ATTACHMENT

Question 1

What is reciprocity?

Answer 1

Description of how 2 people interact

• mother infant interaction is reciprocal in that both infant + mothers respond to each others signals and each elicits a response from the other.

Question 2

What is interactional synchrony?

Answer 2

Mother + infants reflect both the actions + emotions of the other + do this in a co- ordinated (synchronised) way.

Question 3

Describe RECIPROCITY in caregiver infant interactions

Answer 3

• from birth, babies + mothers (or other carers) spend a lot it time in intense + pleasurable interaction.
• babies have periodic ‘ALERT PHASES’ and signal that they are ready for interaction

Question 4

What did FELDMAN + EIDELMAN 2007 find about mother’s responses to alert phases and reciprocity generally?

Answer 4

Mothers typically pick up on + respond to infant alertness 2/3s of the time.

From around 3 months, this interaction tends to be increasingly frequent + involves close attention to each others verbal signals and facial expressions.

• key element of this interaction = RECIPROCITY

Question 5

What did BRAZELTON say about interactions between mothers and infants?

Answer 5

Both mother + child can initiate interactions + they appear to take turns in doing so.

Brazelton et al 1975 described interaction as a ‘dance’

Question 6

MELTZOFF + MOORE 1977 study on interactional synchrony

Answer 6

• observed beginnings of interactional synchrony in infants as young as 2 weeks.
• an adult displayed 1 of 3 facial expressions or 1 of 3 distinctive gestures
• child’s response was filmed and identified by independent observers
• an association found between the expression or gesture the adult had displayed and the actions of the babies.

Question 7

What did ISABELLA ET AL 1989 find about interactional synchrony on the development of mother- infant attachment?

Answer 7

• believed interactional synchrony important
• observed 20 mothers + infants together and assed degree of synchrony
• research also assed quality of mother -infant attachment

Found:
- high levels of synchrony was associated with better quality mother- infant attachment.
E.g emotional intensity of the relationship.

Question 8

Caregiver infant attachments

EVALUATION

It is hard to know what is happening when observing infants.

Answer 8

• Many studies involving observations of interactions between mothers + infants have shown the same patterns of interaction.
• HOWEVER , what is being observed is merely hand movement or changes in expression.
• It’s extremely difficult to be certain, based on these observations, what is taking place from the infants perspective.
• For example: is the infants imitation of adult signals conscious and deliberate?
• Means we cannot really know for certain that behaviours seen in mother- infant interaction have a special meaning.

Question 9

Caregiver infant attachments

EVALUATION

Controlled observations capture fine detail

Answer 9

• Observations of mother- infant interactions generally well- controlled procedures
• Both mother + infant being filmed, often multiple angles.
• Ensures that very fine details of behaviour can be recorded + later analysed.
• Furthermore, babies don’t know or care that they are being observed so their behaviour does change in response to controlled observation (generally a problem for observational research)

• strength of this line of research because it means research has good validity.

Question 10

Caregiver infant attachments

EVALUATION

Observations don’t tell us the purpose of synchrony and reciprocity

Answer 10

• Feldman 2012- points out that synchrony simply describe behaviours that occur at same time.
• These are robust phenomena in the sense that they can be reliably observed
• But this may not be particularly useful as it does not tell us their purpose.

• HOWEVER, there’s some evidence that reciprocal interaction + synchrony are helpful in the development of mother- infant attachment, as well as helpful in stress responses, empathy, language and moral development.

Question 11

Schaffer and Emerson 1964 research into early attachments figures

Answer 11

Found the majority of babies become attached to their mother first (@ around 7 months)

• within a few weeks or months, formed SECONDARY ATTACHMENTS to other family members, including father
• 75% of infants attachment formed with father by the age of 18 months
• determined by the fact that the infants protested when their father walked away

Question 12

GROSSMAN- role of the father research

Answer 12

• carried out longitudinal study, looking at both partners behaviour + its relationship to the quality of children attachments into their teens
• quality of infant attachment with mothers but NO fathers was related to children’s attachments in adolensence suggesting father less important
• HOWEVER, the quality of fathers play with infants was related to the quality of adolescent attachments
• this suggests that fathers have a different role in attachment, more to do with plat + stimulation, less to do with nurturing.

Question 13

FIELD 1978- Fathers as primary carers RESEARCH

Answer 13

• Some evidence to suggest that when fathers do take on role of being main caregiver, they adopt behaviours more typical of mothers.
• FEILD filmed 4 month old babies in face to face interactions with primary caregiver mothers, secondary caregiver fathers and primary caregiver fathers.
• primary caregiver fathers, like mothers, spent most time smiling, imitating an holding infants than the secondary caregiver fathers
• this behaviour appears to be more important in building attachment with an infant than gender of caregiver.
• so seems fathers can be more nurturing attachment figures.
• key to attachment in a relationship is the level of responsiveness not the gender for the parent.

Question 14

Attachment figures

EVALUATION

Inconsistent findings on fathers

Answer 14

• Research into the role of fathers in attachment is confusing as different researchers are interested in different research questions.
• Some psychologists interested in understanding role fathers have as secondary attachment figures
• Others concerned with father as primary attachment figure.
• Secondary attachment: tended to see fathers behaving differently from mothers and having distinct role
• Primary attachment: tended to find fathers can take on a ‘maternal’ role.

• problem as it means psychologists cannot easily answer a simple question of ‘what is the role of the father?’

Question 15

Attachment figures

EVALUATION

If fathers have a distinct role, why aren’t children without fathers different?

