Attachment Flashcards
carer-infant interactions: reciprocity
when each person responds to the other and elicits a response from them
carer-infant interactions: interactional synchrony
the temporal co-ordination of micro level social behaviour
mirroring each other’s actions and emotions. E.g a baby laughs and giggles at the same time the carer pulls silly faces.
carer-infant interactions: interactional synchrony research - facial expressions
Meltzoff and Moore
observed beginnings of IS in babies as early as 2 weeks
adult displayed 1 of 3 facial expressions or distinctive gestures
childs response was filmed and identified by independent observers
an association was found between the expression or gesture and the actions of the babies
carer-infant interactions: interactional synchrony research - quality of attachment
Isabella
observed 30 mothers and infants together
assessed the degree of synchrony and the quality of the mother-infant attachment
found high levels of synchrony were associated with better quality attachments
attachment figures: parent-infant attachment - research
Schaffer and Emerson
found majority of babies did become attached to their mother first
formed secondary attachments to other people in the family after a few weeks or months
75% of infants had attached to father by 18 months
attachment figures: role of the father - research - play
Grossman
longitudinal study
looking at parents’ behaviour and its relationship with the quality of the children attachments into their teens
found that the quality of the infant-mother attachment was related to children’s attachments in teen years but NOT the infant-father attachment
BUT
quality of fathers’ play with infant did relate to the quality of adolescent attachment
attachment figures: fathers as primary caregivers
evidence that when fathers are the primary caregivers they adopt behaviours more typical to mothers
Field
filmed 4 month old babies in face to face interaction with primary caregiver mothers and fathers and secondary caregiver fathers
primary caregivers spent more time smiling, imitating and holding infants
these behaviours seem to be more important in building an attachment with the infant
fathers can be the more nurturing attachment figure
the key the attachment relationship is the level of responsiveness not the gender of the parent
carer-infant interactions evaluation: observations
its hard to tell if the interactions are the same or similar
we can’t be certain, based on these observations, whats taking place from the infants perspective
carer-infant interactions evaluation: good control
observations are generally well controlled
both are filmed from multiple angles
this means very fine details can be recorded and analysed
the infant doesn’t care about being observed so their behaviour doesn’t change in response to the controlled observation
attachment figures evaluation: inconsistent findings in role of the father
research into the role of the father is confusing as different researchers are interested in different questions
seeing the father as the primary or secondary attachment figures
generally have seen for secondary figures have behaved differently from mothers and having a distinct role
for primary figures have seen that they take on the maternal role
this means its hard to answer the question: what is the role of the father?
attachment figures evaluation: limited generalisability
Grossman
found fathers as secondary figures had an important role in their child’s development
however
MacCallum and Golombok
found children growing up in single or same sex families do not develop differently from those in heterosexual families
this suggests that the fathers role isnt as important as first thought
attachment figures evaluation: gender
fathers might not become primary figures due to traditional gender roles
women are expected to be more caring and nurturing
or
it could be female hormones (oestrogen) create higher levels of nurturing and so women are biologically pre-disposed to be the primary figure
Schaffers stages of attachment: study
longitudinal study
60 babies
31 male
29 female
Glasgow, skilled working class families
babies and mothers visited in their homes:
every month for a year
then after 18 months
asked mothers questions about the kind of protest the babies showed in seven everyday separations
also assessed strange anxiety
found:
50% showed separation anxiety to a particular adult at 25-32 weeks
attachment tended to be to the caregiver who was most interactive and sensitive to the signals and facial expressions
80% had a specific attachment and almost 30 % had multiple attachments at 40 weeks
Schaffers stages of attachment: stages
Asocial - first few weeks
baby is recognising and forming bonds with cares
behaviour to human and non human objects is the same
Indiscriminate attachment - 2-7 months
show preference for people
no separation or stranger anxiety
Specific attachment - 7 months
show stranger and separation (from one particular adult) anxiety
primary attachment figure
Multiple attachments - 8 months
extend attachments
secondary attachment figures
Schaffers stages of attachment evaluation: good external validity
carried out in the families’ home and most of the observation was done by the parents
so the babies behaviour is unlikely to be affected by the presence of others
Schaffers stages of attachment evaluation: longitudinal design
same children where followed up and observed regularly
better internal validity than a cross-sectional design
dont have the confounding variable of individual differences
Schaffers stages of attachment evaluation: limited sample
only 60 babies
all from same area, class, culture, 50 years ago
child rearing practices differ from one culture to another and from one historical period to another
hard to generalise to other social and historical contexts
Schaffers stages of attachment evaluation: asocial stage
babies are so young and have poor co-ordination and immobile
hard to observe their behaviour
can’t rely on the evidence
Schaffers stages of attachment evaluation: conflicting evidence for multiple attachments
when they form multiple attachments
psychologists working in cultural contexts where multiple carers is normal suggest babies have multiple attachments from the outset
collectivist cultures
Schaffers stages of attachment evaluation: measuring multiple attachments
Bowlby
pointed out that children have playmates as well as attachment figures
may get distressed when playmate leaves but it doesn’t signify an attachment
Schaffers and Emersons observations dont allow us to distinguish between playmates and attachment figures
animal studies: Lorenz
studied imprinting
divided a clutch of goose eggs
- hatched with mother
- hatched in incubator with Lorenz as the first moving object they see
found that incubator group followed Lorenz even when mixed
however there was a critical period in which imprinting needed to take place (depends on species)
animal studies: Lorenz case study
peacock that was brought up in a reptile house of a zoo
first moving thing it saw was giant tortoises
as an adult would only direct courtship behaviours towards giant tortoises
sexual imprinting
animal studies: Harlow.
