Attachment

Question 1

Outline Lorenz’s geese imprinting study

Answer 1

• Randomly divided large clutch of goose eggs
• One half were hatched with the mother goose in their natural environment (CONTROL GROUP)
• The other half hatched in an incubator where the first moving object they saw was Lorenz
• Mixed all goslings together to see who they would follow
• Incubator group followed Lorenz, control group followed their mother
• Lorenz identified a CRITICAL PERIOD in which IMPRINTING needs to take place, e.g. few hours after hatching
• If imprinting did not occur within that time, chicks did not attach themselves to the mother figure

Question 2

Outline Harlow’s rhesus monkey attachment study

Answer 2

• 16 rhesus monkeys reared with two wire model “mothers”
• CONDITION 1 - milk dispensed by plain wire “mother”
• CONDITION 2 - milk dispensed by cloth covered wire “mother”
• Monkeys’ preferences were measured
• To measure attachment-like behaviour, Harlow observed how the monkeys reacted when placed in frightening situations, e.g. adding a noisy mechanical teddy bear to the environment
• Baby monkeys cuddled the cloth covered mother in preference to the plain wire mother, regardless of which one they took milk from
• This suggests that contact comfort was of more importance than food when it came to attachment behaviour
• Harlow continued to study the monkeys who’d been deprived of their real mother into adulthood
• As adults, the monkey’s who’d been deprived of their real mothers suffered severe consequences - they were more aggressive, less sociable and less skilled in mating than other monkeys

Question 3

Regolin and Vallortigara have research support for Lorenz’s concept of imprinting. How is this a strength?

Answer 3

• Regolin and Vallortigara exposed chicks to simple shape-combinations that moved
• When shown a range of moving shapes, the chicks followed these in preference to other shapes
• This suggests that young animals are born with an innate mechanism to imprint on a moving object

Question 4

How is trying to generalise from birds to humans a weakness of animal studies of attachment?

Answer 4

• The mammalian attachment system is quite different from imprinting in birds
• For example, mammalian mothers show more emotional attachment to their young
• This means that it may be inappropriate to generalise Lorenz’s ideas about imprinting to humans

Question 5

Lorenz’s imprinting theory has applications to human behaviour. How is this a strength of animal studies into attachment?

Answer 5

• The concept of imprinting can explain some human behaviour
• For example, “baby duck syndrome”, in which computer users become attached to their first operating system
• This means that imprinting is a meaningful process in humans as well as birds

Question 6

Harlow’s research has real-world value. How is this a strength of animal studies of attachment?

Answer 6

• According to Howe, it’s helped social workers understand risk factors in child abuse and thus intervene to prevent it
• We also now understand the importance of attachment figures for baby monkeys in zoos and breeding programmes
• This means that Harlow’s research has benefitted both animals and humans

Question 7

How is generalising from monkeys to humans a weakness of animal studies of attachment?

Answer 7

• Monkeys are clearly more similar to humans than Lorenz’s geese, and all mammals share some similarities in their attachment systems
• HOWEVER, they are not human and in some ways, the human mind and behaviour are much more complex
• This suggests that it may be inappropriate to generalise Harlow’s findings to humans

Question 8

Harlow’s research has ethical issues. How is this a weakness of animal studies of attachment?

Answer 8

• Harlow’s procedures caused severe long-term distress to his monkey participants, though the research led to useful applications
• HOWEVER, his findings and conclusions have important theoretical and practical applications
• This suggests that, in spite of its benefits, Harlow’s research shouldn’t have been carried out

Question 9

Describe learning theory as an explanation for attachment

Answer 9

Question 10

Describe the importance of food in the learning theory of attachment

Answer 10

• Sometimes called “cupboard love” explanation because it emphasises the importance of food in attachment formation
• Children learn to love whoever feeds them

Question 11

Outline the role of classical conditioning in attachment

Answer 11

• Classical conditioning involves learning to associate two stimuli
• Food (UCS) leads to feelings of pleasure (UCR)
• Mother starts as a NS but when she provides food over time, she becomes associated with food so becomes a CS
• Once conditioning has taken place, the sight of the mother produces a CR of pleasure. According to learning theory, the conditioned pleasure is the basis of love
• Now an attachment has formed and the mother becomes an attachment figure

