3.5: Romanian orphan studies Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
1
Q

Describe and evaluate research into Romanian orphans (16 marks)

A

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

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Describe and evaluate research into Romanian orphans (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

A group of 52 British children adopted around the same time served as a control group

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Describe and evaluate research into Romanian orphans (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?

A

They found that the mean IQ decreased for adopted children the later they were adopted

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Describe and evaluate research into Romanian orphans (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

A

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

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Describe and evaluate research into Romanian orphans (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?

A

These differences remained at age 16 (Beckett et al)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Describe and evaluate research into Romanian orphans (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 after 6 months show?

A

However, those children adopted after 6 months showed signs of a particular attachment style called disinhibited attachment

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Describe and evaluate research into Romanian orphans (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?

A

However, those children adopted after 6 months showed signs of a particular attachment style called disinhibited attachment, for which symptoms include:

  1. Attention-seeking
  2. Clinginess
  3. Social behaviour directed indiscriminately towards all adults
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Describe and evaluate research into Romanian orphans (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 attention-seeking, clinginess and social behaviour directed indiscriminately towards all adults, both who?

A

However, those children adopted after 6 months showed signs of a particular attachment style called disinhibited attachment, for which symptoms include:

  1. Attention-seeking
  2. Clinginess
  3. Social behaviour directed indiscriminately towards all adults, both familiar and unfamiliar
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Describe and evaluate research into Romanian orphans (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 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?

A

Those children adopted before 6 months rarely displayed disinhibited attachment

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Describe and evaluate research into Romanian orphans (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 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.

Zeanah et al.

A

Zeanah et al. assessed attachment in 95 Romanian orphans aged 12 - 31 months who had spent 90% on average of their lives in institutional care

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Describe and evaluate research into Romanian orphans (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 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.

Zeanah et al. assessed attachment in 95 Romanian orphans aged 12 - 31 months who had spent 90% on average of their lives in institutional care.
Who were they compared to?

A

They were compared to a control group of 50 children who had never lived in an institution

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Describe and evaluate research into Romanian orphans (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 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.

Zeanah et al. assessed attachment in 95 Romanian orphans aged 12 - 31 months who had spent 90% on average of their lives in institutional care.
They were compared to a control group of 50 children who had never lived in an institution.
What percentage of institutionalised children did the description of disinhibited attachment apply to?

A

The description of disinhibited attachment applied to 44% of institutionalised children

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Describe and evaluate research into Romanian orphans (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 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.

Zeanah et al. assessed attachment in 95 Romanian orphans aged 12 - 31 months who had spent 90% on average of their lives in institutional care.
They were compared to a control group of 50 children who had never lived in an institution.
The description of disinhibited attachment applied to 44% of institutionalised children, as opposed to what?

A

The description of disinhibited attachment applied to 44% of institutionalised children, as opposed to less than 20% of the control group

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Describe and evaluate research into Romanian orphans (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 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.

Zeanah et al. assessed attachment in 95 Romanian orphans aged 12 - 31 months who had spent 90% on average of their lives in institutional care.
They were compared to a control group of 50 children who had never lived in an institution.
The description of disinhibited attachment applied to 44% of institutionalised children, as opposed to less than 20% of the control group.

First AO3 PEEL paragraph

A

The first AO3 PEEL paragraph is that one strength of Rutter’s Romanian orphan study was that it was a longitudinal study

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Describe and evaluate research into Romanian orphans (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 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.

Zeanah et al. assessed attachment in 95 Romanian orphans aged 12 - 31 months who had spent 90% on average of their lives in institutional care.
They were compared to a control group of 50 children who had never lived in an institution.
The description of disinhibited attachment applied to 44% of institutionalised children, as opposed to less than 20% of the control group.

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?

A

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

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Describe and evaluate research into Romanian orphans (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 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.

Zeanah et al. assessed attachment in 95 Romanian orphans aged 12 - 31 months who had spent 90% on average of their lives in institutional care.
They were compared to a control group of 50 children who had never lived in an institution.
The description of disinhibited attachment applied to 44% of institutionalised children, as opposed to less than 20% of the control group.

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?

A

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

17
Q

Describe and evaluate research into Romanian orphans (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 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.

Zeanah et al. assessed attachment in 95 Romanian orphans aged 12 - 31 months who had spent 90% on average of their lives in institutional care.
They were compared to a control group of 50 children who had never lived in an institution.
The description of disinhibited attachment applied to 44% of institutionalised children, as opposed to less than 20% of the control group.

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?

A

This also helped to identify consistent changes that may disappear over time, but be mistakenly concluded to be definite due to institutionalisation

18
Q

Describe and evaluate research into Romanian orphans (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 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.

