In the history of psychology and theoretical discourse on the socioemotional development of children, the names Bowlby and Spitz are often mentioned in tandem. Both men were hugely interested in research on the consequences of maternal deprivation for young infants. However, though they would appear to have been thinking along the same lines and often referenced each other's work, it turns out they held very different views on the dynamic assessment and theoretical underpinning of their observations (Bowlby, 1960; Spitz, 1960). Even though some of this became public when they criticized each other after Bowlby's publication in 1960, newly uncovered archival material1 detailing Bowlby's reflections on several meetings with Spitz enables us to look more closely at their differences of opinion. These meetings took place in the spring of 1950, when Bowlby visited the United States for a research project for the World Health Organization (WHO). (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

中文翻译：

---

研究记录：约翰·鲍尔比（John Bowlby）对RenéSpitz的工作进行了批判性评估。

在有关儿童的社会情感发展的心理学和理论论述的历史中，经常串联提及鲍比和斯皮茨这两个名字。两人都对研究母体剥夺对年幼婴儿的后果非常感兴趣。然而，尽管他们似乎一直在考虑相同的思路并经常参考彼此的工作，但事实证明，他们对观测的动态评估和理论基础持有截然不同的观点（Bowlby，1960； Spitz，1960）。尽管其中一些在1960年鲍比（Bowlby）出版后互相批评时就公开了，但新发现的档案材料1详细介绍了鲍比（Bowlby）在与斯皮兹（Spitz）的几次会谈中的思考，使我们能够更仔细地观察他们的意见分歧。这些会议于1950年春天举行，当时鲍比（Bowlby）访问美国，参加世界卫生组织（WHO）的一项研究项目。（PsycINFO数据库记录（c）2019 APA，保留所有权利）。