Question 12

Outline the role of operant conditioning in attachment

Answer 12

• Operant conditioning explains when babies cry for comfort (an important building for attachment)
• Crying leads to a response from the caregiver (e.g. feeding)
• As long as the caregiver provides the correct response, crying is reinforced because it produces a pleasurable consequence

Question 13

Describe negative reinforcement in attachment

Answer 13

• At the same time as the baby is reinforced for crying, the caregiver receives negative reinforcement because the crying stops
• Negative reinforcement is escaping from something unpleasant
• This interplay of positive/negative reinforcement strengthens an attachment

Question 14

Outline hunger drive reduction in attachment

Answer 14

• Hunger is a PRIMARY DRIVE, so we are motivated to eat to reduce the hunger drive
• Attachment is a SECONDARY DRIVE learned by association between the caregiver and the satisfaction of a primary drive
• Sears et al. suggested as caregivers provide food, the primary drive of hunger becomes generalised to them

Question 15

There is counter evidence to learning theory from animal studies. How is this a weakness of learning theory?

Answer 15

• Lorenz’s geese imprinted on the first moving object they saw
• Harlow’s monkeys attached to a soft surrogate in preference to the wire one with milk
• In both these animal studies, imprinting/attachment did not develop as a result of feeding
• This shows that factors other than feeding are important in attachment formation

Question 16

There is counter evidence to learning theory from human studies. How is this a weakness of learning theory?

Answer 16

• Schaffer and Emerson showed that for many babies, their main attachment was NOT to the person who fed them
• Also, Isabella et al. found that interactional synchrony (unrelated to feeding) predicted attachment quality
• This also suggests that other factors are more important in attachment than feeding

Question 17

Some elements of conditioning could still be involved in learning theory. How is this a strength of learning theory?

Answer 17

• It seems unlikely that association with food is central to attachment. HOWEVER, conditioning may still play a role in attachment
• For example, a baby’s choice of primary attachment figure may be determined by the fact that a caregiver becomes associated with warmth and comfort
• This means that conditioning could still be important in the choice of attachment figures, though not in the process of attachment formation

Question 18

Learning theory may be inappropriate in explaining any aspect of attachment. How is this a weakness of learning theory?

Answer 18

• Learning theory ignores the fact that babies take a very active role in the interactions that produce attachment
• For example, they initiate interactions, according to Feldman and Eidelman
• This suggests that learning theory may be inappropriate in explaining any aspect of attachment

Question 19

Learning theory can be developed into social learning theory. How is this a strength of learning theory?

Answer 19

• Hay and Vespo suggest that parents teach their children to love them by modelling attachment behaviour, e.g. hugging and kissing
• Parents also reward babies with approval when they display their own attachment behaviour (“that’s a lovely smile” etc.)
• This means that social learning theory can provide better explanations, including explaining the active role taken by babies in attachment development

Question 20

Outline Bowlby’s monotropic theory of attachment

Answer 20

• Bowlby’s theory is described as monotropic because of the emphasis on the child’s attachment to one caregiver
• This attachment is different from others and more important
• Bowlby believed that the more time a baby spent with their primary caregiver, the better, due to the LAWS OF CONTINUITY and ACCUMULATED SEPARATION

Question 21

Define the Law of Continuity

Answer 21

The more constant a child’s care, the better the quality of attachment

Question 22

Define the Law of Accumulated Separation

Answer 22

The effects of every separation add up

Question 23

Describe Bowlby’s social releasers

Answer 23

• Bowlby suggested that babies are born with a set of innate “cute” behaviours (e.g. smiling, cooing, gripping) that encourage attention from adults
• The purpose of these social releasers is to activate adult social interaction (i.e. make an adult attach to the baby)
• Bowlby recognised that attachment is a RECIPROCAL SYSTEM

