3.5: Privation Flashcards
Outline and evaluate research into the effects of failure to form attachment (16 marks)
Rutter et al’s ERA project was that physical, cognitive and emotional development was assessed at ages 4, 6, 11 and 15 years of 165 Romanian orphans adopted in Britain
Outline and evaluate research into the effects of failure to form attachment (16 marks).
Rutter et al’s ERA project was that physical, cognitive and emotional development was assessed at ages 4, 6, 11 and 15 years of 165 Romanian orphans adopted in Britain.
What served as a control group?
A group of 52 British children adopted around the same time served as a control group
Outline and evaluate research into the effects of failure to form attachment (16 marks).
Rutter et al’s ERA project was that physical, cognitive and emotional development was assessed at ages 4, 6, 11 and 15 years of 165 Romanian orphans adopted in Britain.
A group of 52 British children adopted around the same time served as a control group.
What did they find?
They found that the mean IQ decreased for adopted children the later they were adopted
Outline and evaluate research into the effects of failure to form attachment (16 marks).
Rutter et al’s ERA project was that physical, cognitive and emotional development was assessed at ages 4, 6, 11 and 15 years of 165 Romanian orphans adopted in Britain.
A group of 52 British children adopted around the same time served as a control group.
They found that the mean IQ decreased for adopted children the later they were adopted.
Example
For example, the mean IQ of those adopted before the age of 6 months was 102, compared to 77 for those adopted after 2 years
Outline and evaluate research into the effects of failure to form attachment (16 marks).
Rutter et al’s ERA project was that physical, cognitive and emotional development was assessed at ages 4, 6, 11 and 15 years of 165 Romanian orphans adopted in Britain.
A group of 52 British children adopted around the same time served as a control group.
They found that the mean IQ decreased for adopted children the later they were adopted.
For example, the mean IQ of those adopted before the age of 6 months was 102, compared to 77 for those adopted after 2 years.
When did these differences remain?
These differences remained at age 16 (Beckett et al)
Outline and evaluate research into the effects of failure to form attachment (16 marks).
Rutter et al’s ERA project was that physical, cognitive and emotional development was assessed at ages 4, 6, 11 and 15 years of 165 Romanian orphans adopted in Britain.
A group of 52 British children adopted around the same time served as a control group.
They found that the mean IQ decreased for adopted children the later they were adopted.
For example, the mean IQ of those adopted before the age of 6 months was 102, compared to 77 for those adopted after 2 years.
These differences remained at age 16 (Beckett et al).
However, what did those children adopted 6 months show?
However, those children adopted after 6 months showed signs of a particular attachment style called disinhibited attachment
Outline and evaluate research into the effects of failure to form attachment (16 marks).
Rutter et al’s ERA project was that physical, cognitive and emotional development was assessed at ages 4, 6, 11 and 15 years of 165 Romanian orphans adopted in Britain.
A group of 52 British children adopted around the same time served as a control group.
They found that the mean IQ decreased for adopted children the later they were adopted.
For example, the mean IQ of those adopted before the age of 6 months was 102, compared to 77 for those adopted after 2 years.
These differences remained at age 16 (Beckett et al).
However, those children adopted after 6 months showed signs of a particular attachment style called disinhibited attachment, for which symptoms include what?
However, those children adopted after 6 months showed signs of a particular attachment style called disinhibited attachment, for which which symptoms include:
- Attention-seeking
- Clinginess
- Social behaviour directed indiscriminately towards all adults
Outline and evaluate research into the effects of failure to form attachment (16 marks).
Rutter et al’s ERA project was that physical, cognitive and emotional development was assessed at ages 4, 6, 11 and 15 years of 165 Romanian orphans adopted in Britain.
A group of 52 British children adopted around the same time served as a control group.
They found that the mean IQ decreased for adopted children the later they were adopted.
For example, the mean IQ of those adopted before the age of 6 months was 102, compared to 77 for those adopted after 2 years.
These differences remained at age 16 (Beckett et al).
However, those children adopted after 6 months showed signs of a particular attachment style called disinhibited attachment, for which which symptoms include attention-seeking, clinginess and social behaviour directed indiscriminately towards all adults, both what?
However, those children adopted after 6 months showed signs of a particular attachment style called disinhibited attachment, for which which symptoms include:
- Attention-seeking
- Clinginess
- Social behaviour directed indiscriminately towards all adults, both familiar and unfamiliar
Outline and evaluate research into the effects of failure to form attachment (16 marks).
Rutter et al’s ERA project was that physical, cognitive and emotional development was assessed at ages 4, 6, 11 and 15 years of 165 Romanian orphans adopted in Britain.
A group of 52 British children adopted around the same time served as a control group.
They found that the mean IQ decreased for adopted children the later they were adopted.
For example, the mean IQ of those adopted before the age of 6 months was 102, compared to 77 for those adopted after 2 years.
These differences remained at age 16 (Beckett et al).
However, those children adopted after 6 months showed signs of a particular attachment style called disinhibited attachment, for which which symptoms include attention-seeking, clinginess and social behaviour directed indiscriminately towards all adults, both familiar and unfamiliar.
What did those children adopted before 6 months rarely display?
Those children adopted before 6 months rarely displayed disinhibited attachment
Outline and evaluate research into the effects of failure to form attachment (16 marks).
