AO3: Attachment

Question 1

Infant-Caregiver Interactions: Research relies on Observations (Limitation)

Answer 1

• Infants lack language so they can’t be researched using self-report methods
• Instead their behaviour is observed and interpreted
• This can result in ‘rich interpretation’ (an adult interprets the infant’s behaviour from an adult perspective)
• This leads to incorrect inferences about infant’s motivations behind their behaviour and an overestimate of the infant’s abilities
• Reliance of this research method is prone to error when studying infants

Question 2

Infant-Caregiver Interactions: Importance of Reciprocity in Infant-Caregiver Interactions

Answer 2

• In Tronick’s still face experiment the findings showed that the infant would try to engage the attention of a non-responsive carer before averting their gaze and reacting negatively
• This shows reciprocity is a feature of infant-caregiver interactions as it shows the infant is actively trying to get a response from there caregiver
• The negative reaction to the non-reciprocating care-giver shows the importance of reciprocity to the attachment bond as if it wasn’t important, the infant wouldn’t have suffered from a non-reciprocating care-giver
• This shows the danger of technology to healthy attachment as many adults give devices to an infant instead of showing reciprocity
• Still a danger of rich interpretation in the study as the infant may not have made a purposeful attempt to show reciprocity

Question 3

Infant-Caregiver Interactions: Research support for the importance of Interactional Synchrony

Answer 3

• In 1989 Isabella observed 30 infant-caregiver pairs, assessed attachment quality and levels of interactional synchrony (IS) and found higher IS levels were associated with the development of a secure attachment
• Supports the importance of IS to the development of attachment as is shows IS leads to a secure attachment
• Isabella presents the evidence of a correlation and correlation ≠ causation
• Its possible that a secure attachment means higher IS levels not the other way round
• Shows support for IS but weakly due to the evidence being a correlation

Question 4

Stages of Attachment: Strength of Schaffer and Emerson’s research is that it used a longitudinal design

Answer 4

• A longitudinal design is when the same participants are studied over a long period of time (rather than a cross-sectional design where the participants were different e.g, a group of 1-month olds and a different group of 2-month olds)
• Longitudinal design would control for participant EV’s meaning any observed differences would have been because of the age of the infants, not any individual differences
• Improves the internal validity of Schaffer and Emerson’s study
• Therefore the use of a longitudinal design strengthens Schaffer and Emerson’s research on the stages of attachment as it strengthens the internal validity of the study

Question 5

Stages of Attachment: Schaffer and Emerson’s research has issues with external validity

Answer 5

• The sample for the study was 60 working-class mothers and babies from Glasgow (in 1964)
• The sample size is small so it can’t be representative of all infants
• The sample comes from a very specific cultural background so it can’t be representative to infants of other cultural backgrounds
• The study was conducted in 1964 and since then there is no longer stigma around working mothers so there has been changes in the way children are brought up so the findings can’t be generalise to present day infants
• Therefore the findings of Schaffer and Emerson’s research into the stages f attachment can’t be generalised to all infants because of these issues

Question 6

Stages of Attachment: Schaffer and Emerson’s claims on the stages of attachment have been challenged

Answer 6

• In 1994 Sagi did research and found that infants raised in a communal environment (raised by a community) went straight to the multiple attachment stage
• Schaffer and Emerson argued that an infant can only form multiple attachments after they’ve formed a specific attachment
• This research shows that cultural backgrounds play an important role in the stages of attachment and Schaffer and Emerson ignored this
• Schaffer and Emerson’s research was presented as universal when in reality it contains cultural bias as they failed to consider cultural context and assumed their culture applied to the stages of attachment of all infants
• Therefore Schaffer and Emerson’s research into the stages of attachment was culturally biased and can’t be applied to all infants

Question 7

Animal Studies: Strength is their implications for human attachment

Answer 7

• John Bowlby (whose conclusions on attachment were inspired by Lorenz and Harlow’s research) was a pioneering researcher in the study of attachment
• Lorenz’s research inspired Bowlby’s claim that attachment was an innate need in humans and there was a critical period this needed to happen in
• Harlow’s research inspired Bowlby’s claim that early attachment can impact later development greatly
• It also led Bowlby to challenge the behaviourist claim that attachment depended on feeding (he said it depended on emotional sensitivity)
• Finally, Harlow’s findings showed evidence for the importance of contact comfort which led to reform in childcare institutions

