Care System The Care system operates to ensure that care is provided to someone in need. The caregiving system is activated when a person perceives that another being is in distress, or alternatively, that another person would benefit from being helped or encouraged. With respect to the Care system Shaver, Mikulincer, and Shemesh-Iron (2010) write:
According to Bowlby (1982) humans are born with a capacity to develop caregiving behaviors aimed at providing protection and support to others who are either generally vulnerable and dependent or temporarily in need. Bowlby claimed that these caring behaviors, as they emerge in development, are organized by an evolved, adapted caregiving behavior system…(p. 77).
Power System With regard to the Power system Shaver, Segev, and Mikulincer (2011) write:
We propose that the main goal of the power system is to remove threats and obstacles that interfere with a person's sense of power. In other words, the power system seeks to maintain a stable inner sense of power and to restore this sense when one perceives that others are attempting to constrain ones' access to valuable resources or influence one's behavior in a particular situation. This does not imply that people seek power simply for power's sake. Rather, following Bowlby's (1982) contention that attachment security (i.e, felt security) provides a solid foundation for exploration, we propose that power facilitates the smooth functioning of other behavioral systems, such as exploration, affiliation, caregiving, and sex. With a sense of power, people can more easily explore and master their environment; help and get along with other people without worrying about being influenced, exploited, or constrained; and have sex with desirable partners… (p. 75 – 76.)
Emotional Regulation and Behavioral Systems The mother-infant relationship is perhaps the most familiar example of how distinct behavioral systems within an individual develop and are "tuned" (Killen, 2009, p. 40) in relationship with another human being. The infant's Attachment system reaches out to the mother as a source of help and support, and the mother's Care system reaches out to the infant as a provider of help and encouragement. When all goes well, these two individual systems integrate into one smoothly functioning relationship that acts as a conduit for giving and receiving emotional regulation. For both the mother and the child, their individual Power systems regulate the flow of energy towards, together, and away from each other as needs (for reassurance, play, connection, etc.) come and go.
Regulation of the FEAR In the following YouTube clip, we see an example of a baby's Attachment system being activated by fear associated with the mother making a strange noise (blowing her nose). Though the mother is off camera, we can hear from her conversation with the baby that she notices that the baby is frightened by the noise. She also notices that in addition to being frightened, the baby is somewhat intrigued by this new experience. The mother calibrates the baby's experience of fear at the strange noise in a low-key, playful way. This is an example of an attachment system working smoothly to both regulate an aversive emotion (FEAR) and at the same time to facilitate the baby's learning about the world (e.g., not all loud noises are dangerous).
Regulation of PANIC In the next YouTube clip (below), we see an example of the distress a baby feels when she is not able to make emotional contact with her mother. As described in the clip, when the sequence begins, the baby is happily playing with her mother by making eye contact, vocalizing, and pointing to things in the room that the mother then notices and comments on. When the mother presents a "still face," however, and stops making any response to the baby, the baby immediately becomes panicky and dysregulated. Though this phase of the sequence lasts less than two minutes, it is upsetting to watch, because the baby is in such evident distress. When the mother returns to her normal responsiveness, the baby relaxes and returns to play, because she is back in sync with her mother, and the pleasurable give and take of emotional interaction that she is accustomed to.
Regulation ANGER This final YouTube clip is a humorous, animated commercial that illustrates in a light-hearted way a story about a baby mobilizing his Power system in order to confront another force that he perceives as coming between him and a highly valued resource (the attention of his mother).
Patterns of Emotional Regulation In the examples above, a baby plays out a brief intense drama on the stage of his or her relationship with the mother. In each case, the raw material of the drama is one of the basic mammalian emotions (FEAR, PANIC, ANGER) and each drama has a beginning (the baby experiences an intense, aversive emotion), a middle (the baby works to regulate the emotion in the context of the relationship with the mother), and an end (the emotion changes into something else).
All babies play out versions of these three dramas many, many times in the course of infancy and early childhood. Mostly, these dramas end as in the examples above, with a satisfying resolution. However imagine that one drama that is particularly salient for a baby is enacted over and over, without a satisfying resolution. In the FEAR example, instead of becoming more comfortable with the frightening noise, the baby remains more or less chronically afraid. In the PANIC example, instead of the baby successfully getting the mother's attention back, the baby remains chronically distressed. And in the ANGER example, instead of the baby successfully meeting his opposing force and regaining access to his mother's attention, he remains chronically angry. In these situations, the behavioral system associated with the primary emotion would adjust into some combination of hyperactivation. A behavioral system that is hyperactivated is chronically set in the "on" position, and deactivation, a system that is deactivated is chronically set to "off," that best fits this chronic state of emotion. It is at this point, where behavioral systems adjust to accommodate unresolved, intense emotion, that we can see the types taking form.
Hyperactivated Behavioral Systems Hyperactivating strategies are "fight" (persist or protest) responses that intensify the primary strategy of a system in order to coerce another person to behave in accordance with the system's goals (e.g. to provide support or to accept one's help). They keep a behavioral system chronically activated until its set goal is achieved (Shaver, Mikulincer, and Shemesh-Iron, 2010, p. 76).