Answer 15

• Study by GROSSMAN found that fathers as secondary attachment figures had important role in children’s development.
• Other studies (e.g MacCallum + Golombok 2004) found children growing up in single or same sex parent families do NOT develop any differently from those in 2 parent heterosexual families.
• Would seem to suggest that the father’s role as secondary attachment figure NOT important.

Question 16

Attachment figures

EVALUATION

Why don’t fathers generally become primary attachments?

Answer 16

• Fact that fathers tend not to become primary attachment figure could simply be result of traditional gender roles
• women expected to be more caring + nurturing than men.
• Men more bread winners

• other hand, could be down to female hormones (e.g oestrogen) create higher levels of nurturing + therefore women are biologically pre-disposed to be primary attachment figure.

Question 17

Schaffers stages of attachment

Answer 17

Many developmental theories identify sequence of qualitatively different behaviours linked to specific ages

Question 18

What was schaffers and Emerson’s aim?

Answer 18

Aimed to investigate the formation of early attachments: in particular the age at which they develop their emotional intensity and to whom they are directed.

Question 19

Procedure for Schaffer and Emerson’s stages of attachment

Answer 19

• 60 babies (31 males, 29 females)
• all from Glasgow
• skilled working class families
• babies + mothers visited at their homes every mother for 1st year and again at 18 months.
• researchers asked mothers questions about kinds of protest their babies showed in 7 everyday separations
• separations anxiety
• stranger anxiety

Question 20

Findings of Schaffer and Emerson’s stages of attachment

Answer 20

• between 25 + 32 weeks of age, about 50% of babies showed signs of separation anxiety towards particular adult- usually mother
• attachment tended to be the caregiver who was most interactive + sensitive to infant signals and facial expressions
• this is not necessarily infant spends most time with
• by age of 40 weeks, 80% of babies had specific attachment + almost 30 % displayed multiple attachment.

Question 21

What are the 4 stages of attachment

Answer 21

Stage 1: asocial stage (first few weeks)

Stage 2: indiscriminate stage (from 2-7 months)

Stage 3: specific attachment (from around 7 months)

Stage 4: multiple attachment (after 7 months)

Question 22

Describe the asocial stage

Answer 22

STAGE 1: ASOCIAL STAGE (first few weeks)
• baby is recognising and forming bonds with its carers.
• However, baby’s behaviour towards non- human objects + human is quite similar.
• Babies show some preference for familiar adults in that those individuals find it easier to calm them.
• Babies also happier when in presence of other humans

Question 23

Describe the indiscriminate attachment stage

Answer 23

STAGE 2: INDISCRIMINATE ATTACHMENT (from 2-7 months)
• majority of babies display more observable social behaviour.
• Show a preference for people rather than inanimate objects, + recognise and prefer familiar adults.
• At this stage babies usually accept cuddles + comfort from any adult
• Don’t normally show separation anxiety or stranger anxiety

Question 24

Describe the specific attachment stage

Answer 24

STAGE 3: SPECIFIC ATTACHMENT (from around 7 months)
• majority of babies start to display anxiety towards strangers and becoming anxious when separated from 1 particular adult (biological mother in 65% of cases).
• Baby said to have formed specific attachment
• Adult is termed primary caregiver
• Doesn’t have to be the adult that spends most time with infant however
• instead one who offers most interaction + responds to baby’s ‘signals’.

Question 25

Describe multiple attachment stage

Answer 25

STAGE 4: MULTIPLE ATTACHMENT (after 7 months)
• shortly after showing attachment to on adult, usually then extend this attachment behaviour to multiple attachments with other adults with whom they regularly spend time.
• Relationships= secondary attachments
• By age if about 1, majority of infants developed multiple attachments,

Question 26

SCHAFER AND EMERSONS STUDY

EVALUATION

Good external validity

Answer 26

GOOD EXTERNAL VALIDITY
• Schaffer + Emerson study carried out in families own homes and most observations done by parents during ordinary activities and reported to researcher later.
• Means that the behaviour of the babies was unlikely to be affected by presence of observers.
• Excellent chance that particpants behaved naturally while being observed.
• Therefore can say study has GOOD EXTERNAL VALIDITY.

Question 27

SCHAFER AND EMERSONS STUDY

EVALUATION

Longitudinal design

Answer 27

• Strength of study is it was carried out longitudinally.
• Means that the same children were followed-up + observed regularly
• Quicker alternative would have been to observe different children at each age (cross- sectional design)
• Longitudinal designs have better INTERNAL VALIDITY than cross- sectional design because the do not have the CONFOUDING VARIABLES of individual differences between particpants (PARTICIPANT VARIABLES)

Question 28

SCHAFER AND EMERSONS STUDY

EVALUATION

Limited sample characteristics

Answer 28

• Sample size of 60 babies + their carers was good considered large volume of data gathered on each participant.
• However, fact that all the families involved were from the same distinct + social class in the same city + at a time over 50 years ago is a limitation.
• Child- rearing practices vary from 1 culture to another + 1 historical period to another.
• These results do not necessarily GENERALISE well to other social + historical contexts.

Question 29

STAGES OF ATTACHMENT

EVALUATION.

Problems studying asocial stage

Answer 29

• Schaffer + Emerson describe first few weeks of life as ‘asocial stage’, although important interactions take place in those weeks.
• Problem: babies that are young have poor co-ordination + are generally pretty much immobile.
• Therefore difficult to make any judgments about them based on observations of their behaviour.