Question 8

Animal Studies: Issues with generalising findings on attachment to humans

Answer 8

• Both Lorenz and Harlow did their research on animals which are very different to humans, behaviourally and physiologically (rhesus monkeys cling but humans don’t, goslings are much more capable at birth than humans)
• These differences may be significant enough to where the findings from animal studies can’t be generalised to attachment in humans
• The extent of generalising is dependent on the animal as rhesus monkeys share 93% of their genes with humans and have a similar brain structure to human whereas geese are more related to reptiles so have less in common with humans
• Issues of generalising impact both researchers but have a greater impact on Lorenz as there is a more distant relationship between humans and geese

Question 9

Animal Studies: Ethical Issues with animal studies on attachment

Answer 9

• In Harlow’s study the rhesus monkeys showed clear distress being separated from their real mother and in Lorenz’s study he raised the goslings in an unnatural way that impacted their development
• These issues go against the ethical guideline of protection against harm
• Animals lack language and aren’t able to give their informed consent
• A justification of this animal research is that if the research was on humans it would have been ethically impossible and would have hindered our understanding of human attachment
• Harlow’s research also led to the development of guidelines for animal research and the animal liberation movement

Question 10

Learning Theory: Research on humans challenges learning theory’s explanation of attachment

Answer 10

• Schaffer and Emerson’s research into stages of attachment showed many of the babies formed an attachment to their biological mother even when another carer did most of the feeding
• If learning theory was correct the infants would automatically form an attachment to whoever fed them the most but this isn’t the case so the assumption that feeding is the main driver of attachment is wrong
• Schaffer and Emerson’s findings imply that something other than feeding (an innate attachment to the mother or a learnt response to contact comfort) drives infants to attach to their biological mothers
• This challenge to learning theory can be seen as weak as Schaffer and Emerson’s research couldn’t be generalised properly (sample was 60 working class mothers and infants from Glasgow and was done in 1964)

Question 11

Learning Theory: Research to support learning theory’s explanation of attachment

Answer 11

• In 1950 Dollard and Miller did research and found that infants were fed 2000 times by their main carer in their 1st year
• Supports learning theory as it shows both classical conditioning (babies learn to associate their caregiver with food) and operant conditioning (baby’s attachment behaviour of crying positive reinforces the caregiver)
• Support is limited as there is no manipulation of variables in the study so it’s impossible to say if feeding is causing an association with attachment
• There’s a possibility the infant’s attachment behaviour is biologically determined
• Provides support but limited as lack of experimental control means that the association made isn’t certain

Question 12

Learning Theory: Implications of learning theory’s explanation of attachment are socially sensitive

Answer 12

• Learning theory’s explanation of attachment says that infant’s crying and parental response for food are learnt behaviours driven by the infant’s primary need for food
• This implies infants don’t need an attachment to their caregiver but only need to be fed and a good parent is one that feeds their child, not one who loves their child
• Behaviourist John Watson encouraged parents to avoid giving their child excessive affection claiming it would reinforce unhealthy behaviours and instead said to leave crying babies alone to teach them not to cry
• Learning theory’s explanation of why babies cry is used in the controlled crying technique where the baby is left to cry for short periods of time to weaken the attachment behaviour of crying (as it’s reinforced less)

Question 13

Monotropic Theory: Research challenges Bowlby’s claim that the need to form a monotropic relationship is innate

Answer 13

• Schaffer and Emerson’s research into the stages of attachment showed whilst most infants formed a specific attachment a significant minority formed multiple attachments
• If Bowlby’s claim was correct the need to form a monotropic relationship would be universal and all the infants in S&E’s study would have formed a specific attachment first
• S&E’s study had issues with generalising (60 working-class infants and mothers from Glasgow) so findings aren’t representative and challenge is weak

Question 14

Monotropic Theory: Research to support Bowlby’s concept of the internal working model (IWM)

Answer 14

• In 2007 Bailey interviewed 99 mothers with 1-year old babies and found mothers who rated themselves as having a good attachment to their mothers also rated themselves as having a good attachment to their infants
• Mothers who rated their attachment as good would have developed an IWM where they have high self-worth and positive expectation of others
• This means they would have formed good relationships with their infants as as their positive IWM would have helped them interact positively with their own children
• There are issues with validity of the study as the mothers had to recall their own early care experiences retrospectively allowing issues of accurate recall

Question 15

Monotropic Theory: Lorenz’s research provided support for Bowlby claim that the need to form a monotropic relationship is innate

Answer 15

• Lorenz raised goslings so that the first moving object they saw when they hatched was either their mother or him and found they imprinted on whoever they saw first and followed them around
• Assuming imprinting is the goose version of forming a monotropic relationship then this supports Bowlby’s claim as the goslings bonded with who they saw move first showing the need is innate not learnt
• Issues with generalising in Lorenz’s study as his study used geese which are very different to humans
• It’s debatable the extent to which geese imprinting demonstrates human attachment
• Research shows support but limited due to generalising issues

