5 Flashcards

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

Who proposed the theory of Maternal Deprivation?

A

Bowlby

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

Define maternal deprivation

A

Child and caregiver (mother) are separated and their attachment bond is disrupted, which is believed to negatively affect the child’s intellectual and emotional development

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

Outline how maternal deprivation occurs

A
  • Child and caregiver separated for extended period

- Child becomes deprived of emotional care

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

Can deprivation sometimes occur without separation?

A

Yes - sometimes poor care from a present caregiver can also lead to a deprivation of emotional care

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

When did Bowlby believe that children were vulnerable to maternal deprivation?

A

Critical period of first 2.5 yrs (with lesser risk continuing up to 5yrs)

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

Did Bowlby believe that maternal deprivation has negative consequences?

A

Yes - thought to negatively affect intellectual and emotional development

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

What intellectual effect did Bowlby suggest maternal deprivation can have?

A

Delayed intellectual development : shown in low IQ

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Give a piece of research evidence to support the idea that maternal deprivation negatively effects intellectual development

A

Goldfarb (1947)
Aim:
- To investigate whether the Maternal Deprivation Hypothesis is correct in suggesting childhood separations can impair intellectual development
Procedure:
- Sample: wartime orphans
- Group 1: first few months in orphanage, then fostered
Group 2: first 3 yrs in orphanage, then fostered
Findings:
- Lower IQ in those who remained in institutions for longer
Conclusion:
- Maternal deprivation can stunt intellectual development, evident in low IQs

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

What emotional effect did Bowlby suggest maternal deprivation can have?

A

Impaired emotional development, which may lead to the development of disorders, e.g. AFFECTIONLESS PSYCHOPATHY

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

Define affectionless psychopathy

A

Inability to experience guilt or strong emotions towards others

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

What type of people commonly have affectionless psychopathy?

A

Criminals - can complete crimes with no remorse

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

Give a piece of research evidence to support the idea that maternal deprivation negatively effects emotional development

A

Bowlby’s 44 Juvenile Thieves Study (1944)
Aim:
- To investigate whether the Maternal Deprivation Hypothesis is correct in suggesting childhood separations can impair emotional development and trigger disorders
Procedure:
- Sample = 88 children, age 5-16, attend guidance clinic
- Group 1: Experimental group. 44 children referred for theft
Group 2: Control group. 44 children referred for other reasons
- Interviewed ppts + families to determine: type of upbringing (deprived?) and whether ppts were affectionless psychopaths
Findings:
- Group 1: Higher level of separation from mothers in childhood (86%) and higher level of affectionless psychopaths (32%)
- Group 2: Lower level of separation from mothers in childhood (4%) and no affectionless psychopaths
Conclusion:
- Early life separations can cause maternal deprivation, which can have negative effect on emotional development + cause disorders

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

Give 2 positive evaluation points for Bowlby’s Maternal Deprivation Theory

A

Research support

  • Concept of damaged intellectual development supported by Goldfarb
  • Concept of damaged emotional development support by Bowlby
  • This research support increases the theory’s validity

Practical applications

  • Theory has highlighted important considerations for childcare, that can reduce deprivation
  • E.g. ‘Attachment + Family Centred Care Programme’ encourages parents to remain in contact and routine with hospitalised children, so attachment isn’t lost and child isn’t emotionally deprived
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Give 3 negative evaluation points for Bowlby’s Maternal Deprivation Theory

A

Research to refute

  • Hilda Lewis (1954) replicated the 44 thieves study using 500 young people
  • Didn’t find any link between early separation (deprivation) + criminality or affectionless psychopathy
  • Suggests Bowlby was wrong, maternal deprivation doesn’t hinder emotional development

Methodological issues with supporting research
Bowlby:
- May have had observer bias + interviewer bias (particularly as he was a deprived child)
- Didn’t observe any other variables (e.g. poverty) that linked to delinquency, so may have ignored third intervening variable - reductionist
Goldfarb:
- Confounding variables, as all children in wartime orphanages had varying levels of trauma, so intellectual development may be result of this, not of deprivation

Alternative explanation

  • Effects of deprivation may actually be effects of privation
  • Goldfarb’s orphans + Bowlby’s thieves suffered separation at a such a young age that they may never have formed attachments
  • The lack of development may be due to the ppts suffering privation
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Define privation

A

Child-caregiver attachment is never formed

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

What is the difference between deprivation and privation?

A
  • Deprivation is removal of an attachment

- Privation is never forming an attachment

17
Q

Who pointed out that those raised in institutional care may never form attachments, so always suffer from privation not deprivation?

A

Rutter (1981)

18
Q

Why were orphan studies initially used?

A
  • To see affects of maternal deprivation on intellectual + emotional development
  • Over time became clear that these studies were actually a measure of the affects of privation, as attachments didnt have time to form
19
Q

Define institutionalisation

A

Effects of living in an institution (e.g. hospital, orphanage) where emotional care is limited

20
Q

Why are institutionalised children studied?

