Attachment Flashcards
What is the 1978 Baltimore study conducted by Mary Ainsworth?
-> performed a similar study in Baltimore, USA -> visiting 26 mother-child pairs every 3-4 weeks for the babies first year of life
-> each visit lasted 3-4 hrs -> interviews and naturalistic observations
-> two features of attachment -> adaptive survival value -> infants seek proximity to their mothers -> when feeling threatened
-> secure attachments -> allow infants to explore -> behaviour that aids cognitive and social development -> using their attached figure as a safe base
What are the aims of the classical research conducted by Ainsworth?
-> Strange Situation -> make sense of the data Ainsworth had collected -> create a valid method of measuring attachments
-> asses how infants -> 9 and 18 months of age behave under conditions of mild stress and novelty -> in order to test stranger anxiety, separation anxiety and the secure base concept
-> individual differences -> mother infant pairs -> in terms of quality of their attachments
What is the procedure conducted by Ainsworth’s Strange Situation?
-> The SS -> comprised of 8 episodes -> one episode lasted 30 seconds
-> every aspect of participants behaviour was observed and videotaped -> most attention given to the reunion behaviours -> the infants responses to their mothers return -> data combined from several studies -> altogether 106 infants were observed
-> testing environment = unfamiliar -> comprising of 81 square foot -> approx. 7.5 meters area divided into 16 squares to help record movements
-> five categories were recorded: Proximity and Contact seeking behaviours, Contact maintaining behaviours, Proximity and Interaction avoiding behaviours, Contact and Interaction resisting behaviours and search behaviours
-> every 15 seconds -> category of behaviour displayed was recorded -> scored on a intensity scale of 1 to 7
What are the findings of Ainsworths Strange Situation?
-> infants explored the playroom and toys more enthusiastically-> just when the mother was present -> rather than after the stranger entered or when the mother was absent
-> reunion behaviours reflected three types of attachments :
-> type A -> insecure avoidant -> 15% infants ignored their mother + indifferent to their presence -> level of play wasn’t affected whether by the mothers absence or presence -> displayed little stress when she left -> ignored or avoided her when she returned -> reacted to the mother and stranger in similar ways -> most distress when left on their own
-> type B -> securely attached -> 70% played with content -> mother was present -> whether or not a stranger was present -> distressed when she left -> on return sought comfort from her -> calmed down and re-started to play -> mother and stranger were treated very differently
What are the findings/conclusions of the classical research conducted by Ainsworth?
Type C-> insecure resistant -> 15% infants were fussy and wary -> even with their mother present -> distressed by her leaving and sought contact with her on her return -> simultaneously showed anger and resisted contact -> for instance -> putting out their arms to be picked up -> fighting to get away once they had been picked up
-> sensitive responsiveness —> major factor —> determining quality of attachments ——> sensitive mothers interpret infants signals and respond appropriately to their needs
-> sensitive mothers = securely attached babies
-> insecurely attached babies = insecure mothers
What are the brief evaluation points for Ainsworth’s Classical study of the Strange Situation?
-> The Strange Situation -> become a paradigm -> the accepted method of assessing attachments
-> SS assumes that attachment types are fixed characteristics of children -> classification can change -> family circumstances like mother’s stress levels alter -> attachment type is not a permanent characteristic
-> The SS -> artificial way of assessing attachment -> lab based with ‘mother’ and ‘stranger’ acting to a script -> far removed from everyday situations and lacks ecological validity
-> this can be supported by research conducted by Brofenbrenner -> found that infants attachment behaviour is much stronger in a lab than at home -> because of the strangeness of the environment
-> The SS focuses too much on the behaviour of infants -> not enough of that on the mothers -> can distort results
-> The SS has some ethical issues -> deliberately stresses infants to see their reactions -> but on the other hand it can be seen as justifiable -> as the stress caused is no greater than that of everyday experiences like being left with a unfamiliar babysitter or childminder
-> Research conducted by Main and Weston —> children acted differently in the strange situation dependant on which parent they were with
-> children = insecurely attached -> mothers
-> children = securely attached to their fathers -> demonstrating that attachment types are linked to individual relationships with carers-> not set characteristics of children
-> suggesting that the SS might not be a valid measure of attachment types -> The SS is reliable though -> children tested at different times -> generally have identical attachment types
-> Main et al -> all infants identified before the age of 18 months -> still securely attached at six years of age and 75% identified as insecurely attached still were
-> Main and Solomon -> found an additional attachment type -> insecure disorganised-> displayed by a small number of children -> whose behaviour was a confusing mixture of approach and avoidance behaviours -> Ainsworth and Main worked together -> A agrees
-> cultural limitations may not be appropriate for all cultures
What are the aims of the classical research conducted by Marinus Van Ijzendoorn and Pieter Kroonenberg?
-> these studies had consisted of small samples -> didn’t consider intra-cultural differences against inter cultural differences (whether differences between cultures are greater than those within cultures) -> perform a meta analysis of the SS studies in different cultures
-> assess whether within separate samples there was a pattern in the distribution of different attachment types
-> assess the extent of inter (between) and intra (within) cultural differences in attachment types in separate samples
-> asses similarities and differences in the amount of Type A,B and C attachment types in separate samples
What are the conclusions?
-> data suggests there is a difference in the pattern of cross cultural attachment types across cultures
-> intra is often greater than inter
-> similar to what Ainsworth found
-> cross cultural similarity-> predominance of Type B attachment in all cultures
What is the procedure for the cross cultural patterns of attachment research?
-> meta analysis from 32 countries -> strange situation procedure to assess mother-child attachments -> classified attachment as either Type A,B or C.
->1,990 separate strange situation classifications were used
-> all studies -> 35 mother infant pairs with infants below 2 years of age
-> overall attachment drawn from all mother - infant pairs -> type A -> 21%, type B -> 67% and Type C -> 12%
-> highest proportion of Type A attachment -> insecure avoidant found in Germany
-> intra greater than inter -> one USA sample 94% -> in another 47% Type A attachments
-> Type A = western cultures -> Type C = was found more in Israel, China and Japan