Rutter et al’s ERA project was that physical, cognitive and emotional development was assessed at ages 4, 6, 11 and 15 years of 165 Romanian orphans adopted in Britain.
A group of 52 British children adopted around the same time served as a control group.
They found that the mean IQ decreased for adopted children the later they were adopted.
For example, the mean IQ of those adopted before the age of 6 months was 102, compared to 77 for those adopted after 2 years.
These differences remained at age 16 (Beckett et al).
However, those children adopted after 6 months showed signs of a particular attachment style called disinhibited attachment, for which which symptoms include attention-seeking, clinginess and social behaviour directed indiscriminately towards all adults, both familiar and unfamiliar.
Those children adopted before 6 months rarely displayed disinhibited attachment.
Bowlby
Bowlby (1944) compared 44 juvenile thieves with a control group of non-criminal, but emotionally disturbed young people.
32% of the thieves showed affectionless psychopathy and 86% of the affectionless psychopaths had experienced prolonged early maternal separation.
In the control group, only 2 had had such a separation
Outline and evaluate research into the effects of failure to form attachment (16 marks).
Rutter et al’s ERA project was that physical, cognitive and emotional development was assessed at ages 4, 6, 11 and 15 years of 165 Romanian orphans adopted in Britain.
A group of 52 British children adopted around the same time served as a control group.
They found that the mean IQ decreased for adopted children the later they were adopted.
For example, the mean IQ of those adopted before the age of 6 months was 102, compared to 77 for those adopted after 2 years.
These differences remained at age 16 (Beckett et al).
However, those children adopted after 6 months showed signs of a particular attachment style called disinhibited attachment, for which which symptoms include attention-seeking, clinginess and social behaviour directed indiscriminately towards all adults, both familiar and unfamiliar.
Those children adopted before 6 months rarely displayed disinhibited attachment.
Bowlby (1944) compared 44 juvenile thieves with a control group of non-criminal, but emotionally disturbed young people.
32% of the thieves showed affectionless psychopathy and 86% of the affectionless psychopaths had experienced prolonged early maternal separation.
In the control group, only 2 had had such a separation.
First AO3 PEEL paragraph
The first AO3 PEEL paragraph is that one strength of Rutter’s Romanian orphan study was that it was a longitudinal study
Outline and evaluate research into the effects of failure to form attachment (16 marks).
Rutter et al’s ERA project was that physical, cognitive and emotional development was assessed at ages 4, 6, 11 and 15 years of 165 Romanian orphans adopted in Britain.
A group of 52 British children adopted around the same time served as a control group.
They found that the mean IQ decreased for adopted children the later they were adopted.
For example, the mean IQ of those adopted before the age of 6 months was 102, compared to 77 for those adopted after 2 years.
These differences remained at age 16 (Beckett et al).
However, those children adopted after 6 months showed signs of a particular attachment style called disinhibited attachment, for which which symptoms include attention-seeking, clinginess and social behaviour directed indiscriminately towards all adults, both familiar and unfamiliar.
Those children adopted before 6 months rarely displayed disinhibited attachment.
Bowlby (1944) compared 44 juvenile thieves with a control group of non-criminal, but emotionally disturbed young people.
32% of the thieves showed affectionless psychopathy and 86% of the affectionless psychopaths had experienced prolonged early maternal separation.
In the control group, only 2 had had such a separation.
The first AO3 PEEL paragraph is that one strength of Rutter’s Romanian orphan study was that it was a longitudinal study, which helped do what?
The first AO3 PEEL paragraph is that one strength of Rutter’s Romanian orphan study was that it was a longitudinal study, which helped measure the lives of the children over many years
Outline and evaluate research into the effects of failure to form attachment (16 marks).
Rutter et al’s ERA project was that physical, cognitive and emotional development was assessed at ages 4, 6, 11 and 15 years of 165 Romanian orphans adopted in Britain.
A group of 52 British children adopted around the same time served as a control group.
They found that the mean IQ decreased for adopted children the later they were adopted.
For example, the mean IQ of those adopted before the age of 6 months was 102, compared to 77 for those adopted after 2 years.
These differences remained at age 16 (Beckett et al).
However, those children adopted after 6 months showed signs of a particular attachment style called disinhibited attachment, for which which symptoms include attention-seeking, clinginess and social behaviour directed indiscriminately towards all adults, both familiar and unfamiliar.
Those children adopted before 6 months rarely displayed disinhibited attachment.
Bowlby (1944) compared 44 juvenile thieves with a control group of non-criminal, but emotionally disturbed young people.
32% of the thieves showed affectionless psychopathy and 86% of the affectionless psychopaths had experienced prolonged early maternal separation.
In the control group, only 2 had had such a separation.
The first AO3 PEEL paragraph is that one strength of Rutter’s Romanian orphan study was that it was a longitudinal study, which helped measure the lives of the children over many years to do what?
The first AO3 PEEL paragraph is that one strength of Rutter’s Romanian orphan study was that it was a longitudinal study, which helped measure the lives of the children over many years to truly understand the lasting differences that occurred in orphans
Outline and evaluate research into the effects of failure to form attachment (16 marks).
Rutter et al’s ERA project was that physical, cognitive and emotional development was assessed at ages 4, 6, 11 and 15 years of 165 Romanian orphans adopted in Britain.
A group of 52 British children adopted around the same time served as a control group.
They found that the mean IQ decreased for adopted children the later they were adopted.
For example, the mean IQ of those adopted before the age of 6 months was 102, compared to 77 for those adopted after 2 years.
These differences remained at age 16 (Beckett et al).
However, those children adopted after 6 months showed signs of a particular attachment style called disinhibited attachment, for which which symptoms include attention-seeking, clinginess and social behaviour directed indiscriminately towards all adults, both familiar and unfamiliar.
Those children adopted before 6 months rarely displayed disinhibited attachment.
Bowlby (1944) compared 44 juvenile thieves with a control group of non-criminal, but emotionally disturbed young people.
32% of the thieves showed affectionless psychopathy and 86% of the affectionless psychopaths had experienced prolonged early maternal separation.
In the control group, only 2 had had such a separation.
The first AO3 PEEL paragraph is that one strength of Rutter’s Romanian orphan study was that it was a longitudinal study, which helped measure the lives of the children over many years to truly understand the lasting differences that occurred in orphans.
What did this also help to do?
This also helped to identify consistent changes that may disappear over time, but be mistakenly concluded to be definite due to institutionalisation
Outline and evaluate research into the effects of failure to form attachment (16 marks).
Rutter et al’s ERA project was that physical, cognitive and emotional development was assessed at ages 4, 6, 11 and 15 years of 165 Romanian orphans adopted in Britain.
A group of 52 British children adopted around the same time served as a control group.
They found that the mean IQ decreased for adopted children the later they were adopted.
For example, the mean IQ of those adopted before the age of 6 months was 102, compared to 77 for those adopted after 2 years.
These differences remained at age 16 (Beckett et al).
However, those children adopted after 6 months showed signs of a particular attachment style called disinhibited attachment, for which which symptoms include attention-seeking, clinginess and social behaviour directed indiscriminately towards all adults, both familiar and unfamiliar.
Those children adopted before 6 months rarely displayed disinhibited attachment.
Bowlby (1944) compared 44 juvenile thieves with a control group of non-criminal, but emotionally disturbed young people.
32% of the thieves showed affectionless psychopathy and 86% of the affectionless psychopaths had experienced prolonged early maternal separation.
In the control group, only 2 had had such a separation.
The first AO3 PEEL paragraph is that one strength of Rutter’s Romanian orphan study was that it was a longitudinal study, which helped measure the lives of the children over many years to truly understand the lasting differences that occurred in orphans.
This also helped to identify consistent changes that may disappear over time, but be mistakenly concluded to be definite due to institutionalisation.
Second AO3 PEEL paragraph
The second AO3 PEEL paragraph is that a weakness with longitudinal studies however, is that a number of factors and extraneous variables may affect the results
Outline and evaluate research into the effects of failure to form attachment (16 marks).
Rutter et al’s ERA project was that physical, cognitive and emotional development was assessed at ages 4, 6, 11 and 15 years of 165 Romanian orphans adopted in Britain.
A group of 52 British children adopted around the same time served as a control group.
They found that the mean IQ decreased for adopted children the later they were adopted.
For example, the mean IQ of those adopted before the age of 6 months was 102, compared to 77 for those adopted after 2 years.
These differences remained at age 16 (Beckett et al).
However, those children adopted after 6 months showed signs of a particular attachment style called disinhibited attachment, for which which symptoms include attention-seeking, clinginess and social behaviour directed indiscriminately towards all adults, both familiar and unfamiliar.
Those children adopted before 6 months rarely displayed disinhibited attachment.
Bowlby (1944) compared 44 juvenile thieves with a control group of non-criminal, but emotionally disturbed young people.
32% of the thieves showed affectionless psychopathy and 86% of the affectionless psychopaths had experienced prolonged early maternal separation.
In the control group, only 2 had had such a separation.
The first AO3 PEEL paragraph is that one strength of Rutter’s Romanian orphan study was that it was a longitudinal study, which helped measure the lives of the children over many years to truly understand the lasting differences that occurred in orphans.
This also helped to identify consistent changes that may disappear over time, but be mistakenly concluded to be definite due to institutionalisation.
The second AO3 PEEL paragraph is that a weakness with longitudinal studies however, is that a number of factors and extraneous variables may affect the results.
Example
For example, the Romanian orphans may actually display poor development not due to institutionalisation, but other factors whilst they were there
Outline and evaluate research into the effects of failure to form attachment (16 marks).
Rutter et al’s ERA project was that physical, cognitive and emotional development was assessed at ages 4, 6, 11 and 15 years of 165 Romanian orphans adopted in Britain.
A group of 52 British children adopted around the same time served as a control group.
They found that the mean IQ decreased for adopted children the later they were adopted.
For example, the mean IQ of those adopted before the age of 6 months was 102, compared to 77 for those adopted after 2 years.
These differences remained at age 16 (Beckett et al).
However, those children adopted after 6 months showed signs of a particular attachment style called disinhibited attachment, for which which symptoms include attention-seeking, clinginess and social behaviour directed indiscriminately towards all adults, both familiar and unfamiliar.
Those children adopted before 6 months rarely displayed disinhibited attachment.
Bowlby (1944) compared 44 juvenile thieves with a control group of non-criminal, but emotionally disturbed young people.
32% of the thieves showed affectionless psychopathy and 86% of the affectionless psychopaths had experienced prolonged early maternal separation.
In the control group, only 2 had had such a separation.
The first AO3 PEEL paragraph is that one strength of Rutter’s Romanian orphan study was that it was a longitudinal study, which helped measure the lives of the children over many years to truly understand the lasting differences that occurred in orphans.
This also helped to identify consistent changes that may disappear over time, but be mistakenly concluded to be definite due to institutionalisation.
The second AO3 PEEL paragraph is that a weakness with longitudinal studies however, is that a number of factors and extraneous variables may affect the results.
For example, the Romanian orphans may actually display poor development not due to institutionalisation, but other factors, such as what, whilst they were there?
For example, the Romanian orphans may actually display poor development not due to institutionalisation, but other factors, such as poor cognitive stimulation, whilst they were there
Outline and evaluate research into the effects of failure to form attachment (16 marks).
Rutter et al’s ERA project was that physical, cognitive and emotional development was assessed at ages 4, 6, 11 and 15 years of 165 Romanian orphans adopted in Britain.
A group of 52 British children adopted around the same time served as a control group.
They found that the mean IQ decreased for adopted children the later they were adopted.
For example, the mean IQ of those adopted before the age of 6 months was 102, compared to 77 for those adopted after 2 years.
These differences remained at age 16 (Beckett et al).
However, those children adopted after 6 months showed signs of a particular attachment style called disinhibited attachment, for which which symptoms include attention-seeking, clinginess and social behaviour directed indiscriminately towards all adults, both familiar and unfamiliar.
Those children adopted before 6 months rarely displayed disinhibited attachment.
Bowlby (1944) compared 44 juvenile thieves with a control group of non-criminal, but emotionally disturbed young people.
32% of the thieves showed affectionless psychopathy and 86% of the affectionless psychopaths had experienced prolonged early maternal separation.
In the control group, only 2 had had such a separation.
The first AO3 PEEL paragraph is that one strength of Rutter’s Romanian orphan study was that it was a longitudinal study, which helped measure the lives of the children over many years to truly understand the lasting differences that occurred in orphans.
This also helped to identify consistent changes that may disappear over time, but be mistakenly concluded to be definite due to institutionalisation.
The second AO3 PEEL paragraph is that a weakness with longitudinal studies however, is that a number of factors and extraneous variables may affect the results.
For example, the Romanian orphans may actually display poor development not due to institutionalisation, but other factors, such as poor cognitive stimulation, whilst they were there.
Third AO3 PEEL paragraph
The third AO3 PEEL paragraph is that one of the methodological issues for Rutter et al’s ERA project is that children were not randomly assigned to conditions
Outline and evaluate research into the effects of failure to form attachment (16 marks).
Rutter et al’s ERA project was that physical, cognitive and emotional development was assessed at ages 4, 6, 11 and 15 years of 165 Romanian orphans adopted in Britain.
A group of 52 British children adopted around the same time served as a control group.
They found that the mean IQ decreased for adopted children the later they were adopted.
For example, the mean IQ of those adopted before the age of 6 months was 102, compared to 77 for those adopted after 2 years.
These differences remained at age 16 (Beckett et al).
However, those children adopted after 6 months showed signs of a particular attachment style called disinhibited attachment, for which which symptoms include attention-seeking, clinginess and social behaviour directed indiscriminately towards all adults, both familiar and unfamiliar.
Those children adopted before 6 months rarely displayed disinhibited attachment.
Bowlby (1944) compared 44 juvenile thieves with a control group of non-criminal, but emotionally disturbed young people.
32% of the thieves showed affectionless psychopathy and 86% of the affectionless psychopaths had experienced prolonged early maternal separation.
In the control group, only 2 had had such a separation.
The first AO3 PEEL paragraph is that one strength of Rutter’s Romanian orphan study was that it was a longitudinal study, which helped measure the lives of the children over many years to truly understand the lasting differences that occurred in orphans.
This also helped to identify consistent changes that may disappear over time, but be mistakenly concluded to be definite due to institutionalisation.
The second AO3 PEEL paragraph is that a weakness with longitudinal studies however, is that a number of factors and extraneous variables may affect the results.
For example, the Romanian orphans may actually display poor development not due to institutionalisation, but other factors, such as poor cognitive stimulation, whilst they were there.
The third AO3 PEEL paragraph is that one of the methodological issues for Rutter et al’s ERA project is that children were not randomly assigned to conditions.
What did the researchers not interfere with?
The researchers did not interfere with the adoption process
Outline and evaluate research into the effects of failure to form attachment (16 marks).
Rutter et al’s ERA project was that physical, cognitive and emotional development was assessed at ages 4, 6, 11 and 15 years of 165 Romanian orphans adopted in Britain.
A group of 52 British children adopted around the same time served as a control group.
They found that the mean IQ decreased for adopted children the later they were adopted.
For example, the mean IQ of those adopted before the age of 6 months was 102, compared to 77 for those adopted after 2 years.
These differences remained at age 16 (Beckett et al).
However, those children adopted after 6 months showed signs of a particular attachment style called disinhibited attachment, for which which symptoms include attention-seeking, clinginess and social behaviour directed indiscriminately towards all adults, both familiar and unfamiliar.
Those children adopted before 6 months rarely displayed disinhibited attachment.