separated baby rhesus monkeys from mother and put in harlow’s lab.
Importance of tactile comfort - why we attach.
experiment 1: two groups of monkeys, both provided with two surrogate mothers in a cage, one made out of wire and the other made out of soft towelling cloth.
First group: cloth mother provided milk, wire mother provided no milk
second group: wire mother provided milk, cloth mother no milk.
Harlow - findings
found that monkeys cuddled soft object in preference to the wire one, spent more time with cloth mother, only went to wire mother for food.
sought comfort from towelling when frightened
released maternally deprived monkeys back into wild
found that monkeys in 3. were most dysfunctional
those with a soft toy still didn’t develop normal social behaviour
more aggressive and less sociable and bred less
as mothers some of them neglected their young or attacked their children even killing them in some cases
concluded theres a critical period for this behaviour
mother figure had to introduced within 90 days for an attachment to form
early deprivation is irreversible
Lorenz evaluation: generalisability
problem with generalising
mammalian attachment system is very different from birds
e.g. mammalian mothers show more emotional attachments to their young than birds do
Lorenz evaluation: questioning of his conclusions
researchers have questioned some of his conclusions
e.g. the idea that imprinting has a permanent effect on mating behaviour
Guiton
found chickens that imprinted on yellow washing up gloves would try to mate with them but with experience would learn to prefer mating with other chickens
Harlow evaluation: theoretical value
findings has a profound effect on psychologists understanding of human attachment
Harlow showed that attachment doesn’t develop as a result of being fed by a mother figure but as a result of comfort
showed the importance of the quality of early relationships on later social development
Harlow evaluation: practical value
important applications
e.g. social workers understand the risk factors in child neglect and abuse and so intervene to prevent it
important in the care of captive monkeys for zoos and in breeding programs
Harlow evaluation: ethical issues
monkeys suffered greatly
species are considered similar enough to humans to generalise findings therefore means their suffering was likely to be human-like
but
the rewards outweighed the costs
learning theory of attachment
Dollard and Miller
cupboard love approach using learning theory
emphasises on caregiver giving food - children learn to love whoever feeds them
learning theory of attachment: classical conditioning
learning to associate the mother with food
unconditioned stimulus = food
being fed = unconditioned response (pleasure)
caregiver = initially neutral stimulus
mother then through constant association with being fed becomes conditioned stimulus producing conditioned response
learning theory of attachment: operant conditioning
if behaviour produces a pleasant consequence then its likely to be repeated again
behaviour has been reinforced
explains why babies cry for comfort which builds attachment
crying = response from carer e.g. feeding
response = pleasure
crying is reinforced
baby then directs crying to the caregiver that responds to the crying
two way process
this is negative reinforcement for the carer
they respond = crying stops
so they repeat their behaviour to avoid the unpleasant crying
learning theory of attachment: attachment as a secondary drive
draws on the concept of drive reduction
hunger is the primary drive - we are motivated to eat to reduce the hunger drive
Sears
suggested that the caregivers that provide food have the primary drive of hungry generalised to them
so attachment is the secondary drive learned by association between the caregiver and the satisfaction of the primary drive
learning theory of attachment evaluation: counter evidence from animal research
a range of animal studies has shown that young animals don’t attach for food but for comfort instead
Lorenz’s geese imprinted before being fed
Harlow’s monkeys
using the learning theory this should be the same for humans as they believe that non-human animals and humans are equivalent
learning theory of attachment evaluation: counter evidence from human research
Schaffer and Emerson
many babies formed primary attachments to their mother figure even though other carers did most of the feeding
shows that feeding isnt the key element to attachment so theres no unconditioned stimulus or primary drive
learning theory of attachment evaluation: ignores other factors
factors like reciprocity and good interactional synchrony is associated with attachment
studies have shown the best attachments are with sensitive carers that pick up infant signals and respond appropriately
doesn’t support cupboard love theory
Bowlbys monotropic theory
evolutionary explanation
attachment is an innate system that gave a survival advantage
imprinting and attachment evolved because they ensure that young stay close to their caregivers and this protects them from any hazards
monotropy
he placed great emphasis on a childs attachment to one particular caregiver
this was the ‘mother’ - doesn’t have to be biological
he believed this attachment is different and more important than the others
more time spent with the baby = better
law on continuity
more constant and predictable the care = better quality of attachment
law of accumulated separation
effects of every separation adds up
the safest dose is zero
social releasers
innate behaviours
cute behaviours like smiling and cooing
they encourage attention from adults
