Attachment Flashcards
Attachment definition
Attachment = emotional bond between two individuals in which they see eachother as essential for their own emotional security
Behaviours involved with attachment
Behaviours involved with attachment:
-Proximity - people are distressed when an attachment figure leaves
-Seperation distress - people distressed when attachment figure leaves
-Secure base behaviour = explore the environment, but return to attachment figure for comfort
Why are human babies ‘atricial’?
Atricial - they are born at a relatively early stage of their development - they form bonds with adults who will protect an dnurture them
Why are animals ‘precocial’
Precocial animals - animals born at an advanced stage of development
Short term and long term benefits of attachment
Short term benefits of attachment: survival
Long term benefits of attachment: emotional relationships - it is believed that this first relationship between baby and parents act as a template for later relationships
Reciprocity of attachment
Reciprocity of attachment:
-Alert phases: signals that they are ready for interaction, mothers typically pick up on these alerts, however it is dependent on skill of mother and external factors eg stress
-Active involvement - babies are more active than passive
What did Brazelton et al (1975) state about reciprocity?
Interactions between mother and child are like a dance - where they respond to eachother
Interactional synchrony
Interactional synchrony = ‘the temporal co-ordination of micro-level social behaviours’ (Feldman 2007) - when two people interact and tend to mirror each other in terms of facial expressions, body movements, imitating emotions and behaviours
Meltzoff and Moore (1977) experiment
Meltzoff and Moore (1977) experiment:
-Conducted the first systematic study of interactional synchrony - found that infants as young as two to three weeks old imitated specific hand gestures
-Study was conducted using an adult model who displayed one of three facial expressions or hand movement where the fingers moved in a sequence
-A dummy was placed in the infant’s mouth during the initial display to prevent any response
-Following the display, the dummy was removed and the child’s expression was filmed
-They found that there was an association between the infant behaviour and that of the adult model
Why is it difficult to test infant behaviour in attachment experiments?
It is difficult to test infant behaviour in experiments eg Meltzoff and Moore experiment -> as infants mouth constantly moving therefore difficult to distinguish between general activity and specific imitated behaviours -> low internal validity due to uncertainty wether what is being recorded is interactional synchrony or just natural movement
AO3 evaluation of involvement of reciprocity and interactional synchrony
AO3 evaluation of involvement of reciprocity and interactional synchrony:
- = Observations don’t tell us the purpose of synchrony and reciprocity
- = It is difficult to test infant behaviour
- = Caregiver-infant interactions is not found in all cultures
-/+ = Research into care-giver interaection is usually conducted within a labatory setting
Stage 1 (of attachment) - Asocial stage
Stage 1 (of attachment) - Asocial stage :
-First few weeks of birth
-Baby recognises and forms bonds with carers
-Baby’s behavior towards non-human objects and humans is quite similar
-Babies show preference for familiar adults in that those individuals find it easier to calm them
-Babies happier when in the presence of other humans
Who proposed the stages of attachment?
