Read the following text and fill in the table below.
An observation and an explanation
It is worth looking at one or two aspects of the way a mother behaves towards her baby. The usual fondling, cuddling and cleaning require little comment, but the position in which she holds the baby against her body when resting is rather revealing. Careful American studies have disclosed the fact that 80 per cent of mothers cradle their infants in their left arms, holding them against the left side of their bodies. If asked to explain the significance of this preference most people reply that it is obviously the result of the predominance of right-handedness in the population. By holding the babies in their left arms, the mothers keep their dominant arm free for manipulations. But a detailed analysis shows that this is not the case. True, there is a slight difference between right-handed and left-handed females, but not enough to provide an adequate explanation. It emerges that 83 per cent of right-handed mothers hold the baby on the left side, but then so do 78 per cent of left-handed mothers. In other words, only 22 per cent of the left-handed mothers have their dominant hands free for actions. Clearly there must be some other, less obvious explanation.
The only other clue comes from the fact that the heart is on the left side of the mother's body. Could it be that the sound of her heartbeat is the vital factor? And in what way? Thinking along these lines it was argued that perhaps during its existence inside the body of the mother, the growing embryo becomes fixated ('imprinted') on the sound of the heart beat. If this is so, then the re-discovery of this familiar sound after birth might have a calming effect on the infant, especially as it has just been thrust into a strange and frighteningly new world outside. If this is so then the mother, either instinctively or by an unconscious series of trials and errors, would soon arrive at the discovery that her baby is more at peace if held on the left against her heart, than on the right.
This may sound far-fetched, but tests have now been carried out which reveal that it is nevertheless the true explanation. Groups of new-born babies in a hospital nursery were exposed for a considerable time to the recorded sound of a heartbeat at a standard rate of 72 beats per minute. There were nine babies in each group and it was found that one or more of them was crying for 60 per cent of the time when the sound was not switched on, but that this figure fell to only 38 per cent when the heartbeat recording was thumping away. The heartbeat groups also showed a greater weight-gain than the others, although the amount of food taken was the same in both cases. Clearly the beatless groups were burning up a lot more energy as a result of the vigorous actions of their crying.
Another test was done with slightly older infants at bedtime. In some groups the room was silent, in others recorded lullabies were played. In others a ticking metronome was operating at the heartbeat speed of 72 beats per minute. In still others the heartbeat recording itself was played. It was then checked to see which groups fell asleep more quickly. The heartbeat group dropped off in half the time it took for any of the other groups. This not only clinches the idea that the sound of the heart beating is a powerfully calming stimulus, but it also shows that the response is a highly specific one. The metronome imitation will not do - at least, not for young infants.
So it seems fairly certain that this is the explanation of the mother's left-side approach to baby-holding. It is interesting that when 466 Madonna and child paintings (dating back over several hundred years) were analysed for this feature, 373 of them showed the baby on the left breast. Here again the figure was at the 80 per cent level. This contrasts with observations of females carrying parcels, where it was found that 50 per cent carried them on the left and 50 per cent on the right.
What other possible results could this heartbeat imprinting have? It may, for example, explain why we insist on locating feelings of love in the heart rather than the head. As the song says: 'You gotta have a heart!' It may also explain why mothers rock their babies to lull them to sleep. The rocking motion is carried on at about the same speed as the heartbeat, and once again it probably 'reminds' the infants of the rhythmic sensations they became so familiar with inside the womb, as the great heart of the mother pumped and thumped away above them.
Nor does it stop there. Right into adult life the phenomenon seems to stay with us. We rock with anguish. We rock back and forth on our feet when we are in a state of conflict. The next time you see a lecturer or an after-dinner speaker swaying rhythmically from side to side, check his speed for heartbeat time. His discomfort at having to face an audience leads him to perform the most comforting movements his body can offer in the somewhat limited circumstances; and so he switches on the old familiar beat of the womb.
Wherever you find insecurity, you are liable to find the comforting heartbeat rhythm in one kind of disguise or another. It is no accident that most folk music and dancing has a syncopated rhythm. Here again the sounds and movements take the performers back to the safe world of the womb.
From The Naked Ape by Desmond Morris. (Jonathan Cape and McGraw Hill, 1967)
|_____________||Most women are right-handed.|
|Paragraph 2||Solution 2||_________________________________|
|Paragraph 3||_______________||1. Groups of new-born babies exposed to sound of heart
2. Three groups of older babies listend to different sounds. _____________________.
3. Even in old paintings, _______________________________________________.
4. When observed carrying parcels, ______________________________________.
|Paragraph 6||Other consequences||1. We locate love _________________________.
2. Mothers ______________________________.
3. We rock ______________________________.
4. Folk music and dancing ___________________.
Press this button to check your answers: