Attachment Flashcards
Attachment
Emotional tie between two people usually mother and child. Relationship is reciprocated 2 way process
Behaviours
Seeking proximity
Separation anxiety
Joy on reunion
Used as a safe base
Learning theory - attachment
Babies learn to form attachment through nurture
Bowlbys theory of attachment
Monotropic theory evolutionary explanations. Infants have an innate drive to form attachments especially with mother and stay in close proximity- for survival.
5 monotropic theory
Adaptive
Social releases
Critical period
Monotropy
Internal working model
Adaptive
Learning behaviour reflects invincible social and practical needs to everyday
Social releases
Crying, smiling - attract caregivers attention - mothers biologically programmed to instinctively find these behaviours cute or distressing
Critical period
Specific time period which montropic attachment forms 30months after birth
Montropy
Initial attachment with one attachment figure main usually mother - lack of this causes social and intellectual consequences
Internal working model
Child’s montropic attachment to mother forms a schema/ blueprint for future relationships
+ practical applications
Applies to early childcare. Immediate physical contact between mother and baby for first few hours of birth is encouraged- allowing further research by Mary Ainsworth
+ Lorenz
Study in geese found geese imprinted with not him supporting biological and innate need to form an attachment within a specific time and now boy based his work on.
However these was on geese hard to generalise to humans
+ hazan and shavers
Early childhood affects adult relationship, support internal working model - born to form attachments as instinct same as adult partners- template for future
- Rutter et al
Romanian Orphans don’t form attachment during “critical period” founder why still could form attachments
- Schaffer and Emerson Bowblys theory
Babies attach to multiple people after primary attachment unclear whether the first attachment is more unique than others. - father role is hardly explained and shown as the “breadwinner”- reflecting 1940 values - outdated research - lacks temporal validity
Reciprocity
Mutual turn taking form of interaction both caregiver and infant contribute by responding to each others cues
Interactional synchrony
Simultaneous interaction between infant and caregiver who appear to be acting matching behaviour and imitates state
+ meltzoff and Moore
Interaction synchrony - Experimenter displayed facial expressions such as sticking tongue out to 12-21 days old infant found infants had the ability to observe and reciprocate through imitation
+condor and sander
Interactional synchrony - Videotaped interaction between adults and infants focusing on movements of infant in response to adult speech found interactional synchrony
Limitation- you can’t be certain that the action of infant had particular meaning misinterpreted not valid and subjective- unscientific inferences
+ no demand characteristics
The baby won’t know they’re being filmed so won’t change behaviour reducing data to be invalid and making findings more reliable
Stages of attachment
Schaffer
4 stages of attachment
Asocial - 0-2 months
Indiscriminate attachment- 2-7 months
Specific attachment - 7-9months
Multiple attachments - 9- 2 years +
Asocial
0-6 months
Displays innate behaviour crying and smiling ensure proximity to caregiver anyone can comfort them don’t have a preference
Indiscriminate attachment
2-7months infants able to tell difference between familiar and unfamiliar individuals, smiling more at people they are familiar to
Specific attachment
7-9 months babies form strong attachment to primary caregiver - mother often- separation anxiety and stranger anxiety develop
Multiple attachments
9-2years + infants start to form attachments with other caregivers - grandparents father and stranger anxiety decreases
+ Schaffer and Emerson observation
Longitudinal observation
60 w/c babies
separation anxiety occurred around 25 weeks with stranger anxiety.
18 month follow up 87% had developed multiple attachments.
Strongest with mother- caregiver infant interaction.
Development in stages quality of caregiver infant interaction can influence
Schaffer and Emerson evaluation
+ mundane realism - high validity
- data collected by observer - observer bias
- hard to generalise - temporal validity - only w/c mothers 1960 Glasgow
Role of the father research
Schaffer found 18months infant had formed attachment with father - separation anxiety
Active play
Father seen to engage in baby activities more consistently than mother - encouraging risk taking g behaviour
Primary caregiver in fathers
Men take on the role of primary caregiver there Interactional style changes to be more motherly increase capacity for sensitive responsiveness
+ Field
Fathers focused more on game playing than holding . Fathers showed more sensitively responsive behaviour similar to mothers
- Playmate role
Geiger found fathers play interaction were more exciting in comparison to mothers (more nurturing)
Mother takes role of nurturing
- social sensitive
Doesn’t consider the role of a single father and two fathers and bowls theory suggests that mother cannot be replaced lead to fathers feeling as though they can’t provide
Rutter
Multiple attachments - all being as important combines to form a child’s iwm blue print
Dolland and millers
Learning theory cupboard love infant become attached to their caregiver because they learn that their caregiver provides food
Classical conditioning
Food is unconditioned stimulus producing pleasure
Unconditioned response mother is presented every time the baby is fed mother associated with pleasure of being fed - change from neutral —> conditioned stimulus
Operant conditioning
Positive reinforcement - parents feeds a crying baby repeat crying behaviour for food
Negative reinforcement - baby stops crying behaviour when fed
Secondary drive
Attachment
Primary drive
Attachment leads to satisfying primary drive of : Hungry
- Harlow
Rejects cupboard love theory showing infant monkeys because attached to clothe mother that didn’t provide milk than wired monkey that provides milk when felt threatened
Ainsworth
Identify behaviours indicating attachment strength
Behaviours categories in attachment
Proximity to mother
Exploration/safe base
Stranger anxiety
Separation anxiety
Reunion on response
Sensitive responsiveness
Insecure avoidant
Infants explore freely - not using mother as safe base
Low levels of stranger anxiety + separation anxiety
Mothers - low sensitive responsiveness
Secure
Infants use safe base
Moderate level of stranger anxiety and separation anxiety shows
Caregiver shows sensitive responsiveness
Insecure resistant
Infants clingy
High stranger anxiety and separation anxiety
On mothers return infant seen as having mixed emotions both crave and reject
Mother inconsistent with sensitive responsiveness
Ainsworth procedure 1970s
Structured observation of infant and mother pairs in lab setting. Eight stages including mothers leaving the room and the stranger entering. Behaviour that indicated attachment strength were recorded
Ainsworth findings
Evidence for three distinct attachment types seemed to correlate with level of sensitive responsiveness shown by mother
Findings : secure
66%
Findings insecure
34% overall
Avoidant - 22%
Resistant - 12%
Ainsworth results
Secure attachment develop due to attention of a consistently sensitively responsive mother
Stages 1-3
Mother,infant, observer - observe introduce mother and infant to experimental room
Observer leaves
Mother and infant - mother passive while infant explore
Stranger comes back
Stranger mother and infant - stranger enters first silent then talking with mother
Stages 4-6
Mother leaves
Stranger infant - first separation from mother - separation anxiety - stranger anxiety
Mother comes back stranger leaves
Mother infant - first reunion - reunion response mother greets infant engage
Mother leaves says good bye
Infant alone - second separation episode - separation anxiety
Stage 7-8
Stranger returns
Stranger infant - stranger enters gears towards infant - stranger anxiety
Stranger leaves mother enters
Mother, infant - second reunion mother greets and picks up infant stranger leaves quietly
How was behaviours recorded in strange situation
Recorded every 15 seconds categories of behaviour displayed was record scored from 1-7
+ high control on variables
Lab experiment clear behavioural categories
Standardisation - precise replication -reliable
Low ecological validity
Observation was not in familiar environment like family home. Mothers knows her baheviour is monitored so many show sensitive responsiveness due to demand characteristic
Infant show more distress from environment unfamiliar not separation from mother
+/- Cultural bias
American sample hard to generalise to other cultures. Malian Australian children
Standardisation/ clear behavioural categories show repeatable - reliable - different cultures - van ljzendoorn
Malin
Australian children showed insecure attachment but was due to their upbringing - different child rearing practices
Haven and shaver evaluation
- correctional study between adults and children attachment type secure - loving relationships insecure - lonely
- volunteer - shared characteristics hard to generalise
Van ljzendoorn - procedure
Meta analysis 32 studies from 8 countries classified the attachment type of the infant and mother based on strange situation
Findings secure
Most common type in all countries
Finding - insecure resistant
Least common Japan 27%
Collectivist cultures mothers spend significant time with infant explain extreme resistant
Label as wanting to seek proximity being negative cause they are not used to it
Insecure avoidant - van ljzendoorn
Gross man - Germany 35%
Individualistic western culture
Families encourage independents - “avoidant “
Limitation of meltzoff and Moore
Limitation- you can’t be certain that the action of infant had particular meaning misinterpreted not valid and subjective- unscientific inferences
Tronkic et al
Studied tribe in are child rearing patterns were different to western countries. Mother close with all babies sharing breastfed however sleep with mothers in their bed support monotropic Bowblys
Tronkic er al findings
Breastfed by multiple people still showed signs of wanting primary caregiver support monotropic innate need for primary caregiver - showing there isn’t cultural variation it’s universal
Overgeneralised
Child rearing practices in countries have its own subcultures which have differences compared to between countries .
Ainsworth based upon western cultures ethnocentric labelling as negative attachments may not be suitable for certain countries
Reciprocity +
Feldman 3 month old reciprocity increases in frequency infant and caregiver pay attention to each others verbal and facial cues
