ainsowrths stranger situation + types of attachments Flashcards
Outline ainsworth strange situation
• devised in order observe key attachment behaviours to assess quality of child’s attachment. • used to see how infants react to stressful situations e.g separation from the caregiver (separation anxiety) + presence of stranger (stranger anxiety). • aimed to encourage exploration by putting the infants into a novel situation. METHOD: observers watched behaviours displayed between infants + caregiver from behind one-way mirrors in a lab + collected data/15 s on various different criteria for 3 min, also measured the intensity of the behaviour on a scale of 1-7. TSS - consisted of 8 different episodes used to highlight/provoke certain behaviours. e.g, parent leaving the room, and stranger being presented and the parent returning. The data was then collated to make a total of 100 middle-class American infants. FOUND: 60-75% of the children showed secure attachment, 20-25% insecure-avoidant and 3% ambivalent.
Evaluate Ainsworth strange situation
EVAL
Imposed Etic: designed by American researcher + based on British study (BOWLBY) + so findings may not relate to other cultures. e.g, Ainsworth suggests lack of pleasure on reunion = insecure-avoidant BUT other cultures may suggest that behaviour shows a normal independent child. TISB GROSSMAN + GROSSMAN - German children tended to be classified at insecurely attached based on Ainsworth’s guidelines. TMBB different child rearing practices, indicating cultural variation TISB TAKAHASHI - noted the this does not work with Japanese children bc rarely separated from their mothers, .:. we would expect to see a higher % of Insecure-Resistant attachments. Based on BOWLBY, ∴ children will develop less stable adult relationships based on their attachment type + so AINSWORTH’s categories = potentially neg consequence for children in other cultures. BUT, ability to classify children into attachment types allows us to predict + prevent mental health issues in their future.
Follows a predetermined script ∴ high inter-rater reliability as behaviours where operationalized, TS TSS = reliable technique for assessing types of attachment, as different observers agree on their assessment of child attachment types. TISB WORTHER: found 78% of German children classified in the same way between the ages of 1-6. BUT, although it is a high %, still not 100%. TMBB LAMBS argument - claims TSS is highly artificial as child is placed in unfamiliar settings .:. may act differently than they would at home. ALSO, the scripts may not reflect how the mother would normally act around the child ∴ less externally valid as it lacks ecological validity.
Strange situation IDA
Nomothetic → suggests all children can be characterised (based on their behaviour in TSS) into just 1/3 attachment types. BUT, later research suggests that some children do not fit into one of these categories (insecure–disorganised), ∴ idiographic approach may be more appropriate.
outline VAN IZENDOORN + KROONENBERG
META ANALYSIS of studies from 8 countries
→ found highest % in insecure avoidant children: GERMANY
→ found highest % in insecure resistant (ambivalent) children: JAPAN
→ SECURE attachment = most common in all countries
→ Variations within cultures was greater than variations between cultures, TMBB differences in socio-economic factors and levels of stress that varied between samples used within each country.
eval VAN IZENDOORN + KROONENBERG
Comparison is aided by standardised methodology. use of TSS as a procedure means that a comparison can be made across cultures, and ∴ reliability is therefore high
Not globally representative: V+K recognised data from less Western-oriented cultures were required to establish a more global perspective attachment classifications, pointing out that Africa, South America, + Eastern European socialist countries were not represented.
Overall findings are misleading - As a disproportionately high number of the studies reviewed were conducted in the USA (18/32), the overall findings would have been distorted by these. ∴ apparent consistency between cultures might not genuinely reflect how much attachment types vary between cultures.
Large sample size: incr. internal validity by reducing the impact on anomalies caused by bad methodology + individual diffs.
Related research for cultural variations in attachment
McMAHON: used TSS to asses infant-mother attachments among Dogon people of Mali to compare w/ north American samples. Found kids raised w/ Dogon practices have higher levels of secure attachments + no insecure avoidant attachments. TS natural, traditional style of raising kids leads to secure attachments as levels of secure attachments where higher
HOWEVER
KYOUNG: used TSS to compare Korean + American families. Found Korean infants didn’t stay close to mom AND Korean moms more likely to play w/ infant when they got home BUT there was a similar proportion of securely attached kids, TS non-traditional child rearing can lead to secure attachments. EMPOSED ETIC: interpret non-American infant behaviour against American standard.
GROSSMAN + GROSSMAN: German children tended to be classified at insecurely attached based on Ainsworth’s guidelines. TMBB different child rearing practices, indicating cultural variation
Cultural variation in attachment IDA
Secure attachments seem the norm in a wide variety of cultures, supporting BOWLBY’s idea that attachment is innate + universal HOWEVER research shows cultural practices can have an influence on attachment types. E.g, McMAHON: suggests nurture as sticking close to parent still developes a secure attachment. TS there is an interaction between the two