Question 24

Outline Bowlby’s critical period

Answer 24

• Critical period of about 2 years when the infant attachment system is active (viewed more of a SENSITIVE PERIOD)
• A child is maximally sensitive at 6 months and this may extend up to the age of 2 years. If an attachment has not formed in this time, a child will find it much harder to form one later

Question 25

Outline and evaluate Bowlby’s internal working model of attachment

Answer 25

• Bowlby argued that the child forms a mental representation of the relationship with their primary attachment figure.
• This INTERNAL WORKING MODEL acts as a template for what future relationships are like
• A child whose first experience is a loving relationship with a reliable caregiver will tend to form an expectation that all relationships are loving and reliable
• HOWEVER, a child whose first relationship involves poor treatment may expect such treatment from others
• This internal working model may also affect the child’s later ability to be a parent themselves

Question 26

Monotropy lacks validity. How is this a weakness of Bowlby’s monotropic theory of attachment?

Answer 26

• The relationship with the primary attachment figure may simply be stronger than other attachments, rather than different in quality, as Bowlby believed
• Other family members may well develop attachments to the baby that have the same qualities, such as comfort and a secure base from which to explore
• This means that Bowlby may have been wrong to suggest there is a unique quality to a child’s primary attachment

Question 27

There is evidence support from Brazelton for the role of social releasers. How is this a strength of Bowlby’s monotropic theory of attachment?

Answer 27

• Brazelton instructed primary attachment figures to ignore their baby’s social releasers
• Babies (who were previously shown to be normally responsive) initially showed some distress, but eventually, some curled up and lay motionless
• This supports the idea that social releasers play an important role in attachment development

Question 28

There is research support from Bailey for the internal working model. How is this a strength of Bowlby’s monotropic theory of attachment?

Answer 28

• The idea of the internal working model predicts that patterns of attachment will be passed from one generation to the next
• Bailey studied 99 mothers. Those with poor attachment to their own parents were more likely to have one year olds who were poorly attached
• This supports Bowlby’s idea of an internal working model of attachment as it is being passed through families

Question 29

Bowlby may have overemphasised the importance of the internal working model in attachment. How is this a weakness of Bowlby’s monotropic theory?

Answer 29

• There are other influences on social development
• A baby’s genetically influenced personality is more important in the development of social behaviour, including their later parenting style
• This suggests that Bowlby overemphasised the importance of the internal working model in development

Question 30

There are feminist concerns surrounding Bowlby’s monotropic theory. How is this a weakness?

Answer 30

• According to Burman, the laws of continuity and accumulated separation imply that working mothers may damage their baby’s development
• HOWEVER, Bowlby’s theory did draw attention to a mother’s importance and also had real-world applications (e.g. daycare)
• This means that, although Bowlby’s theory has had important applications, it may have also contributed to the oppression of women, particularly working mothers

Question 31

Outline the 5 categories in Ainsworth’s Strange Situation

Answer 31

1. PROXIMITY-SEEKING : well-attached babies stay close to caregivers
2. EXPLORATION AND SECURE-BASED BEHAVIOUR : good attachment makes a baby confident to explore, using the caregiver as a point of safety
3. STRANGER ANXIETY : displayed by well-attached babies
4. SEPARATION ANXIETY : displayed by well-attached babies
5. RESPONSE TO REUNION WITH CAREGIVER AFTER SEPARATION : well-attached babies are enthusiastic

Question 32

Outline the seven 3-minute-long episodes of the Strange Situation

Answer 32

1. Baby is encouraged to explore by caregiver
2. Stranger enters and talks to caregiver, approaches baby
3. Caregiver leaves
4. Caregiver returns, stranger leaves
5. Caregiver leaves baby alone
6. Stranger returns
7. Caregiver returns

Question 33

Describe secure attachment (Type B)

Answer 33

• 60 - 75% of British toddlers
• Baby happy to explore but seeks proximity to caregiver
• Shows moderate separation and stranger anxiety
• Requires and accepts comfort from caregiver on reunion

Question 34

Describe insecure-avoidant attachment (Type A)

Answer 34

• 20 - 25% of British toddlers
• Baby explores freely but does NOT seek proximity
• Shows little / no separation and stranger anxiety
• Avoids contact at the reunion stage

Question 35

Describe insecure-resistant attachment (Type C)

Answer 35

• 3% of British toddlers
• Baby explores less and seeks greater proximity
• Shows considerable stranger and separation anxiety
• Resists comfort when reunited with caregiver

Question 36

Ainsworth’s Strange Situation has good predictive validity. How is this a strength of types of attachment?

