attachment Flashcards
Bowlby’s evolutionary theory.
Attachment evolved as it increases survival.
Short term survival.
Attachment results in a desire to maintain proximity & leads to anxiety on separation. This ensures that the infant is provided with food, protection & safety.
Long term survival.
Early attachments influence emotional development via Internal working model:
This provides template for future relationships. Attachment also provides a secure base for exploration which is important for cognitive development.
social releasers.
Theory suggests a role of social releasers such as crying & smiling to cement bond which ensures adult responds to child (& child will survive).
Monotropy hypothesis.
One attachment relationship most important. This will be the primary attachment figure (who forms the basis on the internal working model).
critical period
The time frame in which an attachment usually occurs. If attachment fails to form within the critical period it cannot readily form.
Critical period for humans: Attachment must form before 2.5 years otherwise there will be long term damage.
AO3 - love quiz
Ps who were Secure in childhood rated their adult love experiences as happy & trusting & their relationships lasted longer than insecure types (10 years compared to 5 or 6 years). Ps who were Resistant in childhood experienced obsession, emotional highs & lows and extreme attraction & jealousy in their adult relationships. They worried that their partners would abandon them. Ps who were Avoidant in childhood typically feared intimacy in romantic relationships and they believed that they did not need love to be happy.
criticism for the love quiz
Love quiz data is retrospective. This means Ps have to think back many years to their childhood or many months to their last relationship. Consequently, their memories may not be accurate. Ps might also be effected by social desirability bias, Questions about relationships & childhood are very sensitive so Ps may change their answers to be seen in the best light. Sample bias: Ps were volunteers so it is likely that only people who are happy in their relationships will apply. This means that results may lack population validity and may not generalise to other people. As there are problems with the Love Quiz which we have been using to support the Internal Working Model, it suggest that the idea of the IWM & indeed evolutionary theory may in itself be flawed
AO3 for Monotropy Hypothesis - efe tribe
Support from Efe tribe (Zaire) for monotropy hypothesis:
Tribe members live in extended family groups, babies breast-fed by different women but sleep with mother at night. By the age of 6 months infants show preference for the mother who is the primary attachment figure. This supports the idea of monotropy theory with the mother being the primary caregiver
AO3 for Monotropy Hypothesis
But maybe different relationships fulfil different needs. Fathers may be more playful & provide more challenging situations for the child.
Therefore, the role of the father is also very important. This refutes (goes against) monotropy hypothesis.
AO3 Criticism of monotropy theory
Another problem with the monotropy theory is that the critical period is not so absolute as children who are adopted after critical period CAN form attachments. Therefore 2 ½ years should be seen as a sensitive period in which it would be best for the attachment to form
Procedure of cross - culture strange situation.
Used a meta-analysis. Looked at various databases to find studies that used the strange situation to assess attachment type. Studies were excluded if they included special groups e.g. Down syndrome or twins. Studies excluded if they had fewer than 35 infants. Examined data from 2000 strange situations from 32 studies in 8 countries.
findings of cross - culture strange situation.
Secure attachment most common in all countries. Avoidant was the next most common (particularly common in Germany 35%) in all countries except Japan and Israel. In Japan 27% & Israel 29% resistant was next most common. Therefore little variation between cultures. However, they did find variation within a culture was 1.5 times as much than between cultures
Why do you think attachment is similar across cultures?
One strength of cross-cultural studies is that it highlights the universal nature of attachment. The fact that findings were similar worldwide suggests attachment is innate (inherited). Alternatively, it could be argued that such similarities are due to the influence of mass media on parenting styles (as the study suggests).
What do you think is the difference between the terms countries and cultures?
The meta-analysis compared countries without considering the different sub-cultures within a country. It was found that the variation of attachment within cultures is 1.5 times greater than between cultures. Therefore, there is a danger of exaggerating differences between countries and minimising differences within a country (as the different sub-cultures are not considered when interpreting the results). This is a problem because different countries are not the same as different cultures: some studies were on rural groups others urban therefore data was actually collected from different subcultures E.g. the Israeli Ps lived on a kibbutz. This would be a very different experience to living in Tel Aviv! Therefore, the differences in attachment that may exist WITHIN Israel have not been considered.
Why is there a problem with imposed etic?
SS may be an invalid measuring tool. The use of a technique developed in one culture to study another is known as an imposed etic. There is danger that the US is considered the norm and other cultures that are different are considered abnormal. In fact the measuring tool is invalid. E.g. Japan, Israel, Germany
There were 36 Ps in the Chinese study. Why is this a problem?
In some countries sample sizes were too small to make safe generalisations. E.g. only 36 Chinese infants were observed & China has a population of over I.3 billion!
Are there any other methodological problems with this meta-analysis?
Half of the studies were carried out in USA. This means the results are likely to be biased and not representative of all cultures. The meta-analysis included studies that had used the strange situation to measure attachment types. However, there are concerns that the SS lacks internal validity.
Ao3: Reasons for different attachments
Germany: More avoidant. German culture = keeping distance with children & encouraging independence.
Israel: More resistant, less avoidant. Children in the sample were raised on a kibbutz = used to separation from mother but not used to strangers. (But only 5% of Israelis live on a kibbutz)
Japan: More resistant, less avoidant. Mothers rarely leave infants therefore not used to separation.
stranger situation procedure
100 middle class American infants & mothers. Placed in a room with toys. Observed through a one way mirror. Seven 3-minute episodes in which child is in the room with mother, child is left with a stranger or child is left alone. The following behaviours are observed: Separation anxiety (reaction when mother leaves), Willingness to explore (does child play with toys?), Stranger anxiety (how does the child react to the stranger?), and Reunion behaviour (how does the child react when the mother returns?).
stranger situation results.
3 types of attachment
Type A: Avoidant (22%): Infant not concerned by mother’s absence, avoids contact on reunion. Doesn’t prefer mother to stranger
Type B: Securely Attached (66%) Infant explores room, upset when mother leaves, easily comforted on return. Prefers mother to stranger
Type C: Resistant / Ambivalent (12%)
Explores little, wary of stranger. Very upset when mother leaves but angry on her return. Seeks & rejects contact.
ss - AO3: Strengths - Reliability
Test-retest Reliability:
Most children stay in same category of attachment. German study: 78% stayed in same category aged 1 & 6. Any change in attachment was usually due to change in family structure.
Inter observer reliability: Like many observations, the SS was recorded.
Ainsworth recommended that all SSs be recorded so that it could be re-watched by different people to check for reliability.
SS - AO3: Criticisms – population validity
All middle class American families therefore findings may not generalise to other social classes and other cultures. The original study was also ethnocentric as all Ps were American. This means that findings may not generalise to other cultures. In fact the use of a measuring tool (strange situation) developed in one culture may not be suitable for studying other cultures. Eg The strange situation found many German children to be avoidant. This is not actually true as German children are brought up to be more independent so interact less with their mother in the SS! This problem is known as Imposed Etic.
SS - Ethical Issues
No protection from psychological harm. Some babies (secure & resistant) are seen to get upset in the Strange Situation. This is also upsetting for the mother. Mothers may also feel uncomfortable or embarrassed if their child is rated as insecure.