Bowlby (1944) compared 44 juvenile thieves with a control group of non-criminal, but emotionally disturbed young people.
32% of the thieves showed affectionless psychopathy and 86% of the affectionless psychopaths had experienced prolonged early maternal separation.
In the control group, only 2 had had such a separation.
The first AO3 PEEL paragraph is that one strength of Rutter’s Romanian orphan study was that it was a longitudinal study, which helped measure the lives of the children over many years to truly understand the lasting differences that occurred in orphans.
This also helped to identify consistent changes that may disappear over time, but be mistakenly concluded to be definite due to institutionalisation.
The second AO3 PEEL paragraph is that a weakness with longitudinal studies however, is that a number of factors and extraneous variables may affect the results.
For example, the Romanian orphans may actually display poor development not due to institutionalisation, but other factors, such as poor cognitive stimulation, whilst they were there.
The third AO3 PEEL paragraph is that one of the methodological issues for Rutter et al’s ERA project is that children were not randomly assigned to conditions.
The researchers did not interfere with the adoption process.
What does this mean?
This means that those children adopted early may have been the more sociable ones
Outline and evaluate research into the effects of failure to form attachment (16 marks).
Rutter et al’s ERA project was that physical, cognitive and emotional development was assessed at ages 4, 6, 11 and 15 years of 165 Romanian orphans adopted in Britain.
A group of 52 British children adopted around the same time served as a control group.
They found that the mean IQ decreased for adopted children the later they were adopted.
For example, the mean IQ of those adopted before the age of 6 months was 102, compared to 77 for those adopted after 2 years.
These differences remained at age 16 (Beckett et al).
However, those children adopted after 6 months showed signs of a particular attachment style called disinhibited attachment, for which which symptoms include attention-seeking, clinginess and social behaviour directed indiscriminately towards all adults, both familiar and unfamiliar.
Those children adopted before 6 months rarely displayed disinhibited attachment.
Bowlby (1944) compared 44 juvenile thieves with a control group of non-criminal, but emotionally disturbed young people.
32% of the thieves showed affectionless psychopathy and 86% of the affectionless psychopaths had experienced prolonged early maternal separation.
In the control group, only 2 had had such a separation.
The first AO3 PEEL paragraph is that one strength of Rutter’s Romanian orphan study was that it was a longitudinal study, which helped measure the lives of the children over many years to truly understand the lasting differences that occurred in orphans.
This also helped to identify consistent changes that may disappear over time, but be mistakenly concluded to be definite due to institutionalisation.
The second AO3 PEEL paragraph is that a weakness with longitudinal studies however, is that a number of factors and extraneous variables may affect the results.
For example, the Romanian orphans may actually display poor development not due to institutionalisation, but other factors, such as poor cognitive stimulation, whilst they were there.
The third AO3 PEEL paragraph is that one of the methodological issues for Rutter et al’s ERA project is that children were not randomly assigned to conditions.
The researchers did not interfere with the adoption process.
This means that those children adopted early may have been the more sociable ones, a what?
This means that those children adopted early may have been the more sociable ones, a confounding variable
Outline and evaluate research into the effects of failure to form attachment (16 marks).
Rutter et al’s ERA project was that physical, cognitive and emotional development was assessed at ages 4, 6, 11 and 15 years of 165 Romanian orphans adopted in Britain.
A group of 52 British children adopted around the same time served as a control group.
They found that the mean IQ decreased for adopted children the later they were adopted.
For example, the mean IQ of those adopted before the age of 6 months was 102, compared to 77 for those adopted after 2 years.
These differences remained at age 16 (Beckett et al).
However, those children adopted after 6 months showed signs of a particular attachment style called disinhibited attachment, for which which symptoms include attention-seeking, clinginess and social behaviour directed indiscriminately towards all adults, both familiar and unfamiliar.
Those children adopted before 6 months rarely displayed disinhibited attachment.
Bowlby (1944) compared 44 juvenile thieves with a control group of non-criminal, but emotionally disturbed young people.
32% of the thieves showed affectionless psychopathy and 86% of the affectionless psychopaths had experienced prolonged early maternal separation.
In the control group, only 2 had had such a separation.
The first AO3 PEEL paragraph is that one strength of Rutter’s Romanian orphan study was that it was a longitudinal study, which helped measure the lives of the children over many years to truly understand the lasting differences that occurred in orphans.
This also helped to identify consistent changes that may disappear over time, but be mistakenly concluded to be definite due to institutionalisation.
The second AO3 PEEL paragraph is that a weakness with longitudinal studies however, is that a number of factors and extraneous variables may affect the results.
For example, the Romanian orphans may actually display poor development not due to institutionalisation, but other factors, such as poor cognitive stimulation, whilst they were there.
The third AO3 PEEL paragraph is that one of the methodological issues for Rutter et al’s ERA project is that children were not randomly assigned to conditions.
The researchers did not interfere with the adoption process.
This means that those children adopted early may have been the more sociable ones, a confounding variable.
What does this mean?
This means that the findings are not valid
Outline and evaluate research into the effects of failure to form attachment (16 marks).
Rutter et al’s ERA project was that physical, cognitive and emotional development was assessed at ages 4, 6, 11 and 15 years of 165 Romanian orphans adopted in Britain.
A group of 52 British children adopted around the same time served as a control group.
