attachment Flashcards
Summarise the findings of Hazen and Shaver’s love quiz
- 620 responses to newspaper articles (205m/415f)
- Secure - balance between closeness and independence (56%)
- Avoidant - avoiding closeness (25%)
- Anxious - Clingy, not coping well with independence (19%)
- questions that looked at childhood attachment types
What are some issues with Hazen and Shaver’s love quiz?
- self report methods may lead to social desirability etc
- volunteer sample, not the average person
- correlational research, is there actually a link…kagan again
What is the continuity hypothesis?
future relationships are based off of past ones + attachment styles
What study should you use to criticise influence on later realtionships?
Mccarthy (1999) - 40 women (who were assessed as children) and their children and grandparents
secure had higher self esteem and long lasting adult relationships, while insecure avoidant had poor romantic relationships and friends. Both insecure groups were more likely to have a deviant partner.
Avoids self- report issues of hazen and shaver
What are the pros/cons of research into later adult relationships?
- changing children’s internal working model
- most research is correlation, could be temperament…kagan
- this is deterministic
- this takes a nomothetic approach to relationships
- again self report methods
What is the AAI - adult attachment interview?Who?
Maine et al
- 20 qs one hour semi-structured interview looking at IWM
- coded based on the quality of the conversation
- Types = dissmissing…insecure/defensive
- autonomous…secure
- preoccupied…insecure
- unresolved…childhood trauma
What is Bowlby’s definition of attachment?
”
“The formation of a strong, reciprocal emotional bond between an infant and a primary caregiver that endures over time”
”
How did Bowlby disagree with learning theory?
”
Bowlby did not agree with learning theory as an explanation for attachment. Instead he looked at evolutionary reasons inspired by both Lorenz and Harlow’s work to find that innate system for attachment that lead to increased survival rates. He thought that by imprinting these animals were more likely to be protected from potential hazards.
”
What is Bowlby’s Monotropic theory? + 2 conditions?
”
Bowlby (1958, 1969) is monotropic because he focused on the care given by the main caring figure in the child’s life which he believed is more important than any other relationship. He had two conditons for this:
- The Law of Continuity states that the more constant and the more predictable the care for the child the better.
- The Law of Accumulation Seperation stated that the more seperation over time had an effect and therefore ‘the safest dose is a zero dose’.
“
What are social releasers?
”
He believed that babies were formed with a set of characteristics that made the parents give them more attention and defined these as social releasers. These social releasers would trigger the attachement between the child and the adult and would act as a reciprocal process.
”
What is the critical period?
”
The connection between child and adult attachment processes will strengthen this bond over time. This time period Bowlby called the critical period or a ‘sensative period’ which after the age of 2 ( if an attachment is not formed) will make it hard for the child to form relationships. ( Later Bowlby recognised this was not the be all and end all of attachment)
”
What is the internal working model?
”
The child, according to Bowlby forms a mental image of the relationship with their adult caregiver which he called the internal working model.This model will then form a model from which the child can work out how to form other relationships and therefore has large impact on future attachments. This can even extend to future parental sttachments when they have their own children.
”
What is the problem with mixed evidence for monotropy?
”
Mixed Evidence for Monotropy - Bowlby’s theory is not supported by Schaffer and Emerson’s (1964) as they found that most babies did form a single attachment but a significant minority was also able to form multiple attachments at the same time. It is also unclear as to whther the Primary attachment figure is unique in how it is developed. A study by Suess et al(1992) showed that the mother’s attachment was significantly more important than that of the father’s. However this may just have shown that it was stronger, not exactly of a different quality. Therefore it is still not clear whether monotropy is a valid architype for developing attachments.
”
What is a support for social releasers?
”
Support for Social Releasers - There is evidence given by Brazelton et al (1975) that the ‘cute’ motions of a baby are linked to initiating an important social interaction. In this study they were able to observe interactional synchrony and then extended these observations into an experiment. Here primary carers were asked to not repond to the social releasers which lead to the baby feeling distress and then falling motionless. Therefore the strength of this response support’s Bowlby’s ideas about the significance of infant soicial behaviour and elicit caregiving.
”
What is the support for the IWM?
”
Support for Internal Working Models - With the IWM being testable this allows a prediction of patterns to be passed through generations. Bailey et al (2007) assessed 99 mothers and their attachment to their 1 year old babies using a standard interview procedure as well as observation. Those who stated they had poor relationships with their parents were more likely to be classed as having a poor attachment to their own child in observation. Therefore this shows that the IWM is passed through generations, forming the model for these future parental relationships.