• This doesn’t mean the child’s feelings + cognitions are not highly social but the evidence cannot be relied on.

Question 30

STAGES OF ATTACHMENT

EVALUATION

Conflicting evidence on multiple attachments
(Different cultures ideas)

Answer 30

• Although there’s no doubt children capable of multiple attachments at some point, still not entirely clear when.
• Some research seems to indicate most if not all babies from attachments to single main carer before developing multiple ones (BOWLBY 1969).
• Other psychologists (in particular those who work in those cultural contexts where multiple caregivers= norm), believe babies form multiple attachments from outset (Van Ijzendoorn et al 1993).
• Such cultures are called COLLECTIVIST because families work together jointly in everything- such as producing food + child rearing.

Question 31

STAGES OF ATTACHMENT

EVALUATION

Measuring multiple attachments

Answer 31

• May be problem with how multiple attachment assessed.
• Just because baby gets distressed when an individual leaves room, doesn’t necessarily mean that the individual is a ‘true’ attachment figure.
• BOWLBY 1969- pointed out children have playmates as well as attachment figures and may get distressed when a playmate leaves room but this does not significantly attachment.
• Problem for Schaffer + Emersons stages as their observation does not leave us a way to distinguish between behaviour shown towards secondary attachment figures + shown towards playmates.

Question 32

Define imprinting

Answer 32

An innate readiness to develop a strong bond with he mother which takes place during specific time in development (first few hours after birth/hatching)

Question 33

Lorenzes RESEARCH 1935

PROCEDURE

Answer 33

• Lorenz took goose eggs and divided them into 2 groups.
• One group left with natural mother
• Other group kept in incubator
• When inculcation eggs hatched, first living thing they saw was Lorenz and soon after they began to follow him around.

• to test effect of imprinting, Lorenz marked 2 groups to distinguish them and then put them together.
• Lorenz and mother Preston.

Question 34

Lorenzes RESEARCH 1935

FINDINGS

Answer 34

• Incubator group followed Lorenz
• Other group followed mother.
• Lorenz group showed no recognition og mother
• Lorenz noticed imprinting occurs at an early critical period.
• If animal isn’t presented with moving object during this time then animal wont imprint.

• Long lasting effects:
• Lorenz suggested that imprinting is reversible and long lasting.
• Noticed that imprinting had an effect on later mate preferences and that animals choose to mare with the same kind of object upon which they were imprinted.

Question 35

Harrows RESEARCH 1995

PROCEDURE

Answer 35

PROCEDURE:
• Harlow created 2 wire mothers
• One had soft cloth
• One just wire
• 8 infant monkeys studied for 165 days
• Wire mother had food dispenser
• Cloth mother didn’t supply food.
• Time each infant monkey spent with each mother recorded
• Response to other objects also observed.

Question 36

Harrows RESEARCH 1995

FINDINGS

Answer 36

• All 8 monkeys spent most of time with cloth covered mother whether or not it has feeding bottle.
• Monkey fed by wire mother only spent short time with it to get milk
• When monkeys frightened, all monkeys clung to cloth mother
• Findings suggest that infants do not develop attachment to person that feeds him but to person offering contact comfort.

Question 37

Harlows RESEARCH 1995

Long lasting effects on monkeys

Answer 37

• Long lasting effects
• early maternal deprivation had permanent effect.
• Monkeys reared with plain- wire mothers only were most dysfunctional.
• Those reared with cloth mothers did not develop normal social behaviour
• Deprived monkeys= aggressive, less sociable, unskilled at mating.
• Deprived own babies and in some cases killed them.
• Critical period 90 days for attachment to form

Question 38

LORENZ RESEARCH

EVALUATION

Research support

Answer 38

RESEARCH SUPPORT:
• Strength of Lorenzs research is the existence of support for the concept of imprinting.
• Regolin + Vallortigara 1995- supports Lorenzs idea of imprinting.
• Chicks were exposed to simple shape combinations that moved (such as triangle with rectangle in front)
• Range of shape combinations movedinfron of them and they followed the original most closely
• Supports the view of young animals are born with an innate mechanism to imprint on a moving object present in the critical window of development.

• Guiton 1996 demonstrated that leghorn chicks that were exposed to a yellow glove that fed them, became imprinted on the gloves.
• This shows that animals aren’t born with a predisposition to imprint on a specific object but probably on any moving object present during the critical period.

Question 39

LORENZ RESEARCH

EVALUATION

Generalisability to humans

Answer 39

• Limitation of Lorenzs studies is ability to generalise findings and conclusions from birds to humans
• Mammalian attachment system is quite different and more complex than birds.
• Example; mammals attachment = 2 way process
• So it’s not just young that become atttached to their mothers, also mammalian mothers show emotional attachment to their young.
• Means probably not appropriate to generalise Lorenzs ideas to humans.

Question 40

HARLOWS RESEARCH

EVALUATION

Real- world value

Answer 40

• Strength of hallows research is its important real- world applications.
• EXAMPLE: It has helped social workers + clinical psychologists understand that a lack of bonding experience may be a risk factor in child development allowing them to intervene to prevent poor outcomes.
• Also now understand importance of attachment figures for baby monkeys in zoos and breeding programmes in wild.
• Means value of Harlow research not just theoretical but also practical.

Question 41

HARLOWS RESEARCH

EVALUATION

Generalisably to humans

Answer 41

• Limitation of Harlow research is the ability to generalise findings + conclusions form monkeys to humans.
• Monkeys much more similar to humans than Lorenz’s birds
• All mammals share some common attachment behaviours
• However, human brains and human behaviour still more complex than that of omens
• Means it may not be appropriate to generalise Harlow findings to humans.

Question 42

HARLOWS RESEARCH

EVALUATION

Confounding variables

Answer 42

• The 2 stimulus objects varied in more ways than the soft cloth.
• 2 heads were different
• So monkeys may have preferred the more better looking monkey
• Means study lacks internal validity.

Question 43

HARLOWS RESEARCH

EVALUATION

Ethical issues

Answer 43

• As monkeys were considered to be similar enough to humans to generalise findings, it can be said that their suffering was presumably quite human-like
• Lasting emotional effects as the monkeys found it difficult to form relationships with their peers

Question 44

What is the learnig theory in attachment?

Answer 44

A set of theories from the behaviourist approach to psychology that emphasises the role of learning in the acquisition of behaviour

• explanations for learning of behaviour include classical + operant conditioning

Question 45

What did DOLLARD + MILLER 1950 say about caregiver- infant attachment?

Answer 45

Can be explained by learning approach

• approach sometimes called ‘cupboard love’ approach as it emphasises importance of the caregiver as a provider of food.
• children learn to love whoever feeds them

Question 46

Explain classical conditioning in terms of attachment

Answer 46

• involves learning to associate 2 stimuli together as that we begin to respond to one in the same way we already respond to the other.

Food= unconditioned stimulus
Pleasure (from being fed( (don’t need to learn that)= unconditioned response

Caregiver starts as NEUTRAL stimulus

• when same person provide food over time thy become associated with ‘food’
• when baby sees person this is an immediate expectation of food.
• neutral stimulus has then became conditioned stimulus
• once conditioning has taken place the sight of caregiver produces conditioned repose of pleasure.

Question 47

Explain operant conditions in terms of attachment

Answer 47

• involves learning to repeat behaviour, or not, depending on its consequences.
• if behaviour produces PLEASANT consequences, behaviour likely to be repeated
• behaviour has been reinforced
• if behaviour produces UNPLEASANT consequence its less likely to be repeated.
• operant conditioning can explain why babies cry for comfort
• crying leads to a response from a caregiver e.g feeding
• as long as caregiver provided correct response, crying is reinforced.
• baby then directs crying to comfort towards caregiver who responds with comforting ‘social suppressor’ behaviour.

Question 48

Operant conditioning

Reinforcement = 2 way processs

Answer 48

At same time baby is reinforced for crying, caregiver received NEGATIVE REINFORCEMENT as the crying stops (escaping from something unpleasant e.g sound of crying).

Interplay of mutual reinforcement strengthens an attachment.

Question 49

Reinforcement = 2 way process

Answer 49

• At same time baby is reinforced for crying, caregiver receives NEGATIVE REINFORCEMENT because the crying stops (escaping from something unpleasant (sound of crying) is reinforcing.
• Interplay of mutual reinforcement strengthens an attachment.

Question 50

Attachment as a secondary drive

Answer 50

• As well as conditioning, learning theory draws on the concept of drive reduction.
• Hunger can be thought as a PRIMARY DRIVE- it’s an innate, biological motivator.
• We are motivated to eat in order to reduce the hunger drive.
• Sears et al 1957- suggested that, as caregiver provide food, the primary drive of hunger becomes generalised to them.
• Attachment is therefore a secondary drive learned by an association between the caregiver + the satisfaction of a primary drive.

Question 51

LEARNING THEORY

EVALUATION

Counter evidence from animal studies

Answer 51

• Range of animal studies has shown that actually young animals do not necessarily attach to (or imprint on) those who feed them.
• Lorenzs geese imprinted before the were fed and maintained attachment regardless of who fed them.
• Harlows monkeys attached to a soft mother in preference to wire mother that dispensed milk.
• Both these animal studies suggest s attachment doesn’t develop as a result of feeding.
• Same must be true for humans
• I.e food does not create attachment bond
• Doesn’t support learning theory’s idea

Question 52

LEARNING THOERY

EVALUATION

Counter evidence from human research

Answer 52

• Research with human infants also shows that feeding does NOT appear to be an important factor in humans
• Example:
• Schaffer + Emersons study, many of babies developed a PRIMARY ATTACHMENT to their biological mother even though other carers did most of the feeding.
• These findings = problem for learning theory as they show that feeding is not key element to attachment + so there is no unconditioned stimulus or primary drive involved.

Question 53

LEARNING THEORY

EVALUATION

Learning theory ignores other factors associated with forming attachments

Answer 53

• Research into early infant- caregiver interaction suggests that the quality of attachment is associated with factors like developing RECIPROCITY and good levels of INTERACTION SYNCHRONY (e.g Isabella et al 1989)
• In addition, studies have shown best quality attachments are with sensitive carers that pick up infant signals + respond appropriately.
• It’s hard to reconcile these findings with he idea of cupboard love
• If attachment developed purely or primarily as a result of feeding, there would be no purpose for these complex interactions + we would not except to find relationships between them and the quality of infant- caregiver attachment.

Question 54

LEARNING THEORY

EVALUATION

A newer learning theory explanation

Answer 54

• Hay + Vespo (1988) have proposed newer explanation for infant- caregiver attachment based on SOCIAL LEARNING THEORY.
• Social learning theory is based on idea that social behaviour is acquired largely as a result of modelling + imitation of behaviour.
• Hay + Vespo suggest that parents teach children to love them by modelling attachment behaviour e.g by hugging them + other family members, and instructing + rewarding them with approval when they display attachment behaviour of own
• E.g ‘thats a lovely smile/hug’

Question 55

What does mono tropic mean?

