Animal Studies of Attachment

Question 1

Define imprinting

Answer 1

An innate readiness to develop a strong bond with the mother which takes place during a specific time in development. If it doesn’t happen at this time, it probably will not happen

Question 2

Describe Lorenz’s study

Answer 2

• Procedure: Lorenz (1935) divided a clutch of gosling eggs into 2 groups. One was left with their natural mother and the other were place in an incubator. When the incubator eggs hatched, the first living thing they saw was Lorenz and they started following him around.
• Findings: The goslings divided themselves, one group followed Lorenz and the other their natural mother. He noted the process of imprinting is restricted to the critical period and if a young animal isn’t exposed to a moving object during the critical period, then the animal will not imprint. Lorenz did observe that imprinting to humans doesn’t occur in some animals (curlews(
• Long-lasting effects: Lorenz (1952) noted imprinting is irreversible and long lasted. He described how one of the geese who imprinted on him would sleep on his bed every night. He suggested early imprinting had an effect on sexual imprinting. Animals (especially birds) would mate with the same kind of object upon which they were imprinted.

Question 3

Describe Harlow’s study

Answer 3

• Procedure: 8 infant rhesus monkeys were studied for 165 days. 4 monkeys’ milk bottle was on a cloth-covered mother while the others had a plain wire mother. Measurements of how much time each infant spent with their mother was made. Observations of the infants’ responses when scared was also made.
• Findings: All 8 monkeys spent most of their time with the cloth-covered mother. Those who fed from the wire mother only spent little time getting milk then returned to the cloth mother. When frightened, all monkeys clung to the cloth-covered mother and when playing with new toys, the monkeys kept 1 foot on the cloth-covered mother for reassurance. Suggesting that infants don’t develop an attachment to who feeds them rather who offers contact comfort.
• Long-lasting effects: The monkeys grew up and noted the consequences. The motherless monkeys, even if they did have contact comfort, developed abnormally. They were socially abnormal (froze or fled when approached by other monkeys) and sexually abnormal (didn’t show normal mating behaviour and didn’t cradle their own babies). He also found a critical period for the monkeys. If the motherless monkeys spend time with other monkeys, they could recover but only if this happened before they were 3 months. More than 6 months with only a wire mother was something they couldn’t recover from

Question 4

Give evaluation for Lorenz’s research (support for imprinting)

Answer 4

• Others have supported Lorenz’s research and conclusions
• Guition (1966) showed that leghorn chicks, exposed to yellow rubber gloves when fed during their first few weeks, had become imprinted on the gloves. Later, male chicks tried mating with the glove, sexual imprinting.
• Supports imprinting on specific object isn’t innate but probably any moving object present during the critical period.

Question 5

Give evaluation for Lorenz’s research (criticisms of imprinting)

Answer 5

• Uncertainty around the irreversible nature of imprinting as suggested by Lorenz.
• Guition reversed imprinting in the chickens, by them spending time with their own species, they were able to engage in normal sexual behaviour with other chickens.
• Questions validity of Lorenz’s research

Question 6

Give evaluation for Harlow’s research (confounding variable)

Answer 6

• In Harlow’s study, the 2 stimulus objects varied in more then being cloth-covered or not
• The two heads were different which varies systemically with the independent variable (cloth-covered or not). This means the infant monkeys may have preferred the cloth-covered mother because it had a more attractive head.
• Conclusions of this study may lack internal validity

Question 7

Give evaluation for Harlow’s research (generalising)

Answer 7

• Humans differ in important ways (behaviour is governed by conscious decisions.)
• Nevertheless, studies have shown animal behaviour mirrors that of in human studies. For example, Harlow’s is supported by Schaffer and Emerson that infants weren’t most attached to the person who fed them.
• Animal studies can act as a pointer in understanding human behaviour but it’s important to seek confirmation by looking at research with humans