”
How is monotropy a socially sensatice issue?
”
Monotropy is a Socially Sensative Idea - This theory could and does have a major effect on how mother’s choose to live when their child is in its early stages of development and attachment. Feminists such as Erica Burman have pointed out that this places a burden on mothers and sets them up to take the blame if their child has difficulty in later life. bowlby stated this was not his intention - he only wanted to emphasise the importance of the maternal role. Therefore, despite not being a direct attack, Bowlby’s theory could have unethical repercussions.
”
How may temperment be just as important?
”
Temperament may be as Important as Attachment - Kagan (1982) found that some children were more social or anxious, for example, due to their genetic make-up. This goes against Bowlby’s idea that attachment is key to a child’s social development. Therefore this research limits Bowlby’s explanation for attachment with these researchers accusing him of overemphasising the early stages in life.
”
How can the role differ?
”
- Not likely to be the primary caregiver
This can be supported by Schaffer and Emmerson - found that in the first 7 months children formed their main attahcments and saw that for only 3% of the children had this primar attachment to the father figure. 27% were found to share this first atatchment figure role. But by 18 months this had changed to an equal attachment between both carers as the father became the secondary attachment figure (proved by seperation protest when left the room).
Temporal validity is therefore a problem with this, at the time Glasgow benefitted form working with oil which menat that fathers were spending a lot more time away form their children.
”
How do we define the ‘father’ figure?
”
There does not need ot be a biological link. It is just the main male figure providing care in the child’s life. This definition can aslo be challenged by cultural norms of the time as this can shift (temporal validity) for example in the recent pandemic many fathers have been spending more time caring for their children.
”
What other role can the fathers fill (stduy)?
”
Grossman et al (2002) looked at the attachment of fathers ot their children up till they were teenagers. They found that there wa no significant effect on the other relationships that the child formed later on due to the father’s role in the relationship. Therefore they are no tpart of the IWM like the mothers.
”
What other role can the fathers fill?
”
- Foung that the father effected the interpersonal skills of the child (as adolecents)
- They determined that the fathers filled the role of the ‘primary socialiser’which the effect of is not seen until later on.
But this restricts the potential to have a ‘primary scoialiser’ within a single parenting or a lesbian environment. This sticks to the heterosexual norms that were formed as sociaetal norms. It then suggests that a lack of this influence will have a negative effect on the child. McCallum and Golombock (2004)’s research showed that children with thesse parenting methods do not have negative effects.Therefore Grossman’s theory overstates the importance of the ‘primary socialisier’ being the father.
And yet lesbian couples tend to take on a paternal-like role and a maternal role. This goes against M&G and shows how it is how the role is carried out rather than the gender that is performing that role. Therefore this is a limitation of M&G’s criticism.
”
What is the study by Tiffany Feilds?
”
In 1978 there was a study that used a method of emotional reactions when having 4 month year old children sit face to face with carer figures.
- Mothers who were the primary caregiver.
- Fathers who were the primary caregivers.
- Fathers who were the secondary caregivers.
Group 1 & 2 spent more time interacting and imitating each other demonstrating interactional synchrony and reciprocity.
Males have the same ability to be the primary caregiver as women however it did show that babies will only act in this way when a female figure is not there to care in the place of the father. Both tend to express similar levels of emotions.
THis is supported by the practivality of reassuring families with male caregivers in real life. It is effective practivle application.
However this form of research can be seen as steryotyping the heteronormative roles of males and females. Due to the study taking place in the first place it implies this bias is present.
”
What was BF Skinner’s reasoning behind Operant conditoning?
”
BF Skinner realised that people and animals can both learn though the same process, reinforcement or punishment, which he called operant conditioning.
If they carry out an action and are reward in some way ( positive reinforcement) or avoid something unpleasant ( negative reinforcement) then you will repeat it in the future.
If you are punished or the reinforcement stop happening, you will stop doing the behaviour.
”
What are the three key terms for opperant conditioning?
”
Positive Reinforcement - receiving something nice for doing an action.
Negative Reinforcement - avoiding something unpleasant for doing an action
Punishment – getting punished for doing something. When we receive something pleasant or avoid something unpleasant we find it rewarding and so repeat the action. When an action leads to something unpleasant we don’t repeat it.
”
Draw out application diagram of operant conditioning?
” ”
Explain the presence of operant conditioning in the carer-relationship?