They found that the mean IQ decreased for adopted children the later they were adopted.
For example, the mean IQ of those adopted before the age of 6 months was 102, compared to 77 for those adopted after 2 years.
These differences remained at age 16 (Beckett et al).
However, those children adopted after 6 months showed signs of a particular attachment style called disinhibited attachment, for which which symptoms include attention-seeking, clinginess and social behaviour directed indiscriminately towards all adults, both familiar and unfamiliar.
Those children adopted before 6 months rarely displayed disinhibited attachment.
Bowlby (1944) compared 44 juvenile thieves with a control group of non-criminal, but emotionally disturbed young people.
32% of the thieves showed affectionless psychopathy and 86% of the affectionless psychopaths had experienced prolonged early maternal separation.
In the control group, only 2 had had such a separation.
The first AO3 PEEL paragraph is that one strength of Rutter’s Romanian orphan study was that it was a longitudinal study, which helped measure the lives of the children over many years to truly understand the lasting differences that occurred in orphans.
This also helped to identify consistent changes that may disappear over time, but be mistakenly concluded to be definite due to institutionalisation.
The second AO3 PEEL paragraph is that a weakness with longitudinal studies however, is that a number of factors and extraneous variables may affect the results.
For example, the Romanian orphans may actually display poor development not due to institutionalisation, but other factors, such as poor cognitive stimulation, whilst they were there.
The third AO3 PEEL paragraph is that one of the methodological issues for Rutter et al’s ERA project is that children were not randomly assigned to conditions.
The researchers did not interfere with the adoption process.
This means that those children adopted early may have been the more sociable ones, a confounding variable.
This means that the findings are not valid.
To control such variables, what?
To control such variables, another major investigation of fostering vs institutional care did use random allocation
Outline and evaluate research into the effects of failure to form attachment (16 marks).
Rutter et al’s ERA project was that physical, cognitive and emotional development was assessed at ages 4, 6, 11 and 15 years of 165 Romanian orphans adopted in Britain.
A group of 52 British children adopted around the same time served as a control group.
They found that the mean IQ decreased for adopted children the later they were adopted.
For example, the mean IQ of those adopted before the age of 6 months was 102, compared to 77 for those adopted after 2 years.
These differences remained at age 16 (Beckett et al).
However, those children adopted after 6 months showed signs of a particular attachment style called disinhibited attachment, for which which symptoms include attention-seeking, clinginess and social behaviour directed indiscriminately towards all adults, both familiar and unfamiliar.
Those children adopted before 6 months rarely displayed disinhibited attachment.
Bowlby (1944) compared 44 juvenile thieves with a control group of non-criminal, but emotionally disturbed young people.
32% of the thieves showed affectionless psychopathy and 86% of the affectionless psychopaths had experienced prolonged early maternal separation.
In the control group, only 2 had had such a separation.
The first AO3 PEEL paragraph is that one strength of Rutter’s Romanian orphan study was that it was a longitudinal study, which helped measure the lives of the children over many years to truly understand the lasting differences that occurred in orphans.
This also helped to identify consistent changes that may disappear over time, but be mistakenly concluded to be definite due to institutionalisation.
The second AO3 PEEL paragraph is that a weakness with longitudinal studies however, is that a number of factors and extraneous variables may affect the results.
For example, the Romanian orphans may actually display poor development not due to institutionalisation, but other factors, such as poor cognitive stimulation, whilst they were there.
The third AO3 PEEL paragraph is that one of the methodological issues for Rutter et al’s ERA project is that children were not randomly assigned to conditions.
The researchers did not interfere with the adoption process.
This means that those children adopted early may have been the more sociable ones, a confounding variable.
This means that the findings are not valid.
To control such variables, another major investigation of fostering vs institutional care did use random allocation: What?
To control such variables, another major investigation of fostering vs institutional care did use random allocation: In the Bucharest Early Intervention project, Romanian orphans were randomly allocated to fostering or institutional care
Outline and evaluate research into the effects of failure to form attachment (16 marks).
Rutter et al’s ERA project was that physical, cognitive and emotional development was assessed at ages 4, 6, 11 and 15 years of 165 Romanian orphans adopted in Britain.
A group of 52 British children adopted around the same time served as a control group.
They found that the mean IQ decreased for adopted children the later they were adopted.
For example, the mean IQ of those adopted before the age of 6 months was 102, compared to 77 for those adopted after 2 years.
These differences remained at age 16 (Beckett et al).
However, those children adopted after 6 months showed signs of a particular attachment style called disinhibited attachment, for which which symptoms include attention-seeking, clinginess and social behaviour directed indiscriminately towards all adults, both familiar and unfamiliar.
Those children adopted before 6 months rarely displayed disinhibited attachment.
Bowlby (1944) compared 44 juvenile thieves with a control group of non-criminal, but emotionally disturbed young people.
32% of the thieves showed affectionless psychopathy and 86% of the affectionless psychopaths had experienced prolonged early maternal separation.
In the control group, only 2 had had such a separation.
The first AO3 PEEL paragraph is that one strength of Rutter’s Romanian orphan study was that it was a longitudinal study, which helped measure the lives of the children over many years to truly understand the lasting differences that occurred in orphans.
This also helped to identify consistent changes that may disappear over time, but be mistakenly concluded to be definite due to institutionalisation.