Answer 55

Term used to describe Bowlby theory.

• mono means 1 and indicates that 1 particular attachment is different from all others and of central importance to the child’s development

Question 56

What is an internal working model (Bowlby)?

Answer 56

Mental representations we all carry with us of our attachment to our primary caregiver.

• they are importance in affecting our future relationships as they carry our perception of what relationships are like.

Question 57

Why did Bowlby reject the learning theory?

Answer 57

Because as he said ‘were it true, an infant of a year or 2 should take readily to whomever feeds him and this is clearly not the case’ 1988

Question 58

Why is Bowlbys theory described as monotropic?

Answer 58

He placed great emphasis on a child’s attachment to this one particular caregiver is different and more important than others.

Question 59

What were the 2 principles of bowlbys monotropy theory?

Answer 59

• the law of continuity stated that the more constant and predictable a child’s care, the better the quality of their attachment
• the law of accumulated separation stated that the effects of every separation from the mother add up ‘and the safest does is therefore a zero dose’ 1975

Question 60

What did Bowlby say social releases were and the purpose of them?

Answer 60

Babies are born with a set of innate ‘cute’ behaviours like smiling, cooing and gripping that encourage attention from adults.

The purpose is to activate the adult attachment systems i.e making the adult feel love towards the baby.

Social releases trigger response form caregivers

Question 61

What did Bowlby propose the critical period was?

Answer 61

2 years when the infant attachment system is active.

• but in fact he viewed this more of a sensitive period
• if attachment not formed by this time, child will find it much harder to form one later.

Question 62

What did Bowlby say about internal working models ?

Answer 62

Bowlby proposed that a child forms a mental representation of their relationship with their primary caregiver (internal working model)

Question 63

What do internal working models do?

Answer 63

Serves as a model of what relationships are like.

So it has a powerful effect on the nature of the child’s future relationship.

Question 64

How can internal working models affect parenting?

Answer 64

Internal working models affect the child’s later ability to be a parent themselves.

• people tend to base their parenting behaviour on their own experiences of being parented.

Question 65

Bowlby monotropic theory

EVALUATION

Mixed evidence for monotropy

Answer 65

• Bowlby believed babies generally formed one attachment to their primary caregiver and this attachment was special, and is some way different from later attachments.
• only after this attachment established, child can form multiple attachments.
• not supported by Schaffer and Emerson
• they found most babies did attach to one person first
  -however they also found that a significant minority appeared to be able to for multiple attachments at same time.
• its also unclear weather there is something unique about the 1st attachment.
• studies of attachment to mother + father tend to show that attachment to the other is more important in pressing later behaviour (suess et al 1992)
• however this could simply mean that attachment to primary attachment figure is just stronger than others.
• not necessarily that it is different in quality.

Question 66

Bowlbys monotropic theory

EVALUATION

Support for social releasers

Answer 66

• clear evidence to show cute infant behaviours are intended to initiate social interaction and that doing so is important to the baby.
• BRAZELTON ET AL 1975- observed mothers + babies during their interactions, reporting the existence of INTERACTIONAL SYNCHRONY.
• they then extended the study from an observation to an experiment.
• primary attachment figures were instructed to ignore their babies signals (ignore social releasers)
• the babies initially showed some distress but, when attachment figures continued to ignore the baby, some repointed by curling up and lying motionless.
• fact that the children responded so strongly supports Bowlbys ideas about the significance of infant social behaviour in eliciting caregiver.

Question 67

Bowlbys monotropic theory

EVALUATION

Support for internal working models

Answer 67

• idea of internal working models is testable because it predicts that patterns of attachment will be passed on form one generation to the next.
• bailey et al 2007 tested this idea

-they assessed 99 mothers with 1 year old babies on the quality of their attachment to their own mothers using a standard interview procedure.
- the researchers also assessed he attachment of the babies to the mothers by observation.
- it was found that the mothers who reported poor attachments to their own parents in the interviews were much more likely to have children classified as poor according to the observations.

• this supports the idea that, as Bowlby said, an internal working model of attachment was being passed through the families.

Question 68

Bowlbys monotropic theory

EVALUATION

Monotropy is a socially sensitive idea

Answer 68

• monotropy is a controversial idea because it has major implications for the lifestyle choices mothers make when their children are young.
• the law of accumulated separation states that having substantial time apart from primary attachment figure risks a poor quality attachment that will disadvantage the child in a range of ways later.
• feminists like Erica Burman 1994 have pointed out that this places a terrible burden of responsibility on mothers, setting them up to take the blame for anything that goes wrong in the rest of the child’s life.
• it also pushes mothers into particular lifestyle choices like not returning to work when a child is born.
• this was not Bowlbys intention- he saw himself as boosting the status of mothers by emphasising the importance of of their role.

Question 69

Define what the strange situation is

Answer 69

Controlled observation deigned to test attachment security.
Infant are assessed on their response to playing in an unfamiliar room, being left alone, left with a stranger ans being reunited with caregiver.

Question 70

What was the aim of Ainsworths strange situation?

Answer 70

To be able to observe key attachment behaviours as a means of assessing the quality of a child’s attachment to a caregiver.

Question 71

What was the procedure of the strange situation?

Answer 71

• controlled observation
• takes place in a room with quite controlled conditions e.g lab)
• 2 way mirror which psychologists observed the infants.

1. Child and caregiver enters unfamiliar playroom
2. Child encourages to explore (tests exploration + secure base)
3. Stranger comes in and tries to interact with child (tests stranger anxiety)
4. Caregiver leaves child and stranger together (tests separation and stranger anxiety)
5. Caregiver returns and stranger leaves (tests reunion behaviour ans exploration secure base)
6. Caregiver leaves child alone (tests separation anxiety)
7. Stranger returns (tests stranger anxiety)
8. Caregiver returns and reunited with child (tests reunion behaviour)

Question 72

What behaviours did Ainsworth use to judge attachment behaviour?

Answer 72

PROXIMITY SEEKING- infant with good attachment will stay fairly close to caregiver

EXPLORATION + SECURE BASE- good attachment enables child to feel confident to explore, using caregiver as secure base.

STRANGER ANXIETY- closely attached= anxiety shown when stranger approaches

SEPARATION ANXIETY- closely attached= protest at separation to caregiver

RESPONSE TO REUNION - with the caregiver after separation for short time, controlled conditions.

Question 73

What were the findings of Ainsworths strange situation?

Answer 73

SECURE ATTACHMENT (TYPE B)- these children happily explore but regularly return to caregiver. Usually show moderate separation distress and moderate stranger anxiety. Require and except comfort from caregiver in reunion stage. 60-75% British toddlers classed as secure.

INSECURE AVOIDANT ATTACHMENT (TYPE A)- these children explore freely but do not seek proximity or show secure base behaviour. Show little to no reaction when caregiver leaves. Make little effort to make contact with caregiver when return. Show little stranger anxiety. Do not require comfort at reunion stage. 20-25% toddlers classed as insecure- avoidant.

INSECURE RESISTANT ATTACHMENT (TYPE C)- these children seek greater proximity than others and so explore less. Show huge stranger and separation distress. They resist comfort when reunited with caregiver. 3% British toddlers classed as insecure- resistant

Question 74

Strange situation

EVALUATION

Support for validity

Answer 74

• attachment type as defined by stage situation is strongly predictive of later development.
• babies assessed as secure typically go on to have better outcomes in many areas e.g success @ school + romantic relationships + friendships in adult hood.
• insecure resistant attachment associated with worst outcomes including bullying later in childhood (Kokkinos 2007) and adult mental health problems (Ward et al 2006)
• this is evidence for the validity of the concept evacuee it can explain subsequent outcomes.

Question 75

Strange situation

EVALUATION

Good reliability

Answer 75

• strange situation shows very good INTER-RATER RELIABILITY.
• due to different observes watching same children agreeing on what attachment type they are.
• may be because strange situ takes place under controlled conditions
• and because BEHAVIOURAL CATEGORIES are easy to observe
• BRICK ET AL 2012- looked into inter- rather realiabity in a team of trained strange situ observers + found agreement on attachment type of 94% of tested babies.
• this means we can be confident that attachment type of an infant identified in strange situ does not just depend on who observing.

Question 76

Strange situation

EVALUATION

Test may be culture bound

Answer 76

• some doubt whether strange situ is culture - bound test.
• for 2 reasons:
  1) cultural differences in childhood experiences are likely to mean that children respond differently to the strange situation scenarios.
  2) caregivers from different cultures behave differently in strange situation.

Example:
- Takahashi 1990 noted that the test does not really work in Japan as Japanese mothers are so rarely separated from their babies so show very high separation anxiety.
- also in reunion stage, Japanese mothers rushed to thee baby and scooped them up, meaning child’s response was hard to observe.

Question 77

Define what cultural variations are in attachment

Answer 77

‘Culture’ refers to the norms + values that exist within any group of people.

• Cultural variations then are the differences in norms and values that exist between people in different groups.
• in attachment research we are concerned with the differences in the proportion if children of different attachment types.

Question 78

What was the PROCEDURE of Van Ijzendoorn’s study?

Answer 78

• Located 32 studies of attachment where strange situation had been used to investigate proportions of infants with different attachment types.
• 32 studies were conducted in 8 countries
• 15 were in the USA.
• Overall the 32 studies yielded results for 1,900 children
• data of 32 studies were META ANALYSED

Question 79

What were the findings of Van Ijzendoorns study?

Answer 79

• wide variations between the proportions of attachment types in different studies.
• in ALL countries, secure attachment= most common classification.
• however proportion varied from 75%in Britain to 50% in China. (Secure)
• insecure- resistant was overall least common type
• however proportions ranged from 3% in Britain to around 30% in Israel
• insecure- avoidant MOST common in GERMANY
• insecure- avoidant LEAST common in JAPAN

Question 80

INTALIAN STUDY- procedure and findings (simonella et al 2014)

Answer 80

• conducted study in Italy to see whether the proportions of babies of different attachment types still match those found in previous studies.
• researchers assessed 76, 12 month olds using strange situation.
• they found 50% secure
• 36% insecure avoidant
• this is a lower rate of secure attachment than has been found in many studies.
• researchers suggest this is because increasing numbers of mothers of very young children work long hours and use professional childcare.
• findings suggest cultural changes can make a dramatic difference to patterns of secure and insecure attachment.

Question 81

KOREAN STUDY (Jin et al 2012)- study + findings

Answer 81

• conducted study to compare proportions of attachment types in Korea to other studies.
• strange situation used to assess 87 children
• overall proportions of insecure + secure babies were similar to those in most countries, with most infants= secure.
• however, more of those classified as insecurely attached were resistant and only 1 was avoidant.
• this distribution is similar to distributions found in Japan (Van Ijzendoorn).
• since japan and Korea have quite similar child- rearing styles this similarity might be explained in terms of child rearing style.