Zeanah et al. assessed attachment in 95 Romanian orphans aged 12 - 31 months who had spent 90% on average of their lives in institutional care.
They were compared to a control group of 50 children who had never lived in an institution.
The description of disinhibited attachment applied to 44% of institutionalised children, as opposed to less than 20% of the control group.

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.
What is a weakness with longitudinal studies however?

A

A weakness with longitudinal studies however, is that a number of factors and extraneous variables may affect the results

19
Q

Describe and evaluate research into Romanian orphans (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 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.

Zeanah et al. assessed attachment in 95 Romanian orphans aged 12 - 31 months who had spent 90% on average of their lives in institutional care.
They were compared to a control group of 50 children who had never lived in an institution.
The description of disinhibited attachment applied to 44% of institutionalised children, as opposed to less than 20% of the control group.

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.
A weakness with longitudinal studies however, is that a number of factors and extraneous variables may affect the results.
Example

A

For example, the Romanian orphans may actually display poor development not due to institutionalisation, but other factors, whilst they were there

20
Q

Describe and evaluate research into Romanian orphans (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 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.

Zeanah et al. assessed attachment in 95 Romanian orphans aged 12 - 31 months who had spent 90% on average of their lives in institutional care.
They were compared to a control group of 50 children who had never lived in an institution.
The description of disinhibited attachment applied to 44% of institutionalised children, as opposed to less than 20% of the control group.

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.
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?

A

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

21
Q

Describe and evaluate research into Romanian orphans (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 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.

Zeanah et al. assessed attachment in 95 Romanian orphans aged 12 - 31 months who had spent 90% on average of their lives in institutional care.
They were compared to a control group of 50 children who had never lived in an institution.
The description of disinhibited attachment applied to 44% of institutionalised children, as opposed to less than 20% of the control group.

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.
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.

Second AO3 PEEL paragraph

A

The second 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

22
Q

Describe and evaluate research into Romanian orphans (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 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.

Zeanah et al. assessed attachment in 95 Romanian orphans aged 12 - 31 months who had spent 90% on average of their lives in institutional care.
They were compared to a control group of 50 children who had never lived in an institution.
The description of disinhibited attachment applied to 44% of institutionalised children, as opposed to less than 20% of the control group.

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.
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 second 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?

A

The researchers did not interfere with the adoption process

23
Q

Describe and evaluate research into Romanian orphans (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 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.

Zeanah et al. assessed attachment in 95 Romanian orphans aged 12 - 31 months who had spent 90% on average of their lives in institutional care.
They were compared to a control group of 50 children who had never lived in an institution.
The description of disinhibited attachment applied to 44% of institutionalised children, as opposed to less than 20% of the control group.

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.
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 second 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?

A

This means that those children adopted early may have been the more sociable ones

24
Q

Describe and evaluate research into Romanian orphans (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 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.

Zeanah et al. assessed attachment in 95 Romanian orphans aged 12 - 31 months who had spent 90% on average of their lives in institutional care.
They were compared to a control group of 50 children who had never lived in an institution.
The description of disinhibited attachment applied to 44% of institutionalised children, as opposed to less than 20% of the control group.

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.
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 second 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?

A

This means that those children adopted early may have been the more sociable ones, a confounding variable

25
Q

Describe and evaluate research into Romanian orphans (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 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.

Zeanah et al. assessed attachment in 95 Romanian orphans aged 12 - 31 months who had spent 90% on average of their lives in institutional care.
They were compared to a control group of 50 children who had never lived in an institution.
The description of disinhibited attachment applied to 44% of institutionalised children, as opposed to less than 20% of the control group.

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.
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 second 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?

A

This means that the findings are not valid

26
Q

Describe and evaluate research into Romanian orphans (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 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.

Zeanah et al. assessed attachment in 95 Romanian orphans aged 12 - 31 months who had spent 90% on average of their lives in institutional care.
They were compared to a control group of 50 children who had never lived in an institution.
The description of disinhibited attachment applied to 44% of institutionalised children, as opposed to less than 20% of the control group.

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.
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 second 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.

Third AO3 PEEL paragraph

A

The third AO3 PEEL paragraph is that to control such variables, another major investigation of fostering vs institutional care did use random allocation

27
Q

Describe and evaluate research into Romanian orphans (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 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.

Zeanah et al. assessed attachment in 95 Romanian orphans aged 12 - 31 months who had spent 90% on average of their lives in institutional care.
They were compared to a control group of 50 children who had never lived in an institution.
The description of disinhibited attachment applied to 44% of institutionalised children, as opposed to less than 20% of the control group.

