266
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lane Beckes, Hans IJzerman, Mattie Tops

Abstract

Attachment theory (Bowlby, 1969/1982) posits the existence of internal working models as a foundational feature of human bonds. Radical embodied approaches instead suggest that cognition requires no computation or representation, favoring a cognition situated in a body in an environmental context with affordances for action (Chemero, 2009; Barrett, 2011; Wilson and Golonka, 2013; Casasanto and Lupyan, 2015). We explore whether embodied approaches to social soothing, interpersonal warmth, separation distress, and support seeking could replace representational constructs such as internal working models with a view of relationship cognition anchored in the resources afforded to the individual by their brain, body, and environment in interaction. We review the neurobiological bases for social attachments and relationships and attempt to delineate how these systems overlap or don't with more basic physiological systems in ways that support or contradict a radical embodied explanation. We suggest that many effects might be the result of the fact that relationship cognition depends on and emerges out of the action of neural systems that regulate several clearly physically grounded systems. For example, the neuropeptide oxytocin appears to be central to attachment and pair-bond behavior (Carter and Keverne, 2002) and is implicated in social thermoregulation more broadly, being necessary for maintaining a warm body temperature (for a review, see IJzerman et al., 2015b). Finally, we discuss the most challenging issues around taking a radically embodied perspective on social relationships. We find the most crucial challenge in individual differences in support seeking and responses to social contact, which have long been thought to be a function of representational structures in the mind (e.g., Baldwin, 1995). Together we entertain the thought to explain such individual differences without mediating representations or computations, but in the end propose a hybrid model of radical embodiment and internal representations.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 20 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 193 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Netherlands 1 <1%
Russia 1 <1%
Bosnia and Herzegovina 1 <1%
Unknown 190 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 33 17%
Student > Master 22 11%
Researcher 21 11%
Student > Bachelor 19 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 16 8%
Other 49 25%
Unknown 33 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 101 52%
Social Sciences 11 6%
Neuroscience 9 5%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 2%
Other 24 12%
Unknown 36 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 28. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 April 2021.
All research outputs
#1,281,085
of 23,868,920 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#593
of 7,383 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#16,598
of 269,563 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#25
of 188 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,868,920 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,383 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.8. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 269,563 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 188 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.