Deactivated Behavioral Systems [D]eactivating strategies are "flight" (or avoidance) responses that require turning off a behavioral system to avoid the frustration and anguish of failed efforts to attain the system's goal (Shaver, Mikulincer, and Shemesh-Iron, p. 77).
An Analogy One way of understanding behavioral systems in to use the analogy of a house equipped with a furnace for heating and an air conditioner for cooling. The two systems operate independently of each other, but each can also be affected by the other under certain conditions. Imagine that the house has a furnace set to 68 degrees and an A/C set to 72 degrees. When the outside temperature drops, the house becomes chilly, and the furnace begins to put out hot air, bringing the indoor temperature back up to 68 degrees, at which point the furnace stops producing hot air. If the outdoor temperature rises, and the house becomes hot inside, the A/C begins putting out cold air, until the indoor temperature falls back to 72 degrees. Notice that in this scenario, the furnace and the A/C are never set to either "on" or "off." Instead, they are set to a particular temperature (a set point) and each system is either in a "ready state" – ready to begin supplying hot or cold air as necessary – or in an "action state" – actively producing hot or cold air.
But what happens when one of the systems doesn't function smoothly? If I live in a very cold climate, and I have had chronic problems with the reliability of my furnace, it might make sense for me to set the furnace to run on "high" all the time, regardless of the actual temperature inside or outside the house. Or, if both my A/C and my furnace are not working well and causing me lots of stress and anxiety, I might choose to simply turn them both off permanently, and cope with changes in temperature in alternative ways. For example, I might wear lots of sweaters in winter because my house is too cold, or I might sleep outside in summer, because my house is too hot. In both cases, I am coping with changes in temperature, but in ways that are more effortful and inefficient than having a smoothly functioning furnace and A/C.
It is the same with behavioral systems. As children develop, their Attachment, Care, and Power systems become shaped to fit with their environments (especially their close relationships with parents and other caregivers). This shaping of behavioral systems falls into distinct, stable patterns. Behavioral systems that are "secure" are like the well-functioning house, in which systems are either activated or waiting, depending on the needs of any given moment. Behavioral systems that are "hyperactivated" are at least partially turned "on," regardless of changing situations, and behavioral systems that are "deactivated" are at least partially turned "off," regardless of the situation. Because the "on" and "off" switches are separate components of each behavioral system, each system can be set to different combinations of "on" and "off."
Behavioral Systems and Enneagram Types It appears to me that the nine Enneagram types can be described in terms of nine distinct patterns of "on" and "off" of the three basic behavioral systems. For example, in my own research I found a statistically significant association between attachment patterns and Enneagram types (Arthur, 2008; Arthur and Allen, 2010). The two subcomponents of the Attachment system are called anxiety and avoidance. Anxiety is the hyperactivating, or "fight" part of the system, while avoidance is the deactivating or "flee" part of the system (Mikulincer and Shaver, 2007).
Hyperactivated and Deactivated Attachment Patterns
In my study, I found that the Enneagram types Types 2, 4, 6, 8, and 9s with an 8 wing were more likely to score above average on the anxiety subscale, indicating a hyperactivated attachment style. In contrast, I found that Types 1, 3, 5, 7, and 9s with a 1 wing were more likely to score below average on anxiety, indicating that hyperactivation of the attachment system is not a key strategy for these types.
In addition, I found that Types 1, 2, 3, 4, and 9s with a 1 wing were more likely to score below average on the avoidance subscale, indicating that deactivation is not a key strategy for these types. Again in contrast, I found that Types 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9s with an 8 wing were more likely to score above average on avoidance, indicating that deactivation of the attachment system is a key component of attachment relationships for these types.
Because anxiety and avoidance are orthogonal subcomponents of the Attachment system, it is possible for a person to be either high or low on both scales, or to be some combination of high and low (like in the analogy of the furnace and the A/C). It is the combination of results from both subscales that determine a person's attachment "style" or pattern (Mikulincer and Shaver, 2007). The diagram below illustrates the attachment styles of the types in terms of the Enneagram diagram.
Far less research has been done so far on the Care and Power systems than on the Attachment system. However, Shaver, Mikulincer, and Shemesh-Iron, (2010) provide preliminary descriptions of what hyperactivated and deactivated Care systems look like, while Shaver, Segev, and Mikulincer (2011) provide preliminary descriptions of hyperactivated and deactivated Power systems. These researchers are currently developing assessments for the Care and Power systems that are similar to the Experiences in Close Relationships measure that is widely used to assess attachment patterns (Shaver, Mikulincer, and Shemesh-Iron, 2010; Shaver, Segev, and Mikuliner, 2011). This means that we will be able to further investigate possible associations between behavioral system patterns and Enneagram type.
Hyperactivated and Deactivated Care and Power Patterns
Integration of Systems and Spiritual Development Jack and David are teaching us about the three basic mammalian emotions so that we can learn to observe and appreciate them in our lives. To work with them skillfully allows them to come into balance with each other, and create a smoothly functioning and integrated physical, emotional, and mental life. This secure, integrated human system is then available for further integration into more complex systems (Siegel, 1999), which is one way of describing spiritual development.