Question 16

Strange Situation: Research has argued the strange situation may be culturally biased

Answer 16

• In 1990 Takeshi did research and found since Japanese mothers are rarely separated from their infants, the infants inevitably experience high separation anxiety during the strange situation
• Suggests the strange situation is culturally biased in a Japanese context as it was developed in a Western context where separation anxiety is seen as insecurity and therefore an insecure-resistant attachment type
• Behaviour is interpreted from one cultural perspective and is analysed from standards within a specific cultural context
• Suggests Ainsworth’s claims of attachment types as universal are wrong because of cultural bias
• Doesn’t mean strange situation is entirely wrong it just means cultural context needs to be taken into account

Question 17

Strange Situation: Critics of Ainsworth’s Strange Situation claim she overemphasises the importance of nurture in the development of attachment types

Answer 17

• Kagan claims babies are born with a temperament (aspects of personality we’re born with) that make some people more socially anxious than others and said that you either have an inhibited or uninhibited temperament
• Challenges the strange situation as Ainsworth said that attachment types are a result of interactions with a caregiver not nature
• A child might develop a secure attachment type as they were born with an uninhibited temperament not because their caregiver responds to their needs
• Therefore challenges strange situation as it suggest nature is a better explanation for the development of attachment types than nurture

Question 18

Strange Situation: Strength of the strange situation is its reliability

Answer 18

• In 2012 Bick looked at inter-rate reliability of the strange situation with a team of observers and found they all agreed on 94% of the attachment types of tested babies
• Shows the strange situation is reliable as there was high consistency between the observers so they were able to reach the same conclusion about the attachment type they saw a child display
• Reliability is essential for validity which means the strange situation has an increased chance of providing a valid tool to measure individual differences in attachment
• Reliable research ≠ valid research as other factors (population validity, internal validity, ecological validity) must also be considered so the strange situation isn’t necessarily valid even if it’s reliable

Question 19

Cultural Variations: A strength of Van Ijzerndoorn’s research into cultural variation is that it is a meta analysis

Answer 19

• Meta-analysis’ combine the results of multiple studies on the same theory and create a conclusion
• This strengthens Van Ijzerndoorn’s conclusion as meta-analysis is seen as the strongest form of scientific evidence
• The combines studies means the sample is combined as well and this makes the meta-analysis very representative and the conclusions can be generalised to children outside of the study
• Still has issues with publication bias as it fails to take account of unpublished studies and this skews the findings towards positive results on cultural variations of attachment

Question 20

Cultural Variations: Van Ijzerndoorn’s research on cultural variations of attachment provide support for Ainsworth and Bowlby’s theories on attachment

Answer 20

• Van Ijzerndoorn found that across all cultures the secure attachment type was the most common but also found variations in attachment types intraculturally and interculturally
• The dominance of the secure attachment type support Ainsworth research as she had the same result in her research (70%)
• Bowlby claimed that humans have an innate need to form a monotropic relationship (secure attachment) to their main caregiver and the dominance of the secure attachment type in Van Ijzerndoorn’s research also supports this
• Therefore Van Ijzerndoorn’s research into cultural variations of attachment provide support for other theories of attachment

Question 21

Cultural Variations: An issue with Van Ijzerndoorn’s research is it’s socially sensitive

Answer 21

• Sieber and Stanley claim socially sensitive research has social consequences for either the participants or the social group they represent
• Van Ijzerndoorn’s finding of China having a large % infants with insecure attachment types might be interpreted as Chinese parenting being an inferior parenting style
• This actually classifies as ethnocentrism as the findings could be interpreted as implying some cultures have inferior parenting styles to others

Question 22

Maternal Deprivation: Harlow’s animal studies support Bowlby’s maternal deprivation theory

Answer 22

• Harlow did research and found infant rhesus monkeys raised in isolation in bare wire cages left them with abnormalities in their later development and these became irreversible after a certain amount of time
• Harlow’s research supports Bowlby’s theory as the monkeys showed what Bowlby would call complete deprivation after being raised in isolation
• The harm they suffered to their emotional and social development was significant and irreversible like Bowlby claimed
• However their are issuing with generalising these findings to humans as Harlow did his research on rhesus monkeys
• Provides support for Bowlby’s theory but the support is limited due to generalising issues

Question 23

Maternal Deprivation: Rutter’s Romanian Studies provide mixed support for Bowlby’s maternal deprivation theory

Answer 23

-