2. Caregiver-Infant Interactions

Question 1

2 features of caregiver-infant interactions

Answer 1

• reciprocity
• interactional synchrony

Question 2

Outline caregiver infant interactions: reciprocity

Answer 2

reciprocity refers to the interaction between two people where they respond to each others signals, one after the other.
this can be seen as turn-taking.
from birth babies and their mothers spend a lot of time in intense and pleasurable interaction.
mothers typically pick up on and responds to infant alertness around two-thirds of the time.

from around 3 months this interaction tends to be increasingly frequent and involve attention to each others verbal signals and facial expressions.
a key element of this interaction is reciprocity: an interaction is reciprocal when each person responds to the other and elicits a response from them.
for example, if a mother smiles at her baby (a positive action), the baby may smile back (a similar positive action).
in this sense, it is a ‘back and forth’ in communication between the caregiver and infant.

traditional views of childhood have seen the baby in a passive role, receiving care from an adult.
however, it seems that the baby takes an active role.
both the mother and child can initiate interactions and they appear to take turns in doing so.
this sensitivity to the infants behaviour lays the foundation for later attachment between caregiver and infant.

Question 3

Outline caregiver infant interactions: interactional synchrony

Answer 3

two people are said to be synchronised when they carry out the same action simultaneously

interactional synchrony is when infants move their bodies in tune with the rhythm of the carers spoken language

this serves to reinforce the attachment bond

it takes place when a mother and infant interact in such a way that their actions and emotions mirror the other

for example, a baby moving their head in time with the mother

Question 4

Evaluate caregiver infant interactions: Strengths

Answer 4

P: evidence to support interactional synchrony between caregivers and infants from Melzoff and Moore (1977)
E: found that infants aged 2-3 weeks tended to mimic adults specific facial expressions and hand movements
L: this supports the idea that interactional synchrony is an innate ability to aid the formation of attachments, especially since it was subsequently seen in infants of less than 3 days old

P: evidence to support from Isabella et al (1989)
E: observed 30 mothers and infants together and assessed the degree of synchrony, as well as the quality of mother-infant attachment
E: found that a high level of synchrony was associated with better quality mother-infant attachment
L: shows that interactional synchrony is important in forming attachments

Question 5

Evaluate caregiver infant interactions: Limitations

Answer 5

P: issue is that this behaviour doesn’t seem to be universal
E: behaviour is not consistently found with all caregivers across cultures. the fact that interactional synchrony is not found in all cultures weakens support for the idea that it is necessary for attachment formation.
E: Le vine et al (1994) reported that Kenyan mothers have little interaction with their infants but such infants do have a high proportion of secure attachments
L: problem as it suggests some interactions between caregivers and infants may simply be a cultural norm

P: many studies observing C-I interactions have shown the same patterns, however what is being observed is merely hand movements of changes in expression.
E: it is extremely difficult to be certain, based on these observations, what is taking place from the infant’s perspective
E: eg the infants imitations of adult signals is difficult to know whether is it’s conscious and deliberate or accidental
L: we can’t really know for certain that behaviours seen in M-I interaction have a special meaning

P: research is prone to observer bias
E: bc this type of interaction can only be studied through observing the infant and CG in a non-participant observation, some researchers may record more interactions than others
E: eg what one researcher views as interactional synchrony another may not. also, a researcher may record more observations they think show a strong attachment bond in order to support their hypothesis
L: research in C-I interaction may be unreliable from one researcher to the next and lack validity