Shaffer and Merson proposed the 4 stages of attachment
Stage 2 of attachment - indiscriminate attachment
Stage 2 of attachment - indiscriminate attachment:
-2-7 months
-Preference for people than inanimate objects
-Recognise and prefer familiar adults
-Usually accepts cuddles and comfort from any adult
-Don’t show separation anxiety or stranger anxiety
Stage 3 of attachment - specific attachment
Stage 3 of attachment - specific attachment:
-From 7 months
-Anxiety towards strangers
-Separation anxiety when separated from specific attachment
-Specific attachment = primary attachment figure
-This is the person who offers the most interaction and responds to the signals the most
Stage 4 of attachment - multiple attachments
Stage 4 of attachment - multiple attachments:
-Babies soon start to show attachment to more than one adult
-Adults who they regularly spend time with
-These are secondary attachments
-These form quite quickly after specific attachment (29% had one within one month)
-By the age of 1, most infants had multiple attachments
AO3 of the 4 stages of attachment
AO3 of the 4 stages of attachment:
- = Problems studying the asocial stage - as babies are difficult to study at this stage as they don’t move/talk
- = Conflicting evidence on multiple attachments - Bowlby believed in monotropy wheras Van Ijzendoorn believed babies have multiple attachments
- = Measuring multiple attachments - baby gSetting distressed may not be due to absence of person they are attached to
- = Measurement issues - stranger and separation anxiety are crude measures of attachment
Difference between caregiver and attachment figure
-Primary caregiver: person who spends most time with a baby
-Primary attachment figure - the person to whom the baby has the strongest attachment
Shafferson and Merson (1964) attachment experiment procedure
Shafferson and Merson (1964) attachment experiment procedure:
-60 babies from Glasgow, from working-class families
-Researches visited the babies and mothers at home every month for a year and again at 18 months
-Seperation anxiety: measured by asking mothers about their children’s behaviour during everyday seperations eg mother leaving the room
-Stranger anxiety also measured by asking mothers questions about their children’s anxiety response to unfamiliar adults
Findings and conclusions of Shafferson and Emerson (1964) attachment experiment
Findings and conclusions of Shafferson and Emerson (1964) attachment experiment:
-Babies developed attachments through a sequence of stages, from asocial through to a specific attachment to multiple attachments
-The specific attachment tended to be the person who was most interactive and sensitive to babies’ signals and facial expressions - not necessarily who the baby spent the most time with
Strengths of Schaffer and Emerson’s study into attachment
Strengths of Schaffer and Emerson’s study into attachment:
+ = Has external validity -> most observations (not serperation anxiety) were made by parents during ordinary activities and reported to researchers -> alternative would’ve been for reasearchers to oberserve in the homes which may have changed the babies behaviour -> means it is highly likely they behaved how they normally would
+ = Real-world application to day care -> in early stages (Asocial and indiscriminate attachments) babies can be comforted by any skilled adult -> but if child starts day care at later stage, unfamiliar adults may cause distress -> means Schaffer and Emerson’s stages can help parents making day care decisions
Two limitations of Schaffer and Emmerson’s attachment experiment
Two limitations of Schaffer and Emmerson’s attachment experiment:
- = Poor evidence for asocial stage -> because of eraly stage of physical development babies have poor co-ordination and mobility -> makes it difficult for mothers to accurately report signs of anxiety and attachment for this age group -> means babies might actually be quite social but appear asocial due to flawed methods
- = Based stages on a single but large-scale study of babies development in glasgow -> however child-rearing practises depend on cultural and historical context -> means observations madecannot be generalised
Positives of using behavioural categories in observational studies
Positives of using behavioural categories in observational studies:
-Categories provide clear focus to the researcher
-Categories enables proposal of a testable hypothesis
-Categories allow for more objective recording
-Use of categories should result in greater reliability
-Categories provide data that is easier to quantify/analyse
-Tallies or ticks and crosses can be used to mark when a behaviour is displayed which can then be compared
Who conducted the 1935 gosling animal study into attachment?
Lorenz conducted the 1935 gosling animal study into attachment
Conclusions of Harlow’s monkey attachment experiment
Conclusions of Harlow’s monkey attachment experiment:
Importance of contact comfort- infant monkeys
prefer a soft toy mother to a wire one, regardless
of which produces milk
Maternal deprivation- Monkeys brought up
without a mother were dysfunctional as adults
Critical period- monkeys has around 90 days to
attach to a mother figure or they could not form
an attachment
Aim of 1958 Harlow monkey experiment
To investigate which of the two alternatives would have more attachment behaviours directed towards it.
Harlow 1958 monkey experiment procedure
Harlow 1958 monkey experiment procedure:
Harlow conducted research with 8 rhesus monkeys which were caged from infancy with wire mesh food dispensing and cloth-covered surrogate mothers
-Harlow measured the amount time that monkeys spent with each surrogate mother and the amount time that they cried for their biological mother.