Likewise, Behavioral Systems (Attachment) Theory provides specific direction for our inner observer to help facilitate personal transformation through the development of smooth moment-to-moment functioning of the three behavioral systems. For example, the Head center is characterized by FEAR, and a distortion of the Attachment system. Rather than naturally turning towards a source of help when threat occurs, Head types tend to move away from themselves and others in three different ways, and in the process, move away from the source of help. Observing the felt experience of this dynamic allows it to relax, which opens up the possibility of getting the help that is needed.
The Heart center is characterized by PANIC, and an accompanying distortion of the Care system. Rather than naturally turning towards need wherever it occurs, Heart types often move toward others whether there is any actual need or not. Once again, when the inner observer sees this unfold in the present moment, it becomes an opportunity to meet one's own needs.
Finally, the Body center is characterized by ANGER, and a distortion of the Power system. Rather than Power being used as needed to support the other behavioral systems, Body types move against themselves and others in three different ways regardless of what actual Power is needed in any given moment. Going in and down allows us to recognize our own worth and we are free to explore the world.
Implications for Practice My own work with this model has helped me in my personal and spiritual life. I am a Type 6, and I have learned that my three basic behavioral systems are organized in a way that maintains an experience of helplessness and a corresponding desperate-seeking of help. But since I am constantly moving away from my self and others, I am not able to receive the help that exists as a quality of creation. My personal practice consists of noticing alarm or distress in myself, and allowing a turn towards help. Sometimes this help comes in the form of another person, and the turn is outwards, towards that person. Sometimes the help takes the form of an internal resource, and the turn is inward towards myself. But the essence of the practice is to allow the turn to occur, rather than evaluating the process before hand (which, for me, is Doubt).
Another example is provided by a Type 4 reflecting on the stress and anxiety he has experienced in preparation for giving an important presentation, and the transformation of this anxiety into a calmer energy during the actual presentation. He said, "When I was up there I became aware of providing a service, rather than a performance, and I was not anxious anymore." (Anonymous, 2011) To me, this is an example of a Heart Type allowing a turn towards an actual need (to provide people with training), and with this turn, his entire three-part system began to function more smoothly.
Conclusion As I wrote earlier on, the convergence of knowledge of mammalian emotions, human behavioral systems, and the Enneagram is exciting news – and a continuation of such convergences of the past few millennia. It provides additional opportunities for personal practice, discernment, integration, and development. I hope this conversation continues.
---------------------------------------------
Acknowledgements I would like to thank my friends and teachers in the Enneagram Learning Community – forming out of our work together at Bergamo – for their support and encouragement in the preparation of this piece. I would also like to give a special shout-out to Jack Killen, for blazing the trail.
Feedback about this work is welcome.
Please email comments to Kristin Arthur.
---------------------------------------------
Kristin Arthur certified with the Enneagram Professional Training Program (EPTP) in 2003. She holds a Doctorate in Human Development with a specialization in Marriage and Family Therapy from Virginia Tech. Kristin is currently exploring implications for spiritual development to be found in the integration of attachment theory and the Enneagram, and she will be presenting some of this work with Georgia Bailey at the 2011 International Enneagram Association Conference this summer.
---------------------------------------------
REFERENCES
Ainsworth, M. D. S. (1967). Infancy in Uganda: Infant care and the growth of love. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins Press.
Anonymous (2011). Spoken on a 4 Panel, quoted with permission of the speaker.
Arthur, K. (2008). Attachment styles and Enneagram types: Development and Testing of an Integrated Model for use in Marriage and Family Therapy. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg.
Arthur, K. and Allen, K. (2010). The Nature of Love: Understanding the Enneagram types as Nine Expressions of Attachment. The Enneagram Journal, 3, 6 – 22.
Bowlby, J. (1969/1982). Attachment and Loss: Vol. 1: Attachment. New York: Basic Books.
Bowlby, J. (1973). Attachment and Loss: Vol. 2: Separation. New York: Basic Books.
Bowlby, J. (1980). Attachment and Loss: Vol. 3: Loss. New York: Basic Books.
Killen, J. (2009). Toward the Neurobiology of the Enneagram. The Enneagram Journal, 2, 40 – 61.
Killen, J. & Daniels, D. (August, 2010). Toward the Neurobiology of the Enneagram. Paper presented at the International Enneagram Association Annual Meeting, San Francisco, CA.
Mikulincer, M. & Shaver, P. R. (2007). Attachment in Adulthood. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.
Shaver, P. R., Mikulincer, M. & Shemesh-Iron, M. (2010). A behavioral systems perspective on prosocial behavior. In M. Mikulincer & P. R. Shaver (Eds.), Prosocial Motives, Emotions, and Behavior (pp. 73 – 92). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Shaver, P. R., Segev, M. & Mikulincer, M. (2011). A behavioral systems perspective on powerand aggression. In P.R. Shaver & M. Mikulincer (Eds.), Human Aggression and Violence (pp. 71 – 120). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Siegel, D. J. (1999). The Developing Mind. New York: Guilford Press.
Siegel, D. J. & Hartzell, M. (2003). Parenting from the Inside Out. New York, NY:
