The effects of childhood adversity, both during an individual’s lifetime and from one generation to the next, are driven by mental structures called schemas. Schemas generally have two basic ingredients – a record in memory of pain or distress which can have motivational potential, and an associated attribution or causal explanation of the perceived cause, as understood by the young individual at the time it is generated. These attributions or conclusions are referred to as core beliefs in Cognitive Behaviour Therapy. (Other components in memory after trauma or need-frustration can include bodily sensations and/or imagery). The operation of schemas underpins aspects of personality functioning not attributable to genetic factors.
The triggering or arousal of schemas, which are often latent until activated, produces unconscious motivational processes involving the hedonic or pleasure principle of generating fantasies, ideas and desires geared towards attenuating or transforming the associated distress into a more favourable feeling state: turning pain into pleasure or reducing pain. (As summarised in “Why do adult offenders commit acts that harm others?” available upon request).
Through the lifespan psychological wellbeing arises from the gratification of psychological needs, and psychological disturbances from need-frustration and trauma
From birth onwards, human beings have a number of fundamental psychological needs that must be gratified (and not frustrated) to promote growth, wellbeing and flourishing. Table 1 below – distilled from the work of Henry Murray (1938/2008) – lists those needs. W. M. Krogman, quoted by Allan (1989), noted that humankind “has absolutely the most protracted period of infancy, childhood and juvenility of all life forms… Nearly 30 % of his entire lifespan is devoted to growing.” That uniquely long period of dependency simultaneously offers opportunities for flourishing and creates risks for vulnerability when needs are unmet (see Personal Anecdote 1 below).
Table 1. List of Psychological Needs
| Psychological Need |
Description |
| ACCEPTANCE |
A fundamental desire for inclusion, as opposed to isolation, rejection, bullying or being shunned [Rohner et al., 2005] |
| ADMIRATION |
Being the focus of positive emotion — delight and interest — by the carer (Murray “Infavoidance”) |
| AFFILIATION |
Relatedness to others: forming friendships and associations (Murray) |
| APPROVAL |
Receiving endorsement and support; avoiding criticism, blame or shame (Murray “Blame-avoidance”) |
| ATTENTION |
To be noticed and attended to (Murray “Exhibition”) |
| AUTONOMY |
The need for self-direction and freedom (Murray) |
| COMPETENCE |
Feeling capable and efficacious; mastery (Murray “Achievement”) |
| CONTROL / POWER |
The need to impact the environment — to make things happen (Murray “Dominance”) |
| ESTEEM |
To be valued, generating feelings of worth (Murray “Abasement”) |
| NURTURANCE |
Desire to care for others, particularly the young (Murray) |
| ORDER |
A preference for structure and predictability in one’s environment (Murray) |
| RECOGNITION |
Receiving praise and being seen as worthy of admiration (Murray) |
| SAFETY / SECURITY |
Feeling protected and safeguarded from threats (Murray “Harm-avoidance”) |
| STIMULATION |
Seeking mental, physical and emotional novelty (Murray “Change” / “Play”) |
| SUCCOURANCE |
Receiving affection, physical touch and care (Murray) |
| UNDERSTANDING |
The need for meaning — making sense of people and events (Murray “Cognizance”; “Intraception”) |
Key: HM = Needs first identified by Henry Murray (1938/2008). Where the label has been modernised, Murray’s original term appears in quotation marks.
Reference – Murray, H. A. (1938/2008). Explorations in Personality. New York: Oxford University Press.
To elaborate on the developmental perspective outlined above, the following extract (slightly formatted for the web) is taken from Cicchini (2016), “By his own hand: A modern commentary on the loss of WA engineering genius C. Y. O’Connor”.
“Apart from infants needing proximity to, and dependable responsivity from, the carer when in need to feel safe and secure, babies, children and adolescents also require input of a caring nature for admiration, attention, approval and physical touch (collectively known as dependency needs). Several of these needs can be adversely affected by environmental changes, such as a change in primary carer, or separation from siblings or peers with whom they have bonded.”
“A common response to a disruption in continuity of care during childhood is a sense of loss, grief and disappointment, which can be re-activated at any point through the lifespan. Such re-activation by relevant life stresses may underpin a recurring disposition for depression and/or anxiety. Mary Ainsworth (in Bowlby & Ainsworth 1965, Chapter 3) notes that ‘the effects of early separation can be hidden and not emerge until later in life, perhaps when some repeated experience of loss reactivates the processes that were set in train by the early loss’ (p. 217).”
My impression is that it is not generally known that unexpected separation from carers in later childhood — not only infancy — can leave an individual carrying enduring feelings of helplessness or powerlessness. These feelings are normally dormant, yet can flare in response to stress. (I first detected such vulnerabilities in adult offenders within the justice system, but similar issues are commonplace in the general community among people who share developmental histories involving environmental change and childhood separation.1)
As a child’s personality forms in response to internal perturbations, habits and dispositions develop that attempt to minimise further distress. Adaptations following parental separation or loss can include meticulous planning and control of events, pursuit of stability and avoidance of environmental change. Certain occupational choices and lifelong preferences (for tasks that exercise order and control, for example) may reflect these early adjustments. While such strategies usually keep the individual on an even keel, unplanned events or interpersonal losses can trigger a dramatic loss of stability and wellbeing by re-activating childhood pain and belief-structures.
Essentially, disturbances in child–carer bonds — and in particular any upset to the need for order, stability and control, or a disruption of dependable support — are recorded in memory along with intense feelings of powerlessness. Because these processes are often latent, they remain invisible to observers (and frequently to the person affected). A vulnerable or sensitive individual’s potential to suffer intense pain in response to future stress may thus stay hidden until it strikes without warning. Increased community awareness of such emotional processes will help individuals and those around them respond more constructively when these hidden vulnerabilities are stirred.
1 See Personal Anecdote 1 below.
Historic (childhood) contributors to adult motivational states
In the course of undertaking in-depth psychological assessments of adult offenders for the Western Australian justice system, I observed that the arousal of emotions stemming from childhood trauma or neglect of psychological needs is a primary contributor to the motivation for adult offending. These processes become active when present-day stressors that resemble childhood privations trigger latent negative feelings, generating fantasies, impulses or desires intended to reduce the distress (see the Appendix for an example).
A developmental explanation I formulated2 is that unmet needs prompt infants and children to act or vocalise, thereby attracting carer attention and, ideally, relevant inputs. When a need is promptly gratified, the negative affect subsides and a new need emerges later; this cyclical satisfaction fosters trust in the external world, a positive self-image and a perception of a benign environment — foundations for resilience and wellbeing across the lifespan.
Conversely, when a child’s expressed need is repeatedly ignored or traumatically frustrated (or when a threat is not removed), a cataclysmic adaptation may occur. Two key elements are then recorded in memory: (a) an intensified negative feeling3 and (b) an assumed causal attribution. Whether this attribution blames external agents or oneself forms the basis of an enduring external or internal locus of control, and of pessimistic or optimistic explanatory styles.
Rigid perceptual filters about the cause of negative events lie at the root of most psychological problems — from internal suffering such as anxiety and depression to externalised behaviours like domestic violence. (Gilbar, Taft & Dekel 2000 analyse links between childhood trauma and dominance in domestic abuse.) Complementing these filters are what J. E. Young terms Early Maladaptive Schemas, enduring cognitive-affective patterns that grow out of unmet needs (Young, Klosko & Weishaar 2003).
Therapeutic work with adults over decades shows that the attributions automatically invoked to interpret new adversity are often primitive explanations formed in childhood. The very wording of these internal statements typically signals the psychological need originally thwarted — an observation that, to my knowledge, constitutes an original contribution to psychological theory.
2 Presented at national and international conferences from 2009 and summarised for lay readers in Cicchini (2009, Chapter 2).
3 The re-activation of such “augmented negative feelings” has been demonstrated during therapy with several adult offenders (see Appendix).
Coercive control
In an InPsych article titled “The Invisible Cage: Psychology’s Role in the Criminalisation of Coercive Control”, Dr Lisa J. Warren concludes: Psychologists have a central role in removing the cloaks and skilfully addressing the underlying personal deficits that compel some men to dominate.
The reflections below expand on the psychological roots of coercive control.
The drive to exert power or control is a universal psychological need that begins in infancy. Excessive control-seeking in adulthood, however, often represents an unconscious strategy to forestall the re-experience of childhood helplessness. When basic trust in caregivers is shattered by trauma, neglect or hostility, the child internalises a sense of powerlessness. Later in life, any hint of abandonment or deprivation can trigger the same intolerable feelings, prompting compensatory dominance behaviours.
A key clinical hurdle is lack of insight: distressed adults usually misattribute their agitation solely to present-day frustrations, unaware that a large proportion of the emotional charge originates from early unmet needs stored in memory. Because the original attributional style was external — “others let me down” — current partners, children or institutions are readily blamed, fuelling coercive tactics.
Psychological assessment can identify whether a person leans toward an external locus of control (predisposing to blame) or an internal locus (predisposing to self-blame). Research also distinguishes optimistic versus pessimistic explanatory styles. Both constructs reflect rigid mental filters formed in childhood that shape perception through the lifespan.