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.
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 second 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.

The third AO3 PEEL paragraph is that to control such variables, another major investigation of fostering vs institutional care did use random allocation: What?

A

The third AO3 PEEL paragraph is that 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

28
Q

Describe and evaluate research into Romanian orphans (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 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.

Zeanah et al. assessed attachment in 95 Romanian orphans aged 12 - 31 months who had spent 90% on average of their lives in institutional care.
They were compared to a control group of 50 children who had never lived in an institution.
The description of disinhibited attachment applied to 44% of institutionalised children, as opposed to less than 20% of the control group.

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.
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 second 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.

The third AO3 PEEL paragraph is that 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?

A

This is methodologically better, because it removes the confounding variable of which children are chosen by parents

29
Q

Describe and evaluate research into Romanian orphans (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 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.

Zeanah et al. assessed attachment in 95 Romanian orphans aged 12 - 31 months who had spent 90% on average of their lives in institutional care.
They were compared to a control group of 50 children who had never lived in an institution.
The description of disinhibited attachment applied to 44% of institutionalised children, as opposed to less than 20% of the control group.

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.
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 second 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.

The third AO3 PEEL paragraph is that 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?

A

This is methodologically better, because it removes the confounding variable of which children are chosen by parents, but it raises ethical issues

30
Q

Describe and evaluate research into Romanian orphans (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 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.

Zeanah et al. assessed attachment in 95 Romanian orphans aged 12 - 31 months who had spent 90% on average of their lives in institutional care.
They were compared to a control group of 50 children who had never lived in an institution.
The description of disinhibited attachment applied to 44% of institutionalised children, as opposed to less than 20% of the control group.

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.
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 second 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.

The third AO3 PEEL paragraph is that 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

A

The fourth AO3 PEEL paragraph is that research into Romanian orphans have real-life application

31
Q

Describe and evaluate research into Romanian orphans (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 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.

Zeanah et al. assessed attachment in 95 Romanian orphans aged 12 - 31 months who had spent 90% on average of their lives in institutional care.
They were compared to a control group of 50 children who had never lived in an institution.
The description of disinhibited attachment applied to 44% of institutionalised children, as opposed to less than 20% of the control group.

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.
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 second 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.

The third AO3 PEEL paragraph is that 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 research into Romanian orphans have real-life application.
What has it enhanced our understanding of?

A

It has enhanced our understanding of the effects of institutionalisation

32
Q

Describe and evaluate research into Romanian orphans (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 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.

Zeanah et al. assessed attachment in 95 Romanian orphans aged 12 - 31 months who had spent 90% on average of their lives in institutional care.
They were compared to a control group of 50 children who had never lived in an institution.
The description of disinhibited attachment applied to 44% of institutionalised children, as opposed to less than 20% of the control group.

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.
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 second 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.

The third AO3 PEEL paragraph is that 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 research into Romanian orphans have real-life application.
It has enhanced our understanding of the effects of institutionalisation.
What have such results led to?

A

Such results have led to improvements in the way children are cared for in institutions (Langton)

33
Q

Describe and evaluate research into Romanian orphans (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 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.

Zeanah et al. assessed attachment in 95 Romanian orphans aged 12 - 31 months who had spent 90% on average of their lives in institutional care.
They were compared to a control group of 50 children who had never lived in an institution.
The description of disinhibited attachment applied to 44% of institutionalised children, as opposed to less than 20% of the control group.

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.
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 second 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.

The third AO3 PEEL paragraph is that 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 research into Romanian orphans have real-life application.
It has enhanced our understanding of the effects of institutionalisation.
Such results have led to improvements in the way children are cared for in institutions (Langton).
Example

A

For example, orphanages and children’s homes now ensure that perhaps only one or two people play a central role for a child, so that the chances of children displaying disinhibited attachment are reduced

34
Q

Describe and evaluate research into Romanian orphans (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 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.

Zeanah et al. assessed attachment in 95 Romanian orphans aged 12 - 31 months who had spent 90% on average of their lives in institutional care.
They were compared to a control group of 50 children who had never lived in an institution.
The description of disinhibited attachment applied to 44% of institutionalised children, as opposed to less than 20% of the control group.

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.
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 second 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.

The third AO3 PEEL paragraph is that 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 research into Romanian orphans have real-life application.
It has enhanced our understanding of the effects of institutionalisation.
Such results have led to improvements in the way children are cared for in institutions (Langton).
For example, orphanages and children’s homes now ensure that perhaps only one or two people play a central role for a child, so that the chances of children displaying disinhibited attachment are reduced.
What does this show?

A

This shows that research into Romanian orphans has been immensely valuable in practical terms