A: Explanations of attachment: Learning theory Flashcards
Who developed the learning theory of attachment?
Dollard and Miller
The importance of food.
Sometimes called the ‘cupboard love’ explanation as it emphasises the importance of food in attachment formation. Children learn to love whoever feeds them.
The role of Classical conditioning.
Involves learning to associate two stimuli. For example: UCS (food) leads to UCR (pleasure). This response is not learned so it is an unconditioned response.
Baby learning the mother produces a sense of pleasure.
Caregiver (e.g. mother) starts as NS (neutral stimulus) (a thing that produces a neutral response). NS providing food over time becomes associated with ‘food’ so the NS becomes a CS (conditioned stimulus). Once conditioning has taken place the sight of the caregiver produces a CR (conditioned response) of pleasure. According to a learning theorist, this is the basis of attachment love.
Role of Oparent conditioning.
Explains why babies cry for comfort (an important building block for attachment). Crying leads to response from caregiver (e.g. feeding). As long as the caregiver provides the correct response, crying is reinforced because it provides a pleasurable consequence.
Negative reinforcement.
At the same time the baby is positively reinforced for crying, the caregiver receives negative reinforcement because the crying stops (negative reinforcement = escaping something unpleasant, which is reinforcing). The interplay of positive/negative reinforcement strengthens an attachment.
Drive reduction.
Hunger = primary drive- an innate biological motivator. We are motivated to eat to reduce the hunger drive. Attachment = secondary drive learned by an association between the caregiver and the satisfaction of a primary drive.
What did Sears et al. suggest about drive reduction?
As caregivers provide food, the primary drive of hunger becomes generalised to them.
Limitations of Learning theory.
ANIMAL STUDIES PROVIDE EVIDENCE AGAINST FOOD AS THE BASIS OF ATTACHMENT: Lorenz’s imprinted geese maintained attachment regardless of who fed them. Harlow’s monkeys attached to a soft surrogate in preference to a wire one with milk. In both these animal studies, attachment did not develop as a result of feeding. Same must be true for humans (that food does not create the attachment bond), after all learning theorists believe that non-human animals and humans are equivalent.
HUMAN RESEARCH SHOWS FEEDING IS NOT AN IMPORTANT FACTOR: Schaffer and Emerson showed that for many babies a primary attachment was not to the person who fed them. Shows feeding is not the key element to attachment and so there is no unconditioned stimulus or primary drive involved. The evidence suggests that other factors are more important than food in the formation of attachment.
Strength of learning theory.
SOME ELEMENTS OF CONDITIONING COULD STILL BE INVOLVED: main problem with learning theory is the idea that feeding provides the unconditioned stimulus, reinforcement or primary drive. However, many aspects of humans development are affected by conditioning so it seems plausible that it could still play a role in attachment (but not in relation to feeding). E.g. associations (classical conditioning) between the primary caregiver and provision of comfort and social interaction could be part of what builds attachment.