When we analyse an individual’s recurrent self-statements, the language itself offers clues to the underlying frustrated need. For instance, an assertion such as “Nobody has the right to tell anyone else what to do” points to thwarted AUTONOMY, whereas “I feel unsafe” signals unmet needs for SAFETY / SECURITY. Mapping these verbal cues to specific psychological needs enables targeted intervention.
Table 2 provides illustrative verbalisations and the corresponding need domains. Use it only as a heuristic; individual formulations must always be validated in therapy.
Table 2. Sample Cognitions by Need-Domain
| Example Statement |
Psychological Need |
| “Nobody has the right to tell anyone else what to do.” |
AUTONOMY |
| “Nobody cares.” |
SUCCOURANCE |
| “I want everyone to like me.” |
ACCEPTANCE |
| “I feel unrecognised for my achievements.” |
RECOGNITION |
| “I’m a klutz; I can never do things right.” |
COMPETENCE |
| “I have to be the life of the party—centre-stage.” |
ATTENTION |
| “I want to be admired for my special talents, not lost in the crowd.” |
ADMIRATION |
| “It’s either my way or the highway.” |
CONTROL / POWER |
| “I always feel inferior—just not good enough.” |
ESTEEM |
| “Whatever I do to please is never good enough.” |
APPROVAL |
| “I can’t stand my routines being disrupted.” |
ORDER |
| “I’m not a people person; I prefer my own company.” |
AFFILIATION |
| “I can’t stand the idea of having to look after others.” |
NURTURANCE |
| “Boredom is a frequent problem for me.” |
STIMULATION |
| “I get obsessed trying to figure things out.” |
UNDERSTANDING |
| “I feel unsafe.” |
SAFETY / SECURITY |
Enlightened Approaches to Crime Prevention
Historians and seasoned professionals agree that punitive strategies (i.e. criminalisation) rarely mitigate emotionally driven behaviours in adults, nor do they curb entrenched habits or addictions. Deterrence presupposes rational, consequence-based decision-making; yet violent or compulsive acts are fuelled primarily by trauma-related emotions and unmet needs. Hence, the logic of deterrence often fails in practice (see Justice Steytler, 2008; Cicchini, 2023a).
While internal forces shape behaviour, we do not abdicate responsibility; adults must learn to regulate their emotional states. Psychologists play a pivotal educational role—helping clients recognise, tolerate and process pain without resorting to harmful action (the literature calls this emotional processing).
Consequently, forward-thinking professionals advocate a public-health prevention model. The guiding maxim is “as we sow, so shall we reap”: unless society safeguards the psychological needs of infants and children, cycles of inter-generational trauma—and the attendant anxiety, depression and violence—will persist. Primary prevention therefore hinges on community education for parents and carers; secondary prevention focuses on adults who already carry historic wounds, fostering insight, attributional change and grief work.
A local example is PreventingChildSexualAbuse.org, which hosts two educational papers on the roots of child sexual abuse. The project operates on minimal funding, yet illustrates what evidence-based resources can achieve. A national, government-funded campaign—pairing psychology-informed content with robust marketing—could scale these benefits.
Personal Anecdote 1 (Train-station vignette). A commuter distressed by a bus-replacement exclaimed, “I can’t stand it when things are changed!” On brief conversation she disclosed maternal abandonment at age four—an illustrative link between childhood disruption and adult sensitivity to routine change.
Personal Anecdote 2 (Infant-care facility). A carer once reflected on supervising seven babies with only two staff: “We only had four hands…” Such institutional rearing—even at six weeks of age—raises grave concerns about unmet dependency needs.
Unmet Needs in an Offender of Domestic Violence
The following case illustrates the interplay of childhood need-frustration, distorted cognitions and adult violence. The client—a young man imprisoned for striking his de-facto partner with a baseball bat—held the global belief that “women are totally irrational and use you up.” Throughout therapy he grew agitated whenever public adulation was directed toward others (e.g. Australian ultramarathon legend Cliff Young). His preoccupation with praise signalled an unmet need for recognition.
Developmental enquiry revealed that as a child he received little acknowledgement; his mother routinely credited his achievements to her own parenting, while favouring a sibling. According to Murray (1938) Recognition need theory, the absence of praise evokes envy and resentment (“pleasure when flattered, annoyance when others are rewarded”). These early experiences formed a schema: “Women withhold deserved praise.”
A concrete trigger occurred when the partner innocently mentioned a former inmate who was “doing really well.” The comment re-activated the old wound of being unrecognised, fuelling rage that culminated in violence. Later in treatment the client realised she had not intended any comparison—an insight that weakened the schema’s grip.
Note. Parts of this section were submitted to the 2024 South Australian Royal Commission on Domestic, Family and Sexual Violence.