Answer 36

• Attachment type predicts later development. For example, secure babies typically have greater success at school, according to McCormick et al.
• In contrast, insecure-resistant attachment is associated with the worst outcomes, e.g. bullying (Kokkinos) and adult mental health problems (Ward et al.)
• This is evidence for the validity of the concept because it can predict future outcomes

Question 37

The Strange Situation has good inter-rater reliability. How is this a strength of types of attachment?

Answer 37

• Different observers watching the same babies generally agree on attachment type. Bick et al. found 94% agreement in one team
• This may be because the Strange Situation takes place under controlled conditions and because the behavioural categories are easy to observe
• This suggests that we can be confident that the attachment type of a baby identified in the Strange Situation does not just depend on who is observing them

Question 38

The Strange Situation may not actually measure attachment. How is this a weakness of types of attachment?

Answer 38

• Although the Strange Situation measures something that predicts later development, according to Kagan, it may be measuring genetic differences in anxiety
• This means that the Strange Situation may not actually measure attachment

Question 39

The Strange Situation may be culture-bound. How is this a weakness of types of attachment?

Answer 39

• The Strange Situation test might not have the same meaning outside Western Europe and the USA where it was created
• Cultural differences in children’s experiences mean they respond differently, e.g. Japanese babies show anxiety because they are not used to being left by their caregiver, according to Takahashi
• This means that is difficult to know what the Strange Situation is measuring in some countries / cultures

Question 40

According to Main and Solomon, there are other attachment types. How is this a weakness of types of attachment?

Answer 40

• Main and Solomon identified a fourth category of attachment - DISORGANISED ATTACHMENT (Type D), a mix of RESISTANT and AVOIDANT behaviours
• HOWEVER, Type D babies are unusual and have generally experienced some form of severe neglect or abuse, associated with later psychological disorders
• This means that Ainsworth’s classification is adequate as a description of normal variations in attachment

Question 41

Outline van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg’s meta-analysis into cultural variations in attachment

Answer 41

• Found 32 studies of attachment where the Strange Situation was used. They were conducted in 8 countries, 15 studies done in the USA
• Secure attachment was most common in all countries, but ranged from 50% in China to 75% in Britain
• In individualist cultures, rates of resistant attachment were similar to Ainsworth’s original sample (all under 14%)
• Collectivist samples from China, Japan and Israel had rates above 25% (where rates of avoidant attachment were reduced)
• This suggests that there were cultural differences in the distribution of insecure attachment
• Variations between results of studies within the same country were 150% greater than those between countries
• In the USA, one study found 46% securely attached, compared to one sample as high as 90%

Question 42

Outline Simonelli’s study into cultural variations in attachment

Answer 42

• Assessed 76 babies aged 12 months in Italy using the Strange Situation
• 50% were secure, 36% were avoidant. This lower rate of secure attachment may be because increasingly, mothers work long hours and use more childcare
• This shows that cultural changes can affect patterns of attachment

Question 43

Outline Jin et al.’s study into cultural variations in attachment

Answer 43

• Compared the attachment types of 87 Korean babies to proportions in other studies
• Found similar patterns of secure and insecure attachments to other studies
• HOWEVER, within insecure categories, there were differences - only 1 baby was AVOIDANT
• This pattern is similar to Japan and may be because both countries have similar child-rearing practices

Question 44

How is the use of indigenous researchers a strength of cultural variations in attachment?

Answer 44

• Indigenous researchers = the same cultural background as the participants, e.g Grossmann et al. - Germans working with Germans
• Using indigenous researchers aids communication between researchers and participants, and helps prevent misunderstandings or language barriers
• This means that there is an excellent chance that researchers and participants communicated successfully, increasing the validity of the studies

Question 45

Some cross-cultural studies have had communication errors and may lack validity. How is this a weakness of cultural variations in attachment?