A

To see the effects of maternal deprivation/privation

21
Q

What country provided a great opportunity to analyse institutionalised children?

A

Romania

22
Q

Outline the orphan issue in Romania

A

1960s - President Ceausescu banned contraception + abortion until women had 5 children in hope to boost population

Many Romanian children placed in institutions (orphanages) as parents couldn’t afford to care for them

1989 onwards - Romanian Revolution ended oppressive period + many existing orphans were adopted, including by British parents

23
Q

How did the orphan issue in Romania provide a psychological opportunity?

A

Psychologists (e.g. Rutter + Zeanah) were able to do research into the impacts of institutionalisation and the maternal deprivation/privation that it causes, in NATURAL EXPERIMENTS

24
Q

What type of research did Rutter do + when?

A
  • Longitudinal study

- 1998 onwards

25
Q

What type of research did Zeanah do + when?

A
  • One off controlled observation + interview

- 2005

26
Q

Outline Rutter et al’s research

A

Aim:
To investigate whether the negative effects of maternal deprivation/privation from institutionalisation were long term or could be overcome by good care

Procedure:

  • 165 Romanian orphans tracked longitudinally (in 3 age categories: under 6 months, 6 months-2yrs, over 2yrs)
  • Intellectual + emotional development assessed at age 4,6,11,15,22-25
  • Control group of 52 UK children adopted at similar time, assessed too

Findings:
- When first adopted, all showed lack of emotional + intellectual development
- Recovery rate depended on age of adoption (earlier adoption - better)
- Intellectually, in age 6 assessment, found higher IQ when adopted earlier
Adopted before 6 months: 102
Adopted 6 months-2yrs: 86
Adopted over 2 yrs: 77
- Emotionally, in age 11 assessment, found more regular attachment type when adopted earlier
Adopted before 6 months: More regular
Adopted after 6 months: Many had disinhibited attachment

27
Q

What is disinhibited attachment?

A

Children don’t form secure attachments

  • Equal affection to strangers + caregivers
  • Behaviour appears clingy + attention seeking, even to strangers
28
Q

Outline Zeanah et al’s research

A

Aim:
To investigate whether maternal deprivation/privation from institutionalisation affects attachment type

Procedure:
- 95 Romanian orphans aged 12-31 months who had spent most of life in institutions
- Assessed attachment type by…
Controlled observation in form of the Strange Situation Procedure
Interviewing caregiver about unusual behaviours associated with irregular, disinhibited attachment (e.g. clinginess)
- Control group of 50 children, never in institutions assessed too

Findings:
- Experimental group: Low secure attachment (19%)
High disinhibited attachment (44%)
- Control group: High secure attachment (74%)
Low disinhibited attachment (less than 20%)

29
Q

What were the overall conclusions of the Romanian orphan studies (Rutter + Zeanah)?

A
  • Institutionalisation can cause maternal deprivation/privation + the associated negative effects on development
  • Emotional issues that can occur include: disinhibited attachment - as children adapt to living with multiple caregivers
  • Intellectual issues that can occur include: intellectual disability
  • Supports sensitive period - those institutionalised at a young age CAN have long lasting issues, but they do have a chance of recovery, with best recovery seen in those adopted at an early age
30
Q

Why does disinhibited attachment type develop?

A

Believed to be associated with being raised with multiple caregivers (no primary caregiver), so learn to show everyone equal affection

31
Q

Give 3 positive evaluation points for the Romanian orphan studies

A

Methodology

  • Higher internal validity than previous orphan studies (e.g. Goldfarb)
  • All Romanian orphans had similar background due to national situation in Romania
  • Greater focus on measuring institutionalisation, with fewer impacts of confounding variables (e.g. affects of previous trauma)

Practical applications

  • Understanding institutionalisation + how it can cause damaging deprivation/privation allows avoidance of negative affects
  • E.g. More efforts to place orphans in foster care (less issues with institutionalisation, can get emotional care + attachments)
  • E.g. Existing institutions have made effort to reduce negative effects - each child has 1-2 ‘key workers’ to reduce disinhibited attachment

Ethical issues

  • Experiments are natural (As IV of institutionalisation is naturally occurring)
  • Allows assessment of deprivation + privation without putting ppts at additional risk (utilising negative situation)
32
Q

Give 3 negative evaluation points for the Romanian orphan studies

A

Methodology

  • Romanian orphanages may have been so extreme in lacking emotional care that institutionalisation issues are exaggerated
  • Findings may not be generalisable, as other institutions may be better

Methodology of Rutter

  • Used longitudinal study
  • Study unfinished (adult data may provide diff results currently unknown)
  • Some data may be lost by ppt attrition

Issue of social sensitivity

  • Findings suggest lack of development in Romanian orphans
  • Published during orphans’ lifetime
  • Ppts’ lives may be affected, so maybe shouldn’t have been published so soon
  • E.g. Discrimination (low intellectual expectations if applying for job) or Preferential Treatment (people feel bad so are biased towards them)