Relevant Resources
External Locus of Control & Antisocial Behaviour —see the special series in Frontiers in Psychology, e.g. Nowicki et al. (2018) “Early Home-Life Antecedents of Children’s Locus of Control” (doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02032).
Harvard Center on the Developing Child —working paper 11, “Building the Brain’s ‘Air-Traffic-Control System’” illustrates how early experiences shape executive function (developingchild.harvard.edu)
Preventing Adverse Childhood Experiences —CDC training hub: vetoviolence.cdc.gov/apps/aces-training
Additional Brief Articles by Mercurio Cicchini
- “Recommendations for Community Interventions” (Domestic & Family Violence)
- “The Psychological Underpinnings of Offending: Motivational Issues”
- “Why Do Adult Offenders Commit Acts That Harm Others?”
- “A Developmental Psychological Needs Perspective of Wellbeing & Psychopathology (1986–2022)” —PDF slides
- Poster: “Origins & Nature of Core Beliefs” —27th AACBT Conference, 2004
- Extract: How Childhood Experiences Influence the Lives of Adults (unpublished manuscript)
- “Childhood Origins of Domestic and Other Violence” (2014 submission)
References
- Allan, J. (1989). The Human Difference. Oxford: Lion Publishing Corporation.
- Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and Loss, Vol. 1: Attachment. London: Hogarth Press.
- Bowlby, J. (1973). Attachment and Loss, Vol. 2: Separation—Anxiety & Anger. London: Hogarth Press.
- Bowlby, J. (1980). Attachment and Loss, Vol. 3: Loss—Sadness & Depression. London: Hogarth Press.
- Bowlby, J., & Ainsworth, M. D. (1965). Child Care and the Growth of Love (2nd ed.). Harmondsworth: Penguin.
- Brazelton, T. B., & Greenspan, S. I. (2000). The Irreducible Needs of Children. Cambridge, MA: Perseus.
- Cicchini, M. (2023). Causal Factors in the Sexual Abuse of Children by Adults: A Psychological Summary. Kelmscott, Western Australia.
- Cicchini, M. (2023a). “Psychology, Punishment & Prevention of Family Violence,” in Fuller, M. Understanding Family Violence (e-book, Appendix D).
- Cicchini, M. (2023b). Aetiology of Core Beliefs, Well-being & Psychopathology: A Psychological Needs Model (unpublished manuscript).
- Murray, H. A. (1938/2008). Explorations in Personality. New York: Oxford University Press.
- Rohner, R. P., Khaleque, A., & Cournoyer, D. E. (2005). “Parental Acceptance–Rejection,” Ethos, 33, 299–334.
- Roth, M., & Hammelstein, P. (2012). “The Need Inventory of Sensation Seeking,” European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 28(1), 11–18.
- Steytler, C. D. (2008). Sentencing in the Criminal Justice System. Vista Public Lecture, 23 April 2008.
- Warren, L. J. (2021). “The Invisible Cage: Psychology’s Role in the Criminalisation of Coercive Control,” InPsych, 43(2).
Appendix
Example of a Childhood-Acquired Augmented Negative Feeling State
A 23-year-old inmate presented with a pronounced anti-authoritarian stance traceable to thwarted autonomy in childhood (excessive parental intrusion). During imagery-based processing he repeated “Don’t tell me what to do,” spontaneously shifting to “Don’t tell me why.” Physiological arousal—head heat, dizziness, “butterflies”—signalled the activation of an augmented negative feeling state.
His criminal record (8 DUI convictions, 23 driving-while-suspended, three life suspensions) culminated in ramming a hotel fence after staff advised him not to drive. The advice re-triggered the latent autonomy wound, demonstrating how unresolved childhood schemas energise adult offending behaviour.
About the Author
Mercurio Cicchini is a Registered Clinical Psychologist, first working as a Psychologist in Fremantle Prison (Western Australia) in 1973. Educated at the University of Western Australia and the West Australian Institute of Technology (now Curtin University), he has been operating as a private practitioner since 1987, working with community clients, the Adoption Research and Counselling Service, and for over 3 decades as a contractor to WA Government to prepare Psychological Reports on sexual, violent and generic offenders for Court sentencing purposes. Prior to that he was a Clinical Psychologist for the Department of Corrective Services, working with adult offenders in the WA prison system for 10 years (1977–1987).
Mercurio Cicchini’s areas of clinical interest include emotion-focused cognitive-behavioral therapy, trauma-informed care, and the integration of personality theory with clinical practice. He is particularly focused on the role of unmet psychological needs in the formation of core beliefs and emotional difficulties.
He is currently engaged in writing, community and professional education, and exploring how an understanding of psychological needs can inform preventative childcare, as well as therapeutic practices to promote clients’ long-term wellbeing.