Question 82

CULTURAL VARIATIONS IN ATTACHMENT

EVALUATION

Large samples

Answer 82

• strength of combining results of attachment studies carried out in different countries is that you can end up with very large sample.
• example: van Ijzendoorn meta analysis there was a total of nearly 2000 babies + their primary attachment figures.
• even studies like simonella et al + Jin et al had large comparison groups from previous research although own samples were smaller.
• overall sample size = strength as large samples increase INTERNAL VALIDITY by reducing the impact of anomalous results caused by bad methodology or very unusual participants.

Question 83

CULTURAL VARIATIONS IN ATTACHMENT

EVAULUATION

Samples tend to be unrepresentative of culture

Answer 83

• meta analysis by van Ijezendoorn + Kroonenberg claimed to study cultural variation
• but in fact the comparisons were between COUNTRIES not cultures.
• within any country, there are many different cultures each with different child- rearing practises.
• one sample might (for example) over - represent people living in poverty, the stress of which may affect caregiveing and hence patterns of attachment.
• an analysis by van Ijzendoorn + Sagi 2001- found that distributions of attachment type in Tokyo (urban setting) were similar to the Western studies.
• whereas more rural sample had an over- representation of insecure- resistant individuals.
• this mean that comparisons between counties (such as Italy or Korea) may have little meaning.

Question 84

CULTURAL VARIATIONS IN ATTACHMENT

EVALUATION

Method of assessment is biased

Answer 84

• cross cultural psychology includes the ideas of Eric and emic
• Etic means cultural universals
• emic means cultural uniqueness
• strange situation designed by an American researcher (Ainsworth) based on a British theory (Bowlby)
• there’s question over whether Anglo- American theories + assessments can be applied to other cultures.
• trying to apply a theory/ technique designed by one culture to another culture known as IMPOSED ETIC.
• EXAMPLE: of imposed etic may be the idea that a lack of separation anxiety + lack of pleasure on reunion indicate an insecure attachment in strange situation.
• in Germany this behaviour might be seen more as independence than avoidance and so not a sign of insecurity within that cultural context.

Question 85

What was the procedure for Rutter’s ERA (English and Romanian adoptee) study?

Answer 85

• Rutter + colleagues (2011) filled group of 165 Romanian orphans adopted in Britain
• this was to test the extent good care could make up for poor early experiences in institutions.
• physical, cognitive and emotional development has been assessed at ages 4,6,11 and 15 years.
• group of 52 British children adopted around same time = CONTROL group

Question 86

What was the findings for Rutter’s ERA (English and Romanian adoptee) study?

Answer 86

• when they first arrived in UK, 1/2 adoptees showed signs of delayed intellectual development
• majority= severely malnourished.
• at age 11, the adopted children differential rates of recovery that were related to their age of adoption.
• Mean IQ of those children adopted BEFORE six months was 102
• this was compared with 86 for those adopted BETWEEN 6 months and 2 years
• and 77 for those adopted AFTER 2 years
• These differences remained at age 16 (Beckett et al 2010).
• in terms of attachment, there appeared to be a difference in outcome related to whether adoption took place before or after 6 months.
• those children adopted AFTER they were 6 months: showed signs of DISINHIBITED ATTACHMENT.
• Symptoms include: attention seeking, clinginess and social behaviour directed indiscriminately towards all adults, both familiar and unfamiliar.
• in contrast, children adopted BEFORE 6 months rarely displayed disinhibited attachment.

Question 87

What was Bucharest Early Intervention project PROCEDURE?

Answer 87

• Zeanah et al (2005) assessed attachment in 95 children
• aged 12- 31 months who had spent most of lives in institutional care (90% on average).
• they were compared to control group of 50 children who had never lived in an institution
• attachment type measured using Strange situ
• carers asked about usual social behaviour included clingy, attention- seeking behaviour directed inappropriately at all adults (i.e. disinhibited attachment)

Question 88

What was Bucharest Early Intervention project FINDINGS?

Answer 88

• Found 74% of CONTROL GROUP came out as SECURELY ATTACHED.
• only 19% of the institutional group were SECURELY ATTACHED
• 65% (institutional group) classified as DISORGANISED ATTACHMENT.
• Description of disinhibited attachment applied to 44% of institutionalised children
• as opposed to less than 20% in control

Question 89

What are the effects of institutionalisation?

Answer 89

• Disinhibited attachment
• mental retardation

Question 90

Describe disinhibited attachment in terms of effects of institutionalisation

Answer 90

• typical effect of spending time in an institution.
• they are equally friendly + affectionate towards people they know well or who are strangers.
• highly unusual behaviour
• Rutter (2006)- explained disinhibited attachment as an adaptation to living with multiple caregivers during the sensitive period for attachment formation.
• in poor quality institutions like those in Romania, child might have 50 carers, none they see enough to perform a secure attachment.

Question 91

Describe mental retardation in terms of institutionalisation.

Answer 91

• in rutters study, most children showed signs of retardation when they arrived in Britain.
• However, most of those adopted before they were 6 months old, caught up with control group by 4 yrs.
• emotional development, can be recovered provided adoption takes place before 6 months of age.