”
- Baby wants the comfort of their dummie and therefore decides to cry in order to recieve it.
- Care giver will then come to the child’s aid and attempt to fullfill whatever they need so they will stop crying ( in this case the dummie) which the baby will experience as a reward for its crying that will go on to reinforce thier actions.
- Parents will begin to become the secondary reinforcer in the relationship between themselves and their child and so when the parent is present the child will be experiencing this form of reward.
- This will increase the connection between caregiver and the child as it is rewarding for each of them to be around each other ( The baby wont cry for the parent and does social releasers/ the baby gets to have its needs met)
“
Explain classical conditoning through Pavlov’s dogs?
”
Carried out experiments on dogs and realised that the saliva would appeare spontaniously when food was present (he called this a salivation response. However over time the dogs began to anticipate the food and salivate before. After this happened he introduced a barrier and after that added the sound of the metranome to the time when it would be fed so that over time the dog would begin to salavate at the sound even if meat wasn’t present (the conditioned reflex).
”
What is the process of classical conditioning?
”
By presenting an unconditioned stimulus with a neutral stimulus, ou can condition someone to give an unconditioned response to both stimulus because the association has been formed. The neutral stimulus has now become a conditioned stimulus.
”
Explain the role of classical conditioning in the carer-child relationship?
”
Food = Unconditoned Stimulus →
Baby Feels Pleasure = Unconditioned Response
Mother = Neutral Stimulus→Food =Unconditioned Stimulus →
Baby = Unconditioned Response
Mother = Conditioned Stimulus as Assosiation Forms →
Baby = Conditoned Response
”
What is a support of behaviourist theories in general?
”
We Can See it Happening - As with all behaviourist theories it is easy to observe the babies as they form this attachment which the learning theory has suggested. Therefore this makes it highly reliable as it is easy for other’s to replicate and verify with simple empirical measures being effortless to observe.
”
What is a support for Pavlov’s dogs?
”
Pavlov’s Dogs - This study found this initial link between assosiations being formed when a neutral stimulus is present with an unconditioned stimulus. This proves how the baby forms this assosiation in this way under a controlled environment. Therefore this justifies the reliabilility and validity of this experiment.
”
A new explanation using Learning Theory?
”
Hay and Vespo (1988) proposed a new form of learning theory call social learning theory. This states that social behaviour is aquired through modelling, eg. when a parent hugs their child, they are demonstrating a form of attachment that their children then mimick. Copying these attachment ‘models’ will also be reinforced by the positive association of the experience it gives others around them. Therefore Learnign Theory may be limited in its original form, but new understandings can bring the prominence its validity to be questioned once again.
”
Lack of inter-rater reliability?
”
This theory is rejected when it comes to Lorenz’s Geese and Harlow’s Monkey Study. Therefore there is a lack of support due to the number of alternative theories that could provide us with a alternate explanations and possibly show how it is not the whole cause of these attachments with other factors being present.
”
Counter Evidence from Animal Research?
”
There has been a large amount of evidence to show that animals do not imprint upon the animals that feed them. Lorenz’s geese imprinted before they were fed and did not change their primary attachment figure when fed by another. Harlow’s monkey study also proved otherwise when the rhesus monkeys were shown to favour the cloth monkey over the wire monkey, despite the wire mother being the source of food. Therefore this theory is countered by a mass of animal research, limiting its validity as an explanation for attachment.
”
Counter Evidence from Human Research?
”
There has also been research carried out with infants that concluded food to not be an important factor in attachment. For example in Schaffer and Emerson’s study there was still a primary attachment to the mother depite other’s feeding the child more consistently. Therefore this study is further limited for making food and important link for the development of attachment, this could be seen as even more damning than the animal evidence, which some may have argued is ungeneralisable to humans.
”
Ignoring other factors?
”
Unlike learning theory, other factors such as reciprosity and good levels of interactional synchrony have been linked as key to the development of attachments. This is explored in the study by Issabella et al (1989). When a caregiver is sensative to a baby’s needs they are more likely to respond appropriately which will then cause attachment. Learning theory simpy cannot account for these more complex processes that would not be relied upon to form attachments if it was merely developed by feeding. Therefore learning theory is limited by its innability to take into account other mportant factors leading to attachment.
”
How is attachment developed at an early age?
”
From an early age babies have meaningful social interactions. These interactions are believed to be the foundations for a child’s social development and the development of carer to child attachment.
”
What is the problem with observing children?