The second AO3 PEEL paragraph is that a weakness with longitudinal studies however, is that a number of factors and extraneous variables may affect the results.
For example, the Romanian orphans may actually display poor development not due to institutionalisation, but other factors, such as poor cognitive stimulation, whilst they were there.
The third AO3 PEEL paragraph is that one of the methodological issues for Rutter et al’s ERA project is that children were not randomly assigned to conditions.
The researchers did not interfere with the adoption process.
This means that those children adopted early may have been the more sociable ones, a confounding variable.
This means that the findings are not valid.
To control such variables, another major investigation of fostering vs institutional care did use random allocation: In the Bucharest Early Intervention project, Romanian orphans were randomly allocated to fostering or institutional care.
Why is this methodologically better?
This is methodologically better, because it removes the confounding variable of which children are chosen by parents
Outline and evaluate research into the effects of failure to form attachment (16 marks).
Rutter et al’s ERA project was that physical, cognitive and emotional development was assessed at ages 4, 6, 11 and 15 years of 165 Romanian orphans adopted in Britain.
A group of 52 British children adopted around the same time served as a control group.
They found that the mean IQ decreased for adopted children the later they were adopted.
For example, the mean IQ of those adopted before the age of 6 months was 102, compared to 77 for those adopted after 2 years.
These differences remained at age 16 (Beckett et al).
However, those children adopted after 6 months showed signs of a particular attachment style called disinhibited attachment, for which which symptoms include attention-seeking, clinginess and social behaviour directed indiscriminately towards all adults, both familiar and unfamiliar.
Those children adopted before 6 months rarely displayed disinhibited attachment.
Bowlby (1944) compared 44 juvenile thieves with a control group of non-criminal, but emotionally disturbed young people.
32% of the thieves showed affectionless psychopathy and 86% of the affectionless psychopaths had experienced prolonged early maternal separation.
In the control group, only 2 had had such a separation.
The first AO3 PEEL paragraph is that one strength of Rutter’s Romanian orphan study was that it was a longitudinal study, which helped measure the lives of the children over many years to truly understand the lasting differences that occurred in orphans.
This also helped to identify consistent changes that may disappear over time, but be mistakenly concluded to be definite due to institutionalisation.
The second AO3 PEEL paragraph is that a weakness with longitudinal studies however, is that a number of factors and extraneous variables may affect the results.
For example, the Romanian orphans may actually display poor development not due to institutionalisation, but other factors, such as poor cognitive stimulation, whilst they were there.
The third AO3 PEEL paragraph is that one of the methodological issues for Rutter et al’s ERA project is that children were not randomly assigned to conditions.
The researchers did not interfere with the adoption process.
This means that those children adopted early may have been the more sociable ones, a confounding variable.
This means that the findings are not valid.
To control such variables, another major investigation of fostering vs institutional care did use random allocation: In the Bucharest Early Intervention project, Romanian orphans were randomly allocated to fostering or institutional care.
This is methodologically better, because it removes the confounding variable of which children are chosen by parents, but what?
This is methodologically better, because it removes the confounding variable of which children are chosen by parents, but it raises ethical issues
Outline and evaluate research into the effects of failure to form attachment (16 marks).
Rutter et al’s ERA project was that physical, cognitive and emotional development was assessed at ages 4, 6, 11 and 15 years of 165 Romanian orphans adopted in Britain.
A group of 52 British children adopted around the same time served as a control group.
They found that the mean IQ decreased for adopted children the later they were adopted.
For example, the mean IQ of those adopted before the age of 6 months was 102, compared to 77 for those adopted after 2 years.
These differences remained at age 16 (Beckett et al).
However, those children adopted after 6 months showed signs of a particular attachment style called disinhibited attachment, for which which symptoms include attention-seeking, clinginess and social behaviour directed indiscriminately towards all adults, both familiar and unfamiliar.
Those children adopted before 6 months rarely displayed disinhibited attachment.
Bowlby (1944) compared 44 juvenile thieves with a control group of non-criminal, but emotionally disturbed young people.
32% of the thieves showed affectionless psychopathy and 86% of the affectionless psychopaths had experienced prolonged early maternal separation.
In the control group, only 2 had had such a separation.
The first AO3 PEEL paragraph is that one strength of Rutter’s Romanian orphan study was that it was a longitudinal study, which helped measure the lives of the children over many years to truly understand the lasting differences that occurred in orphans.
This also helped to identify consistent changes that may disappear over time, but be mistakenly concluded to be definite due to institutionalisation.
The second AO3 PEEL paragraph is that a weakness with longitudinal studies however, is that a number of factors and extraneous variables may affect the results.
For example, the Romanian orphans may actually display poor development not due to institutionalisation, but other factors, such as poor cognitive stimulation, whilst they were there.
The third AO3 PEEL paragraph is that one of the methodological issues for Rutter et al’s ERA project is that children were not randomly assigned to conditions.
The researchers did not interfere with the adoption process.
This means that those children adopted early may have been the more sociable ones, a confounding variable.
This means that the findings are not valid.
To control such variables, another major investigation of fostering vs institutional care did use random allocation: In the Bucharest Early Intervention project, Romanian orphans were randomly allocated to fostering or institutional care.
This is methodologically better, because it removes the confounding variable of which children are chosen by parents, but it raises ethical issues.
