This paper briefly characterizes two conceptions of child development, attachment theory and psychobiological approaches. Both share commonalities (e. g. focusing on infancy; relying on ethological approaches; studying parent - child regulations). They also show marked differences, e. g. in methodology and moral evaluations. However, both approaches are based on the same implicit, taken for granted assumptions that are outlined with respect to cultural differences. Particularly caregiving networks and interaction strategies can be distinctly different in different cultural environments. Two socialization strategies with different values and practices of child development are introduced.Western middle-class families and traditional rural farmers in non-Western countries are selected because information is available in a research landscape where participants from non-Western middle class are rare.They can be regarded as embodying different cultural models with different emphases on autonomy and relatedness. Finally, implications for the clinical practice are discussed.
Zusammenfassung In diesem Beitrag werden zunächst zwei Konzeptionen kindlicher Entwicklung charakterisiert, die Bindungstheorie und psychobiologische Ansätze. Beide Konzeptionen weisen Gemeinsamkeiten auf; z. B. setzen beide einen Schwerpunkt auf das erste Lebensjahr, beide verwenden ethologische Annahmen und beide beschäftigen sichmit Eltern-Kind-Interaktionen. Beide Ansätze unterscheiden sich aber auch substanziell, z. B. in derMethodologie und auch in den Implikationen für moralische Bewertungen. In diesem Zusammenhang ist es wichtig, dass beide Ansätze auf den gleichen impliziten, als selbstverständlich erachteten Annahmen basieren.Diese Annahmen werden mit besonderem Blick auf kulturelle Unterschiede diskutiert. Definition undOrganisation des Beziehungsnetzwerkes können sehr unterschiedlich sein, wie auch die Interaktions- und Regulationsstrategien. Es werden zwei Sozialisationsstrategienmit unterschiedlichen Normen und Praktiken dargestellt. Westliche Mittelschichtfamilien und traditionell lebende Bauern in nicht westlichen Ländern sind deshalb ausgewählt, weil es dazu verlässliche Informationen gibt, während über viele nicht westliche Kontexte ansonsten kaum Informationen verfügbar sind. Beide kulturellen Kontexte unterscheiden sich darin, wie die menschlichen Grundbedürfnisse nach Autonomie und Verbundenheit verstanden und in Sozialisationsstrategien umgesetztwerden.Abschließendwerden Implikationen für die klinische Praxis formuliert.

The placebo effect is an excellent model for understanding the mechanisms underlying the interaction between a subjective and complex mental activity (beliefs, expectations, hopes, learning, patient-physician relationship, socio-cultural context .) with different neural and biological systems. Initially, research on the placebo effect has focused on the mechanisms of pain and analgesia. The cognitive processes of conditioning and reward anticipation (hope of a relief) were highlighted. The involvement of different neurobiological pathways has been clearly shown: endogenous opioids, CCK, dopaminergic pathways, endocannabinoids, immunological factors... More recently, the field has open towards new perspectives: depression and anxiety, motor disorders, immune system, endocrine system. Intensive research in the field emerges because of its fundamental implications in neuroscience research but also because of the ethical, clinical and therapeutical issues. Moreover, the placebo effect is considered as a main methodological mean issue in clinical trials that allows the demonstration of the efficacy and tolerance of new drugs. In the field of psychiatry, depression is a placebo highly-sensitive disorder: placebo response rates in clinical trials are of the order of 30 % to 40 %. The identification of biological markers of placebo response, such as neuroimaging and quantitative electroencephalography may lead to develop more efficient models in clinical research.

This study examined whether expectancy of ergogenicity of a commonly used nutritional supplement (sodium bicarbonate; NaHCO3) influenced subsequent high-intensity cycling capacity. Eight recreationally active males (age, 21 ± 1 years; body mass, 75 ± 8 kg; height, 178 ± 4 cm; WPEAK = 205 ± 22 W) performed a graded incremental test to assess peak power output (WPEAK), one familiarisation trial and two experimental trials. Experimental trials consisted of cycling at 100% WPEAK to volitional exhaustion (TLIM) 60 min after ingesting either a placebo (PLA: 0.1 g·kg(-1) sodium chloride (NaCl), 4 mL·kg(-1) tap water, and 1 mL·kg(-1) squash) or a sham placebo (SHAM: 0.1 g·kg(-1) NaCl, 4 mL·kg(-1) carbonated water, and 1 mL·kg(-1) squash). SHAM aimed to replicate the previously reported symptoms of gut fullness (GF) and abdominal discomfort (AD) associated with NaHCO3 ingestion. Treatments were administered double blind and accompanied by written scripts designed to remain neutral (PLA) or induce expectancy of ergogenicity (SHAM). After SHAM mean TLIM increased by 9.5% compared to PLA (461 ± 148 s versus 421 ± 150 s; P = 0.048, d = 0.3). Ratings of GF and AD were mild but ~1 unit higher post-ingestion for SHAM. After 3 min TLIM overall ratings of perceived exertion were 1.4 ± 1.3 units lower for SHAM compared to PLA (P = 0.020, d = 0.6). There were no differences between treatments for blood lactate, blood glucose, or heart rate. In summary, ergogenicity after NaHCO3 ingestion may be influenced by expectancy, which mediates perception of effort during subsequent exercise. The observed ergogenicity with SHAM did not affect our measures of cardiorespiratory physiology or metabolic flux.