Answer 45

• Americans Morelli and Tronick investigated the Efé in Zaire
• This means that some cross-cultural studies may have communication errors and hence lack validity

Question 46

How is the impact of confounding variables a weakness in cultural variations in attachment?

Answer 46

• Studies conducted in different countries may not be matched for sample characteristics, e.g. children of different social classes
• Environmental variables may also differ, e.g. using smaller rooms which may encourage babies to explore more
• This means that studies assessing attachment types carried out in different countries may tell us little about cultural differences in attachment

Question 47

How is an imposed etic a weakness of cultural variations in attachment?

Answer 47

• Using a test (e.g. the Strange Situation) in a different cultural context than the one it was designed for may be meaningless
• The Strange Situation was designed in the USA where lack of affection at reunion represents insecure attachment, however in Germany, it would be seen as a sign of independence
• This suggests that it may be meaningless to compare attachment behaviours across countries

Question 48

There are competing explanations for cultural variations in attachment. How is this a weakness?

Answer 48

• The reasons for similar patterns of attachment across cultures is explained by Bowlby’s theory that attachment is INNATE, so secure attachment is the universal norm
• HOWEVER, van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg suggest this similarity may be more a product of media representation of correct parenting
• This means that it is hard to know whether Bowlby’s theory is true as there is a credible alternative explanation

Question 49

According to Bowlby, how is separation different to deprivation?

Answer 49

• Separation = the child not being physically in the presence of the primary attachment figure
• Deprivation = losing emotional care as a result of the separation

Deprivation can be avoided if alternative emotional care is offered, thus separation doesn’t always cause deprivation

Question 50

According to Bowlby, how can separation potentially lead to maternal deprivation?

Answer 50

Bowlby believed that mother-love in infancy is “as important for mental health as are vitamins and proteins for physical health”

Question 51

What happens to babies if they are separated from their mother for an extended period of time during the critical period (2 and a half years), according to Bowlby?

Answer 51

• If a child is separated from their mother (without substitute emotional care) for an extended time during the first 2 and a half years, then psychological damage is inevitable
• There is continuing risk up to the age of 5

Question 52

According to Goldfarb, how does maternal deprivation lead to lower IQ?

Answer 52

• If a child is deprived of maternal care for too long during the critical period, this may lead to intellectual disability
• Goldfarb found lower IQs in children from institutions compared to fostered children

Question 53

According to Bowlby’s theory of maternal deprivation, what is affectionless psychopathy?

Answer 53

• Affectionless psychopathy = inability to feel guilt or strong emotion towards others
• This prevents the person from developing normal relationships and is associated with criminality

Question 54

Outline Bowlby’s 44 thieves study

Answer 54

• 44 delinquent teenagers accused of stealing
• All “thieves” were interviewed for affectionless psychopathy : characterised by a lack of guilt, affection and empathy
• Families also interviewed to establish any prolonged separations from mothers
• 14/44 thieves could be described as affectionless psychopaths
• 12 of these has experienced prolonged early separation from their mothers in the first two years of their lives
• In contrast, only 5 of the remaining 30 thieves had experienced separations. This suggests prolonged early separation/deprivation caused affectionless psychopathy

Question 55

Sources of evidence for maternal deprivation are flawed. How is this a weakness of Bowlby’s theory of maternal deprivation?

Answer 55

• The 44 thieves study is flawed because it was open to bias - Bowlby himself assessed both deprivation and psychopathy, knowing what he hoped to find
• Goldfarb’s study of wartime orphans is flawed because he used traumatised participants who lacked good aftercare. This introduced CONFOUNDING VARIABLES
• This means that Bowlby originally had no solid evidence on which to base his theory of maternal deprivation

Question 56

There is evidence from newer studies to support Bowlby’s theory of maternal deprivation. How is this a strength?

