Note: Naka-paraphrased na to <3

Attachment Theory

https://www.statisticssolutions.com/theoretical-spotlight-attachment-theory/

Based on early, formative experiences of bonding, attachment theory provides an explanation for how
individuals approach and grow in relationships. According to Bowlby's (1971) theory, a child's early
interactions with their parents or other adult caregivers serve as the emotional foundation or role model
for later-life romantic and close-knit peer relationships. According to attachment theory, a child's social
and emotional attachment to their caregivers shapes their relationship patterns in the future.

According to Bowlby, a child's emotional and physical closeness to an adult caregiver fosters bonding,
which reflects a basic human desire for protection and safety. Individuals' connections later in life are
modeled after the social and emotional aspects of their early relationships with others. Secure and
insecure attachment are two major categories into which these partnerships fall. Adaptive relationship
strategies based on satisfying early bonding experiences, like consistency and closeness, are hallmarks of
secure attachment. Maladaptive relational strategies, such withdrawal and inconsistency, that stem from
unfavorable early bonding experiences are indicative of insecure attachment.

Four attachment styles were added to the theory of attachment by Bartholomew and Horowitz (1991):
dismissing-avoidant, anxious, fearful-avoidant, and secure. Based on people's early experiences of
bonding, each attachment style represents a theoretical approach to relationships (see Bartholomew
and Horowitz for descriptions of each component). In order to explain a variety of interactions in
psychological study, including research in social and organizational psychology, researchers have turned
to Bowlby's theory of attachment as well as the findings of Bartholomew and Horowitz. To put it briefly,
attachment theory offers a framework for understanding how people adjust socially and emotionally to
new relationships as they get older.

Social Construction of Technology Theory

https://communication.iresearchnet.com/technology-and-communication/social-construction-of-
technology/

Several constructivist approaches to science and technology studies emerged in the 1980s, one of which
is the social construction of technology (SCOT). The term "constructivist" in this context refers to the
approach that studies technological products and scientific facts as achievements, as opposed to as
inherent qualities of the machines and facts themselves.

In their "treatise in the sociology of knowledge," Berger and Luckmann (1966) coined the term "social
construction," arguing that reality is socially constructed and that the sociology of knowledge should
focus on these processes. They drew on the phenomenological tradition, especially Alfred Schutz's
writings. Rather than concentrating on niche cultures like science and technology, Berger and Luckmann
address the reality of social structures and society as a whole. Subsequently, research emerged on topics
including deviance, gender, class, law, and the social construction of mental illness. The social
construction of scientific truths ensued in the 1970s (Latour & Woolgar 1979/1986), whereas the social
construction of artifacts emerged in the 1980s.

There are many different shades of constructivist science and technology studies, from moderate to
extreme (Sismondo 1993). The milder versions, such as Douglas's (1987) history of radio transmission,
only emphasize how crucial it is to include the social backdrop when explaining the development of
science and technology. The extreme versions contend that science and technology are products of
social construction. Stated differently, social processes constitute the reality of scientific claims and the
mechanical operation of machines rather than being drawn from nature.

Numerous case studies were produced in order to fulfill the goal of illustrating how social production of
artifacts is accomplished through in-depth micro-level examination. A few years later, there were two
changes made to the program (Bijker & Law 1992). First, concerns were voiced both at the macro and
meso levels of aggregation. Second, in an effort to counter technological determinism, the agenda was
expanded to cover the topic of technology's influence on society. The phrase "technological frame" and
several interpretations of the obsolescence of technology were coined for this objective. The single
technological artifact was reduced to a more inclusive and diverse socio-technical ensemble as the unit
of analysis. Social was no longer as important as construction.

Cognitive Behavior Theory

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/259574814_Cognitive-
behavior_therapy_Theory_and_practice

Traditional behavior therapy, which was considered to be the first generation of psychotherapy with a
scientific foundation, gave rise to cognitive-behavior therapy. It was a novel strategy that was based on
behavioral theorists like Skinner and Watson's somewhat extreme viewpoint, but it was also unique.
Joseph Wolpe was a key figure in the development of behavior therapy (1958. InSouth Africa, who
developed the theory of reciprocal inhibition and introduced the first empirically supported fear-
reduction treatment for phobias and anxiety, which is systematic desensitization; and Hans Eysenck
(1952, 1960) in the United Kingdom, who gave behavior therapy its theoretical foundation and rationale
and was well-known for his harsh criticism of psychoanalysis and its claims. He asserted in a 1952
evaluation that psychoanalysis was no more beneficial than receiving no treatment at all. The theories
that neuroses are the result of unconscious (sexual) conflicts and that symptoms are the body's way of
protecting itself from distress that would otherwise be intolerable were rejected by Eysenck. Rather, he
postulated that the neurosis may be cured if the symptoms were eliminated (Eysenck, 1960). Ogden
Linds-ley (1956) employed operant methods in his treatment of schizophrenia patients in the United
States.

Behaviorists Donald Meichenbaum and Albert Bandura had a significant impact on the creation of
cognitive therapy. Important theories were created by Bandura (1977a, 1977b), including vicarious
learning, self- and outcome efficacies, anticipation of reinforcement, modeling, and social learning
theory. One of his accomplishments was demonstrating that an actual reinforcer that was not perceived
as reinforcing could not be as effective as a perceived reinforcer. He also demonstrated that an individual
does not always need to receive direct reinforcement to carry out an action; sometimes, it is enough to
witness another person receiving reinforcement for the same behavior. This study suggested that certain
internal processes might moderate the connection between reinforcer and response, suggesting that the
behavioral assumption of an automatic relationship between reinforcer and response may not always be
true.

Meichenbaum found that self-talk serves as a powerful behavioral control mechanism when people
converse with themselves. He saw that patients with schizophrenia who practiced teaching themselves
how to "talk healthy" performed better on a range of tasks. Using progressive tasks, cognitive modeling,
coping statements, and self-reinforcement, he created self-instructional training (Meichenbaum &
Goodman, 1971). Though he is credited with helping to establish cognitive behavioral therapy, his
theories were mostly behavioral in nature since he held that altering behavior was necessary before
altering internal communication.

The primary differentiation between cognitive and behavioral therapies is the integration of the
mediational perspective, which postulates that cognition mediates behavioral and emotional change,
into the former. This process occurred in the late 1960s and early 1970s, primarily based on the research
on depression conducted by Aaron T. Beck (1963, 1967, 1979). Even though the behavioral approach was
still widely accepted at the time, there was growing recognition that some clinical issues, like depression
and obsessional thinking, could not be effectively treated without cognitive interventions and that the
strict stimulus-response model of behavior is not comprehensive enough to account for all human
behavior (Mahoney, 1974).

Psychoanalysis was still being criticized at the same time. The concepts and empirical criteria of Karl
Popper, who maintained that psychoanalysis cannot be falsified and is therefore outside the purview of
science, had a profound impact on behaviorists such as Wolpe.