While the early phases of the development of both primitive Internalizers and Externalizers include the same general sequence, the qualities of their respective developments tend to lie In opposite directions. During the initial stages, the primitive Internalizer develops ideational activity rapidly, at the expense of the perceptual. In response to the limitations which characterize this early developmental stage, more or less severe environmental pressures arise and press the child toward acquiring more externalized types of awareness and. behavior.
Because of his inherent Inclinations toward self-sufficiency, the Internalizer tends to be less aware of, and responsive to, environmental attitudes and pressures than is the Externalizer However, especially under strong and continued external direction and control, he, too, will be forced toward compensatory activities which, at the basic level of his personality development, will become an inherent factor in his orientation. Still later, he will turn his natural ideational dominance to the acquisition and utilization of perceptual awareness and behavior, unless repression and denial have intervened.
Internalizers and Externalizers, then, experience similar developmental problems and pressures. However, because of the fundamentally opposite natures of their respective primitive tendencies, even their earliest experiences and activities are opposite in direction. They will also tend to evoke opposite kinds of responses in others. The Internalizer, even as an infant, experiences primitive but truly internalized feelings, and responds in elementary but characteristically internalized ways. Predominantly aware of, and preoccupied with internal feeling states, he is comparatively unaware of what goes on around him. He therefore appears to be unresponsive, unaware, and even inert. His behavior Is typically passive, because he is preoccupied with activities which are not observable to others.
The earliest activities of the Internalizer, then, consist essentially of responses to covert stimuli. His activities are not inherently meaningful to others and his preoccupations lie in areas which are primarily unshared. He responds to stimuli within himself, reacting to them in private. Intimate external contact tends to disturb him, and isolation and solitude, far from being experienced as threatening, are highly favorable conditions for his psychological well-being. The internalized baby is more likely to cry if his private world, is intruded on by people and things in the environment than if he is deprived of them.
The inherent self-sufficiency of the Internalizer, like the environmental dependence of the Externalizer, tends to arouse ambivalent parental responses. The internalized baby is neither demanding nor involving, and far from requiring constant attention, would prefer to be left alone. However, while his presence does not tend to disrupt the lives of those around him, his Inherent self-containment may easily be interpreted as unfriendliness. His internalized. focus excludes rather than welcomes others, and the dominance of his ideational. reactivity gives his experience a highly individualized. meaning.
The lack of interpersonal responsiveness which is typical of the internalized child may easily result in his failure to meet fundamental emotional needs of his parents. In this event, the parents will find his passivity disturbing, and would prefer a more relating, active child. Early parental training, control, praise and punishment will therefore be directed toward pushing the internalized child. in the direction of increasing responsiveness, activity, and interpersonal involvement.
The Internalizer, though less susceptible to environmental pressure than the Externalizer, is nevertheless capable of experiencing environmental threat in his own way. Although he does not require external involvements and interpersonal relationships as major sources of satisfaction, he does need the support of the external world in order to continue to achieve self satisfactions. Since he is dependent on others for sustenance, the loss of support inherent in the withdrawal of environmental controls constitutes a real threat.
While threat tends to induce inferiority feelings in the Externalizer, it is more likely to result in feelings of insecurity in the Internalizer. Since these responses to threat are qualitatively different but equally uncomfortable, both will result In recourse to defensive activities. The internalized child will defend his security as intensively as the externalized. child will fight in defense of his Role Adaptive.
Under sufficient pressure, the internalized child can be pushed away from his primitive orientation, and come, In time, to associate feelings of insecurity with his passive, ideationally dominant orientation. He will then develop anxiety in connection with his inherent inability to control his ideational activity and will become increasingly aware of the need for developing in externalized directions to preserve his security. Like the externalized child, he, too, will take the cues for change from parental praise and punishment.
If the threat of loss of external support is strong, the internalized child will attach feelings of anxiety, guilt and inferiority to all aspects of his primitive orientation, and will come to believe that his security depends on his ability to change it. He will therefore suppress or repress his inherently internalized reactivity by reacting against it. As in the Externalizer, however, the primitive tendency will continue to seek expression, and the resulting conflict will only serve to increase the Internalizer's feelings of anxiety, guilt, and. insecurity.