Harlow 1958 monkey experiment findings
Harlow 1958 monkey experiment findings:
-Harlow’s findings revealed that separated infant monkeys would show attachment behaviours towards a cloth-covered surrogate mother when frightened, rather than a food-dispensing surrogate mother.
-Monkeys were willing to explore a room full of novel toys when the cloth-covered monkey was present but displayed phobic responses when only the food-dispensing surrogate was present.
-Furthermore, Harlow reviewed infant monkeys that were reared in a social (non-isolated) environment and observed that these monkeys went on to develop into healthy adults, while the monkeys in isolation with the surrogate mothers all displayed dysfunctional adult behaviour
EEvaluation of Harlow’s 1958 monkey experiment
Evaluation of Harlow’s 1958 monkey experiment:
+ = The fact that isolated monkeys displayed long-term dysfunctional behaviour illustrates, once more, that early attachment experiences predict long-term social development.
+ = Human and monkeys are similar(on a biological level)
+ = Important practical application -> found implications of childcare
- = Unethical research -> animals have a right not to be researched/harmed
- = Results cannot be fully generalised to humans as not reflective of emotional connections and interactions that characterises human attachment
What is the learning theory?
The learning theory suggests that people behave in certain ways because they have learned to do so
“Cupboard love” idea
This proposes that attachments are formed when an infant receives food - they learn to ‘love’ the person who feeds them- this is the ‘cupboard love’ idea.
2 forms of learning (conditioning) as part of the learning theory of attachment
2 forms of learning attachments:
-Classical conditioning (learning through association)
-Operant conditioning (learning through rewards/punishment)
Operant conditioning + attachments
Operant conditioning - learning through rewards and punishment -> behaviour is hard-wired and repeated when we do something that results in a pleasant consequence (reinforcement
Positive reinforcer
Positive reinforcer = something that rewards behaviour
Negative reinforcer
Negative reinforcer = when a response switches off something unpleasant
Learning theory evaluation
Learning theory evaluation:
- = Harlow contradicts learning theory -> because it demonstrates that attachments are based on affection and comfort rather than just food
- = Schaffer and Emerson’s research -> showed that babies did not necessarily become attached to whoever fed them the most, rather, who spent time sensitively responding to them. This weakens the assumption of learning theory.
- = Learning theory only considers food as the driving force behind attachment formation and quality, not considering other factors such as sensitive responding and developing reciprocity. This makes the explanation over-simplistic.
- = the learning theory is highly reductionist in only looking at food as the main drive behind attachment
- = It could be said to be over-simplistic in ignoring reciprocity, sensitivity and innate qualities that may also be factors
Primary drive definition in attachment
Primary drive - something the infant needs, biologically, to survive, such as food
Secondary drive definition in attachment
A secondary drive is a stimulus that reinforces behaviour after it has been associated with the primary drive
Maternal deprivation definition as stated by Bowlby
Maternal deprivation: emotional and intellectual consequences of seperation between a child and their mother/mother subsitution
-He proposed that continuous care from a mother is essential for normal psychological development - prolonged seperation causes serious damage to development
Maternal deprivation effect on emotional development
Maternal deprivation effect on emotional development: ‘Affectionless psychopathy’ - inability to experience guilt or strong emotion for others - prevents the individual from forming normal relationships and is associated with criminality as they fail to empathise with victims and lack remorse
Effects of maternal deprivation
Effects of maternal deprivation =
-Emotional development decrease
-Intellectual development decrease
-Anaclictic depression (appetite loss, sleeplessness, impaired social and intellectual development
-Dwarfism - physical underdevelopment
Aim of Bowlby’s 44 thieves case study on maternal deprivation
Aim: to investigate the relationship between maternal deprivation and affectionless psychopathy
Procedure of Bowlby’s 44 thieves case study on maternal deprivation
Procedure: Opportunistic sample of 88 children, on group of 44 juvenile thieves and other group who are not juveniles but had emotional problems, were interviewed to asses their social conscience and family history, control group not interviewed but history was examined
Findings of Bowlby’s 44 thieves case study on maternal deprivation
Findings: 14 of the 44 thieves identified as affectionless psychopaths (none from the control group), 12 of the 14 had experienced prolonged maternal separate before 5 years old, only 2 of the 44 in the control group had experienced prolonged early separation from their mother
Conclusion of Bowlby’s 44 thieves case study on maternal deprivation
Conclusion: early prolonged separation leads to a lack of emotional development leading to affectionless psychopathy, where individuals display a lack of concern for others, cannot admit guilt and are unable to form meaningful relationships
Bowlby’s 44 thieves case study on maternal deprivation evaluation
Bowlby evaluation:
+ = Practical application in real life -> greater stability in childcare practise, hospital visiting hours reviewed so children maintain contact with parents etc
- = Retrospective recall may be inaccurate -> responses may have been inaccurate as it would have been experienced years earlier
- = investigator effects as Bowlby self-reported -> researcher confirmation bias
- = Oversimplified concept
How do early relationships affect later development?