Answer 56

• Levy et al. found that separating baby rats for one day had a permanent effect on their social development
• This means that there is now some evidence for the theory of maternal deprivation

Question 57

Bowlby confused deprivation and privation. How is this a weakness of Bowlby’s theory of maternal deprivation?

Answer 57

• Rutter made the distinction between deprivation (separation from an attachment figure) and privation (failure to form an attachment) - privation has more serious effects
• The 44 thieves Bowlby studied and others he based his ideas on (Goldfarb’s wartime orphans) may have been PRIVED rather than DEPRIVED
• This suggests that Bowlby probably exaggerated the effects of deprivation on development

Question 58

The critical period is more of a sensitive period. How is this a weakness of Bowlby’s theory of maternal deprivation?

Answer 58

• Koluchova conducted a case study of Czech twin boys isolated from age 18 months (locked in a cupboard)
• Later they were looked after by two loving adults and appeared to recover fully
• This shows that severe deprivation can have positive outcomes provided the child has some social interaction and good aftercare
• This suggests that the period identified by Bowlby may be a “sensitive” one, but it cannot be critical

Question 59

How is conflicting evidence a weakness of Bowlby’s theory of maternal deprivation?

Answer 59

• Replications of Bowlby’s 44 thieves study have generally failed to reproduce his findings on psychopathy
• HOWEVER, some more recent research has found links between poor maternal care and adult psychopathy
• This suggests that the link between maternal deprivation and psychopathy are unclear

Question 60

Outline Rutter’s English and Romanian Adoptee study (ERA)?

Answer 60

• 165 Romanian orphans
• LONGITUDINAL STUDY - physical, cognitive and emotional development had been assessed at 4, 6, 11, 15 and 22-25 years old
• Control group = 52 adopted children from the UK
• Those adopted before six months had a mean IQ of 102
• Those adopted after two years had a mean IQ of 77
• Frequency of DISINHIBITED ATTACHMENT related to age of adoption :
• Apparent in children adopted after they were 6 months old (clinginess, attention-seeking and indiscriminate affection to strangers)
• Rare in children adopted before the age of 6 months

Question 61

Outline Zeanah’s Bucharest Early Intervention Project (BEI)

Answer 61

• The researchers used the Strange Situation to assess attachment in 95 Romanian children aged 12-31 months who had spent most of their time in institutional care
• They were compared to a control group of 50 children who had never experienced institutional care
• Only 19% of the institutionalised group were securely attached (74% of controls)
• 44% of the institutionalised group had characteristics of disinhibited attachment (20% of the controls)

Question 62

Describe disinhibited attachment as an effect of institutionalisation

Answer 62

• Such children are equally friendly and affectionate towards people they know well or total strangers
• This may be an adaptation to multiple caregivers

Question 63

Describe damage to intellectual development as an effect of institutionalisation

Answer 63

• Institutionalised children often show signs of intellectual disability
• This effect is not as pronounced if the children are adopted before 6 months of age

Question 64

The Romanian orphans study is a real-world application. How is this a strength of research into institutionalisation?

Answer 64

• Results from this research have led to improvements in the way children are cared for in institutions
• Children’s homes now avoid having large numbers of caregivers for each child. They have one or two “key workers” who play a central role
• This means children in institutional care have a chance to develop normal attachments and disinhibited attachment is avoided

Question 65

Research into Romanian orphans have fewer confounding variables than other research. How is this a strength?

Answer 65

• There were many orphan studies before the Romanian orphans became available to study. These often involved children who experienced loss or trauma before they were institutionalised
• Neglect, abuse and bereavement meant it was hard to observe the effects of institutionalisation in isolation. The children were affected by multiple factors functioning as confounding variables
• This suggests we can be fairly sure that differences in institutionally-cared-for children are the result of this type of care (high internal validity)

Question 66

There is a lack of data on adult development. How is this a weakness of research into institutionalisation?

Answer 66

• It is too soon to say for certain whether children suffered permanent effects because we only have data on their development as far as their early twenties
• It will be some time before we have information about some key research questions (e.g. orphans’ ability to form and maintain romantic and parenting relationships)
• This means that the Romanian orphan studies have not yet yielded their most important findings

Question 67

How can social sensitivity be argued to be a strength of research into institutionalisation?