Fourth AO3 PEEL paragraph
The fourth AO3 PEEL paragraph is that Bowlby found a relationship between early separation and affectionless psychopathy/delinquency, but we cannot definitively conclude that the separation was the cause
Outline and evaluate research into the effects of failure to form attachment (16 marks).
Rutter et al’s ERA project was that physical, cognitive and emotional development was assessed at ages 4, 6, 11 and 15 years of 165 Romanian orphans adopted in Britain.
A group of 52 British children adopted around the same time served as a control group.
They found that the mean IQ decreased for adopted children the later they were adopted.
For example, the mean IQ of those adopted before the age of 6 months was 102, compared to 77 for those adopted after 2 years.
These differences remained at age 16 (Beckett et al).
However, those children adopted after 6 months showed signs of a particular attachment style called disinhibited attachment, for which which symptoms include attention-seeking, clinginess and social behaviour directed indiscriminately towards all adults, both familiar and unfamiliar.
Those children adopted before 6 months rarely displayed disinhibited attachment.
Bowlby (1944) compared 44 juvenile thieves with a control group of non-criminal, but emotionally disturbed young people.
32% of the thieves showed affectionless psychopathy and 86% of the affectionless psychopaths had experienced prolonged early maternal separation.
In the control group, only 2 had had such a separation.
The first AO3 PEEL paragraph is that one strength of Rutter’s Romanian orphan study was that it was a longitudinal study, which helped measure the lives of the children over many years to truly understand the lasting differences that occurred in orphans.
This also helped to identify consistent changes that may disappear over time, but be mistakenly concluded to be definite due to institutionalisation.
The second AO3 PEEL paragraph is that a weakness with longitudinal studies however, is that a number of factors and extraneous variables may affect the results.
For example, the Romanian orphans may actually display poor development not due to institutionalisation, but other factors, such as poor cognitive stimulation, whilst they were there.
The third AO3 PEEL paragraph is that one of the methodological issues for Rutter et al’s ERA project is that children were not randomly assigned to conditions.
The researchers did not interfere with the adoption process.
This means that those children adopted early may have been the more sociable ones, a confounding variable.
This means that the findings are not valid.
To control such variables, another major investigation of fostering vs institutional care did use random allocation: In the Bucharest Early Intervention project, Romanian orphans were randomly allocated to fostering or institutional care.
This is methodologically better, because it removes the confounding variable of which children are chosen by parents, but it raises ethical issues.
The fourth AO3 PEEL paragraph is that Bowlby found a relationship between early separation and affectionless psychopathy/delinquency, but we cannot definitively conclude that the separation was the cause.
What may there have been?
There may have been a third unidentified variable that accounted for the affectionless psychopathy/delinquency
Outline and evaluate research into the effects of failure to form attachment (16 marks).
Rutter et al’s ERA project was that physical, cognitive and emotional development was assessed at ages 4, 6, 11 and 15 years of 165 Romanian orphans adopted in Britain.
A group of 52 British children adopted around the same time served as a control group.
They found that the mean IQ decreased for adopted children the later they were adopted.
For example, the mean IQ of those adopted before the age of 6 months was 102, compared to 77 for those adopted after 2 years.
These differences remained at age 16 (Beckett et al).
However, those children adopted after 6 months showed signs of a particular attachment style called disinhibited attachment, for which which symptoms include attention-seeking, clinginess and social behaviour directed indiscriminately towards all adults, both familiar and unfamiliar.
Those children adopted before 6 months rarely displayed disinhibited attachment.
Bowlby (1944) compared 44 juvenile thieves with a control group of non-criminal, but emotionally disturbed young people.
32% of the thieves showed affectionless psychopathy and 86% of the affectionless psychopaths had experienced prolonged early maternal separation.
In the control group, only 2 had had such a separation.
The first AO3 PEEL paragraph is that one strength of Rutter’s Romanian orphan study was that it was a longitudinal study, which helped measure the lives of the children over many years to truly understand the lasting differences that occurred in orphans.
This also helped to identify consistent changes that may disappear over time, but be mistakenly concluded to be definite due to institutionalisation.
The second AO3 PEEL paragraph is that a weakness with longitudinal studies however, is that a number of factors and extraneous variables may affect the results.
For example, the Romanian orphans may actually display poor development not due to institutionalisation, but other factors, such as poor cognitive stimulation, whilst they were there.
The third AO3 PEEL paragraph is that one of the methodological issues for Rutter et al’s ERA project is that children were not randomly assigned to conditions.
The researchers did not interfere with the adoption process.
This means that those children adopted early may have been the more sociable ones, a confounding variable.
This means that the findings are not valid.
To control such variables, another major investigation of fostering vs institutional care did use random allocation: In the Bucharest Early Intervention project, Romanian orphans were randomly allocated to fostering or institutional care.
This is methodologically better, because it removes the confounding variable of which children are chosen by parents, but it raises ethical issues.
The fourth AO3 PEEL paragraph is that Bowlby found a relationship between early separation and affectionless psychopathy/delinquency, but we cannot definitively conclude that the separation was the cause.
There may have been a third unidentified variable that accounted for the affectionless psychopathy/delinquency.
Example
For example, the immediate cause of the separation (such as neglect or abuse) might have been the direct cause of problems experienced at adolescence, rather than the separation itself
