4 ms·
Paul Tough's book, "How Children Succeed" [1] has a great section on how mother rats (called dams) can significantly counteract the stress of their offspring (c
by MarkMc 7y ago
Paul Tough's book, "How Children Succeed" [1] has a great section on how mother rats (called dams) can significantly counteract the stress of their offspring (called pups):
"Scientists in rat labs are always picking up baby rats to examine them or weigh them, and one day about ten years ago, researchers in Meaney’s lab noticed a curious thing: When they put the pups back in the cages after handling them, some dams would scurry over and spend a few minutes licking and grooming their pups. Others would just ignore them. When the researchers examined the rat pups, they discovered that this seemingly insignificant practice had a distinct physiological effect. When a lab assistant handled a rat pup, researchers found, it produced anxiety, a flood of stress hormones, in the pup. The dam’s licking and grooming counteracted that anxiety and calmed down that surge of hormones.
Meaney and his researchers were intrigued, and they wanted to learn more about how licking and grooming worked and what kind of effect it had on the pups. So they kept watching the rats, spending long days and nights with their faces pressed up against the Plexiglas, and after many weeks of careful observation, they made an additional discovery: different mother rats had different patterns of licking and grooming, even in the absence of their pups' being handled. So Meaney’s team undertook a new experiment, with a new set of dams, to try to quantify these patterns. This time, they didn’t handle any of the pups. They just closely observed each cage, an hour at a time, eight sessions a day, for the first ten days of the pups' lives. Researchers counted every instance of maternal licking and grooming. And after ten days, they divided the dams into two categories: the ones that licked and groomed a lot, which they labeled high LG, and the ones that licked and groomed a little, which they labeled low LG.
...
The researchers ran test after test, and on each one, the high-LG offspring excelled: They were better at mazes. They were more social. They were more curious. They were less aggressive. They had more self-control. They were healthier. They lived longer. Meaney and his researchers were astounded. What seemed like a tiny variation in early mothering style, so small that decades of researchers hadn’t noticed it, created huge behavioral differences in mature rats, months after the licking and grooming had taken place. And the effect wasn't just behavioral; it was biological too. When Meaney’s researchers examined the brains of the adult rats, they found significant differences in the stress-response systems of the high—LG and low-LG rats, including big variations in the size and shape and complexity of the parts of the brain that regulated stress."
[1] http://www.amazon.com/How-Children-Succeed-Curiosity-Character/dp/1452658145 http://www.amazon.com/How-Children-Succeed-Curiosity-Charact...
- drakonka 7y agoThis is so interesting, thank you for sharing. I was recently thinking about affection in my own early childhood - I grew up with loving parents (and grandparents) who were happy to hug me etc. The only 'weird' thing that stands out in terms of affection offered by my family is that my mom was apparently afraid to hold me for the first few days after my birth - I was her first child and she was worried she'd drop or hurt me in some way, so my grandmother took care of me for that short period of time instead. The problem was that _I_ always refused affection as a kid. I never came for hugs or kisses or anything, and when my parents tried to hug me it always felt really awkward for me. The only thing I'd come to my parents for would be back scratches, which I loved. I didn't get a feeling of affection from the scratches, they just felt physically pleasant and relaxing. I wonder how, if at all, kids who refuse affection are impacted later in life. I _think_ I grew up to be a fairly well adjusted person. If I try to find something 'wrong' with me the only thing I can point to is some difficulty in relating to negative emotions in others. I guess I'd be very curious to see any studies about the flip-side - eg how many baby rats are resistant to the 'licking and grooming' offered by their mothers, and how are they impacted later in life?
- sjg007 7y agoWe know human touch is important and that a lack of it will cause severe psychological problems. The evidence is from Russian orphans with kids who were never held or touched. There is also evidence with monkeys and the wire doll mothers. This falls under the wider psychological theory Attachment and need for the infant to have its needs met which is very dependent on the parent. Attachment is probably a life long thing too. As kids develop they shift from being parent oriented to peer oriented. There are some cultural aspects as well, you see this largely expressed in greetings and maybe extended family interactions. As for a rat pup or infant refusing affection it is a warning sign for autism spectrum disorder for sure.
- drakonka 7y agoEven though I've jokingly been told I may be on the spectrum due to my difficulty relating to some emotions, I was under the impression that autistic children usually have speech delays and don't really want human attention, which definitely wasn't the case for me - I just didn't want human _affection_ as a kid, but was perfectly happy to talk and bug my parents to play games with me. Either way I fear I'm going down a path of the kind of self-analysis that is best left to a professional, so I'll leave it at that and enjoy feeling well-adjusted even if it's all an illusion :D