Question 92

Romanian Orphan studies

EVALUATION

Real-life application

Answer 92

• studying Romanian Oprah’s has enhanced out understanding of the effects of institutionalisation.
• such result have led to improvements in way children cared for in institutions
• EXAMPLE: orphanages + children’s homes now avoid having large numbers of caregivers for each child
• instead ensure smaller number of people play central role in child’s care.
• person can be called Key worker.
• having key worker means that children have chance to develop normal attachments + helps avoid disinhibited attachment.
• this shows that such research has been immensely valuable in practicle terms.

Question 93

Romanian Orphan studies

EVALUATION

Fewer extraneous variables than other orphan studies

Answer 93

• there were many orphan studies before Romanian orphans became available to study
• but often studies involved children who had experienced loss or trauma before they were institutionalised.
• EXAMPLE:
• they may have experienced neglect, abuse or bereavement.
• It was very hard to observe effects of institutionalisation in isolation because the children were dealing with multiple factors which functioned as CONFOUNDING PARTICIPANT VARIABLES.
• In case of Romanian orphans it has been possible to study institutionalisation without these confounding variables
• means findings have increased INTERNAL VALIDITY

Question 94

Romanian Orphan studies

EVALUATION

The Romanian orphanages were NOT typical

Answer 94

• although much useful data about institutionalisation has come out of Romanian orphan studies, it’s possible that conditions were so bad that results cannot be applied to understanding the impact of better quality institutional care or any situation where child experienced deprivation.
• example:
• Romanian orphanages had particularly poor standards of care
• especially when it came to forming any relationship with children
• also extremely low levels of intellectual stimulation
• Limitation of Romanian orphan studies as the unusual SITUATIONAL VARIABLES mean the studies may lack generalisability.

Question 95

What did Bowlby suggest about a child’s first relationship with primary attachment figure?

Answer 95

Forms a mental representation of this relationship.

• internal working model acts as a template for future relationships

Question 96

What did Kerns 1994 find about attachment types and impacted on later friendships?

Answer 96

Securely attached: tend to go on and form best quality childhood friendships

Insecurely attached: later go one to have friendship difficulties.

Question 97

What did Wilson + Peter 1998 find about attachment types and bullying later in life?

Answer 97

• they assessed attachment type and bullying involvemnry buffing standard questionnaires.
• 196 children
• age 7-11
• London
• SECURE children: very unlikely to be involved in bullying
• INSECURE AVOIDANT: most likely to be involved in bullying.
• INSECURE RESISTANT: most likely to be bullies

Question 98

What was the study by Gerard McCarthy 1999?

Answer 98

• studied 40 adult women who had been assessed when they were infants to establish their early attachment type.

SECURELY ATTACHED: best adult friendships and romantic relationships

INSECURE RESISTANT: problems maintaining friendships

INSECURE AVOIDANT: struggled with intimacy and adult relationships.

Question 99

What was the PROCEDURE of Hazan + Shaver 1987 for the association between attachment and adult relationships?

Answer 99

• analysed 620 replies to love quiz
• in American local newspaper
• 3 sections
• 1st section: assessed respondents current/ most important relationship
• 2nd section: assessed general lover experiences e.g number of parents.
• 3rd section: assessed attachment type by asking respondents to choose which of three statements best described their feelings.

Question 100

What were the FINDINGS of Hazan + Shaver 1987 for the association between attachment and adult relationships?

Answer 100

• 56% respondents identified as securely attached
• 25% insecure avoidant
• 19% insecure resistant
• those reporting secure attachments, most likely to have good + longer lasting romantic experiences.
• avoidant respondents tended to reveal jealousy + fear of intimacy
• there findings suggest that patterns of attachment behaviour are reflected in romantic relationships.

Question 101

Early attachment influence on later attachment types:

EVALUATION

Evidence on continuity of attachment type is mixed

Answer 101

• internal working models predict continuity between the security of an infants attachment and that of its later relationships
• i.e. attachment type in infancy is usually same as that characterising the persons later relationships.
• evidence for this is continuity
• some strides, like McCarthy, do appear to support continuity and so provide evidence to support internal working models.
• Not all studies support internal working midels
• example:
• Zimmerman 2000- assessed infant attachment type + adolescent attachment to parents
• there was very little relationship between quality of infant and adolescent attachment.
• problem because it is not what we would expect if internal working models were important in development.

Question 102

Early attachment influence on later attachment types:

EVALUATION

Most studies have issues of validity

Answer 102

• most studies of attachment to primary caregiver + other significant people do not make use of strange situ but assess infant- parent attachment by means of interview or questionnaire, not in infancy, but later years.
• this creates VALIDITY problems
• first, assessment relies on self-report techniques like interviews or questionnaire to assess the quality of those relationships.
• validity of questionnaires and interviews is limited because they depend on respondents being honest + having realistic view of own relationship.
• a relayed problem concerns the retrospective nature of assessment of infant attachment.
• looking back in adult hood at ones early relationship to a primary attachment figure probably lacks validity as it relies on accurate recollections.

Question 103

Early attachment influence on later attachment types:

EVALUATION

Association does not mean causality

Answer 103

• in those studies where infant attachment type is associated with quality of later relationships the implications is that infant attachment type cause the attachment.
• however, there’s alternative explanations for the continuity that often exists between infant and layer relationships.
• third enviromental factor such as parenting style might have direct effect on both attachment and child’s ability to form relationships with others.
• alternatively child’s temperament may infleucne both infant attachment and quality of later relationships.

Limitation as it is counter to bowlbys view that the internal working model caused these later outcomes.