The quality of a child’s first attachment is crucial because it forms a template that affects the nature of future relationships
Hazen and Shaver (1987) aim and procedure
Aim: to investigate impact of early attachment on later life adult behaviour
Procedure: Posted in American newspaper with 620 replies, first assessed respondent current or most important relationship, second assessed general love experience, third assessment looked at attachment type, by choosing three statements that describe them
Hazen and Shaver (1987) Findings
Findings: 50% identified as secure, 25% insecure avoidant, 19% insecure resistant, secure had good longer lasting relationships, avoidant tend to reveal jealousy and fear of intimacy
Hazen and Shaver (1987) / internal working model of attachment evaluation
Hazen and Shaver (1987) / internal working model of attachment evaluation:
+ = securely attached infants were found to have positive, long lasting relationships whereas insecurely attached infants had higher divorce rates
- = cannot account for causality, environmental factors such as parenting styles need to be taken into account
- = retrospective data – data used for the studies relies on participants memories, high chance of inaccuracy
- = ethnocentric -> only americans
- = self reported so answers may have been changed to sound socially desirable
Who studied romanian orphans to see the effect of insitutionalism?
Rutter investigated in Romanian Orphanages (1998)
Rutter’s romanian orphan study procedure (1998)
Rutter’s romanian orphan study procedure (1998):
-Studied Romanian orphans aged 1-2 weeks old
-Longitudinal study using 100+ orphans – all adopted at different ages (58 before 6 months, 59 between 6-24 months, 48 adopted between 2-4 years)
Rutter’s romanian orphan study findings (1998)
Rutter’s romanian orphan study findings (1998):
-Those adopted by British families before 6 months showed normal emotional development compared to UK children adopted at the same age
-Majority adopted after 6 months showed a disinhibited attachment eg attention seeking, lack of stranger anxiety, inappropriate physical contact
-Mental retardation also present in the children upon entering England
Effects of insitutionalisation
Effects of institutionalisation:
-Disinhibited attachment – having multiple caregivers in an orphanage means they cannot form a secure attachment
-Mental retardation – significantly low intellectual capabilities
Rutter’s romanian orphan study evaluation
Rutter’s romanian orphan study evaluation:
+ = Real life application -> orphanages and children’s homes now avoid having large numbers of caregivers per child
+ = fever extraneous variables -> Romanian orphanages there from birth -> internal validity
- = Generalisability -> low -> as these particular orphans suffered severe poor emotional and intellectual stimulation that other orphanages may not have
- = potential long-term effects on the children
Mary Ainsworth strange situation study aim
Mary Ainsworth strange situation study aim:
To see how infants aged 9-18 months behave under coniditions of mild stress and also novelty
Mary Ainsworth strange situation study procedure
Mary Ainsworth strange situation study procedure:
-Controlled observation
–8 pre-determined stages:
Stage 1: mother and child enter the playroom
Stage 2: the child is encouraged to explore
Stage 3: stranger enters and attempts to interact
Stage 4: Mothers leave while the stranger is present
Stage 5: Mother enters and the stranger leaves
Stage 6: Mothers leaves
Stage 7: Stranger returns
Stage 8: Mother returns to interact with child and stranger leaves
Main behaviours observed in the Mary Ainsworth strange situation study
Main behaviours were observed: exploration behaviour, proximity seeking, stranger anxiety, separation anxiety, reunion behaviour