”
Hard to recognise the expressions of a child - They cannot tell us what they are thinking so how can we be sure we have concluded acurately. Therefore this limits the validity of these experiments and studies.
”
Parent as the attachment figure…
”
Parent – infant attachment figures. Schaffer and Emmerson (1964) found that children tend to form their first “primary attachment to their mothers within 7 months, and 75% had formed a secondary attachment to their father by 18th months.
”
What is the IWM?
”
An inner working model acts as a template for all future realtionships and is said to be developed in early childhood from the likes of the primary caregiver.
Good experience (love, care) = more liekly to seek a functional relaitonship and behave functionally.
Bad experience = More likely to struggle forming realtionships, and if they do they often act or are dysfunctional ones.
”
How can this effect relationships in later childhood? (Ainsworth)
”
An assessed attachment type can determine the quality of peer relaitonships in later childhood.
Kerns (1994):
Secure attachment = best formed relationships
Insecure attachment = difficulties
Myron-Wilson and Smith(1998) assesed using questionaires how bullying types can be linked to attachment type with196 children ages 7-11 in London. They found insecure-avoidant were likely to be the victims of insecure-resistant.
”
How can this effect relationships in adulthood (later)? (Ainsworth)
”
McCarthy (1999) looked at platonic and romantic attachments of 40 adult women who had previously been assessed as infants. Securely attached children had the best adult relationships. Whereas Insecure -resistant children had problems maintaining friendships later on while avoidant stuggles with intimacy in relationships.
”
What was the procedure for H&S(1999)’s study?
”
Hazen and Shaver (1987) - ‘Love Quiz’
- Assed 620 replies to the love quiz that was put out in a local AMerican newspaper
- Looked at current an most important relationship, general love experiences and attachment types
“
What were the findings?
”
- 56% = securely attached (good relationships)
- 25% insecure -avoidant (jealous + fear of intimacy)
- 19% insecure-resistant
This shows that the attachment patterns are reflected in relationships.
”
How are relationships in adulthood as a parent effected?
”
People base their parenting style on their IWM. Refer back to BAiley et al (2007) who compared 99 mothers to their own mothers when it came to parenting styles. They found that the most had the same attachment to their babies as to their mothers. (using interviews and TSS)
However culture can effect these pracctices.
Can also apply Harlow (but not human so limited). Mother born without a maternal figure were not effective parents.
”
There is mixed evidence on the continuity of a attachment…
”
The IWM assumes that the attachment type remains constant in characterising their future relationships. However the evidence swings both ways with McCarthy seeming to support this theory while Zimmerman (2000) found that the difference between infant and adolencent attachment behaviour to be very small, in relaiton to their parents. Therefore this limits the explanation as we would expect to see the IWM being key to development.
”
How do the studies have issues with validity?
”
The method in which these attachment studies are carried out may be invalid. Most studies of satachment do not use TSS but instead use interviews or questionaires years later than infancy. Therefore the answers tend to depend on the individual’s memory being accurate, as well as honest and unbiased. This is hard to achieve when soem p/pants may go agains these even unconciously. This then lacks the validity it needs as it cannot rely upon accurate recollections being constant.
”
How are association and causality distinct in this case?
”
There are many cases that provide alternative explanations for continuity. For example the child’s temperment or the parenting style may influence the infant attachment type as well as later relationships. Therefore Bowlby’s theory is counteracted as the IWM is either an incorrect explanation or not the only causal demonstration for continuity between infant and later relationships.
”
How is the influence probablistic?
”
Although it is very likely that early attachment types play a role in later relationships, researchers such as Bowlby have possibly exaggerated its effects. Clarke and Clarke (1998) instead describe the relationship betweent the two factors as probablistic. It is not a predetermined state because of attachment types, it is insted just a factor that has become more likely to occur. Therefore the absolutist nature of this theory can be questioned, as well as whether it is ethically wrong to asume this level of pessimism around people’s futures.
”
How can the IWM being unconcious be a problem?
”
Because the IWM is unconcious it makes it imposssible for us to be actively aware of its influence in our lives. Researchers cannot gain evidence from p/pants through questionaires because they themselves know nothing of their own model, the results they gather are merely guess work by the individual. This is known as self-reporting and therefore demonstrated that this theory is limited by its tendency to rely upon the concious testimony of uncouncious factors.
”
What was the data from the Ijzendoorn and kroonenberg study
Bailey grid work
What are the seven situations that take place in the playroom and what do they test?