Answer 67

• Late-adopted children were shown to have low IQ. This might subsequently affect how they are treated by parents, teachers etc. and might create a self-fulfilling prophecy
• HOWEVER, much has been learned from the Romanian orphan studies that might benefit future institutionalised children
• As such, the potential benefits of the studies may outweigh their social sensitivity

Question 68

Describe how the first attachment is a template for future relationships

Answer 68

• The quality of a child’s first attachment is crucial because it provides a template that will affect the nature of their future relationships
• This is due to the influence of the internal working model created by that first attachment

Question 69

Describe how good attachments lead to good relationship expectations

Answer 69

• A child whose first experience is of a loving relationship with a reliable attachment figure assumes this is how all relationships are meant to be
• They will then seek out functional relationships and behave functionally within them

Question 70

Describe how bad attachments lead to bad relationship expectations

Answer 70

• A child with bad experiences of their first attachment will bring these experiences to later relationships
• This may mean they struggle to form relationships in the first place or they do not behave appropriately in them

Question 71

Describe how early attachments are linked with friendships and bullying

Answer 71

• Securely attached babies tend to go on to form the best quality childhood friendships
• Securely attached children are less likely to be involved in bullying, whereas avoidant children are most likely to be victims and resistant are most likely to be bullies

Question 72

Describe how the internal working model of attachment is linked with parenting styles and romantic relationships

Answer 72

• People base their parenting style on their internal working model
• Bailey et al. found that the majority of mothers had the same attachment classification to their babies as they had to their own mothers
• Hazan and Shaver found a link between attachment type and quality of adult romantic relationships

Question 73

Outline Hazan and Shaver’s love quiz study

Answer 73

• Researchers analysed 620 replies to a “love quiz” printed in an American newspaper
• The quiz assessed 3 different aspects of relationships : current or most important relationship, general love experiences and attachment type
• SECURE respondents were the most likely to have good and longer-lasting romantic relationships
• AVOIDANT respondents tended to be jealous and fear intimacy

Question 74

There is strong research support for the influence of early attachment on later relationships (Fearon and Roisman). How is this a strength?

Answer 74

• There are many studies showing a link between infant attachment type and later development, including bullying, success in romantic relationships and parenting
• A review by Fearon and Roisman concluded that infant attachment influenced development in many ways. DISORGANISED attachment was most predictive, e.g. of later mental disorder
• This suggests that insecure attachment appears to convey a disadvantage for children’s development

Question 75

It can be argued that the link between attachment strength and later development is unclear. How is this a weakness of the influence of early attachment on later relationships?

Answer 75

• Not all evidence supports the link between infant attachment and later development
• For example, Becker-Stoll et al. found no evidence of continuity of attachment type from 1 to 16 years old
• This means that it is not clear how strongly attachment influences later development

Question 76

There are validity issues with retrospective studies. How is this a weakness of the influence of early attachment on later relationships?

Answer 76

• Most studies assess participants’ attachment type in adulthood (not in infancy) using questionnaires or interviews. These rely on honest answers
• A further problem is that these studies assess attachment in late childhood or adulthood and assume that it has remained the same since infancy
• This suggests that the measures of attachment may not be valid

Question 77

How are possible confounding variables a weakness of the influence of early attachment on later relationships?

Answer 77

• Some studies do make assessments of infant attachment and follow up children, assessing their later developments
• HOWEVER, these studies may be affected by confounding variables. For example, parenting style and personality might affect both attachment and later development
• This suggests that we can never be entirely sure that it is infant attachment and not other factors that is influencing later development

Question 78

How is balancing opportunity and risk a weakness of the influence of early attachment on later relationships?

Answer 78

• Knowing that insecure infant attachment leads to increased risk of later developmental problems can provide opportunities to intervene
• HOWEVER, this may lead to overly pessimistic expectations and create a self-fulfilling prophecy
• This means that knowing someone’s attachment status may do more harm than good