Behaviours displayed that affects security of attachments
Behaviours displayed that affects security of attachments:
-Proximity and contacting seeking
-Contact maintaining
-Avoidance of proximity and contact
-Resistance to contact and comforting
Mary Ainsworth strange situation findings
Mary Ainsworth strange situation findings:
-Identified three main attachment styles = secure, insecure avoidant and insecure resistant
Conclusion of Mary Ainsworth strange situation study
Conclusion of Mary Ainsworth strange situation study :
-Suggested the ‘caregiver sensitivity hypothesis’ to explain different attachment types -> depends on mother’s behaviour eg sensitivity levels
Mary Ainsworth strange study positive evaluations
Mary Ainsworth strange study positive evaluations:
+ = Other researchers around the world have found very similar to Ainsworth in terms of attachment types
+ = There is strong evidence for the impact attachment types have on later relationships: Bowlby’s Continuity Theory, Hazan and Shaver’s Love Quiz, and Sroufe’s study of institutionalised women are just a few
Mary Ainsworth Strange Situation study negative evaluation
Mary Ainsworth Strange Situation study negative evaluation:
- = Is it too reductionist to assume that the whole population fits into one of the three attachment styles
- = These infants often froze in the strange situation or displayed completely random behaviours that the existing categories from Ainsworth did not cover
- = Main categorised them as Type D: Disorganised and it was found that these were children who had suffered some form of abuse in early infancy - The fact that a 4th category was found some 16 years after the original raises issues about what else may have been missed
Van Ijzendoorn & Kroonenberg’s (1988) study
Van Ijzendoorn & Kroonenberg’s (1988) study:
-Meta-analysis of 8 countries, cultural variations of Ainsworth’s strange situation study - findings were consistent with Ainsworth
+ = Standardised methodology
- = Misleading findings as most were conducted in USA
- = Ethnocentric = behaviour is judged against an American Standard
What is an internal working model?
An internal working model is a mental representation of our relationship with our primary caregiver that becomes a template for future relationships
Proximity-seeking behaviour
Bowlby suggested that attachment is a vital adaptive quality that has evolved to increase the chance of survival through proximity-seeking behaviour
Bowlby monotropic theory evaluation
+ = monotropy universal -> supporting evidence -> Ainsworth Uganda study - infants from one primary attachment even when surrounded by multiple carers
- = monotropy importance overemphasised -> eg Van Ijzendoorn argued network of adults can provide better care than a single parent to meet all a child’s needs
Secure attachment
Secure attachment: infants happy to explore surroundings, distressed when PCG leaves, avoided stranger (stranger anxiety), happy on reunion with PCG
Insecure resistant attachment
Insecure resistant attachment:
-Did not explore surroundings
-Reluctant to leave PCG’s side
-Stranger anxiety
-Ignores PCG’s comfort when upset
Insecure avoidant attachment
Insecure avoidant attachment:
-Happy to explore but did not refer to PCG
-No signs of distress when PCG leaves
-No stranger anxiety
-Ignores PCG upon reunion to continue with what they are doing
What has research found about the role of the father?
What has research found about the role of the father? :
→ Grossman → fathers playstyle was based on his internal working model
→ Field → fathers tended to play more and hold the baby less based on videotapes, but it depended on wether they were primary or secondary caregiver