purpose is to activate the adult attachment system
critical period
around 2 years
baby has to attach or the baby will find it hard to make future attachments
formation of the internal working model
child forms a mental representation of their relationship with their primary caregiver
this serves as a model for what relationships are like
affects the childs ability to be a parent themselves
Bowlbys monotropic theory evaluation: mixed evidence
Schaffer and Emerson
support:
primary attachment (specific) had to be formed first
counter:
a significant minority of the babies formed multiple attachments at the same time
its unclear if theres something unique with the first attachment
Bowlbys monotropic theory evaluation: support for social releasers
Brazleton
observed mothers and infants during interactions
reports the existence of interactional synchrony
extended the study to experiment
primary attachment figures instructed to ignore infant
babies initially showed signs of distress but then curled up and lied motionless
shows the social releasers elicit caregiving behaviours
Bowlbys monotropic theory evaluation: support for internal working model
Bailey
assessed 99 mothers with 1 year old infants on the quality of their attachment to their infants and their own mothers
found that mothers who reported poor attachments with their parents where more likely to have a poor relationship with their infant
strange situation
Ainsworth
controlled observation
measure the security of attachment a child displays towards a caregiver
proximity seeking
infant with a good attachment will stay fairly close to the caregiver
exploration and secure-base behaviour
good attachment enables a child to feel confident to explore while using their caregiver as a secure base
stranger anxiety
displaying anxiety when a stranger approaches
separation anxiety
protest at a separation from caregiver
response to reunion
with the caregiver after separation for a short period of time
strange situation: procedure
- child encouraged to explore
- stranger comes in and tries to interact with child
- caregiver leaves the child and stranger together
- caregiver returns and strange leaves
- caregiver leaves the child alone
- stranger returns
- caregiver returns and is reunited with child
strange situation: findings
identified 3 types of attachments:
- secure
- insecure-avoidant
- insecure-resistant
secure attachment
explore happily but regularly go back to caregiver
(proximity seeking and secure base behaviour)
moderate separation and stranger anxiety
require and accept comfort in reunion stage
60-75% british toddlers
insecure-avoidant attachment
explore freely but not proximity seeking or secure base behaviour
show little or no separation anxiety and response to reunion
little stranger anxiety
20-25% british toddlers
insecure-resistant attachment
children seek greater proximity than others and explore less
show huger stranger and separation anxiety
resist comfort at reunion
3% british toddlers
strange situation evaluation: support
attachment type is strongly predictive of later development
secure - go on to have better outcomes in many areas
insecure-resistant - associated with the worst outcomes including bullying and mental health problems
evidence for the validity of the concept because it can explain subsequent outcomes
strange situation evaluation: good reliability
good inter-rater reliability - multiple observers
generally agreed
controlled conditions and behavioural categories are easy to observe
we can be confident that the attachment type of an infant studied doesn’t depend on who is observing them
strange situation evaluation: cultural bias
cultural differences in childhood experiences means children will respond differently in the strange situation
caregivers from different cultures behave differently in strange situation
Takahshi
test doesn’t work in Japan because mothers are rarely separated from the babies that there are high levels of separation anxiety but in reunion mothers rushed and scooped up baby so it was hard to observe the babies behaviour
cultural variations in attachment
van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenburg
32 studies of strange situation conducted in 8 countries
results meta analysed
Ijzendoorn and Kroonenburg findings
-Secure attachment most common in all countries.
China = 50%
Britain = 75%
individualist cultures - insecure-resistant attachment - similar to Ainsworth’s original samples (all under 14%).
However, collectivist samples - E.g Japan, China and Israel - rates above 25% - insecure avoidant reduced.
-suggest cultural differences in distribution of insecure atatchment.
Variations between results within country - 150% greater than between countries.
USA - one study found 46% securely attached - others found 94%.
Simonella et al
italian study - strange situation
76 12 month old babies
50% secure
36% insecure avoiding
= lower number of secure
because increasing number of mothers work long hours and use childcare
Jin et al
Korean study - strange situation
87 children
overall proportions the same between secure and insecure
however only 1 insecure avoidant
similar to Japanese distribution - they have similar child rearing practices
cultural variations in attachment evaluation: large samples A03
large sample = large comparison groups
increases internal validity
reduces impact of anomalous results caused by bad methodology or individual differences
cultural variations in attachment evaluation: unrepresentative samples AO3
van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg
claimed it was a comparison between different cultures when it was a comparison between countries
within a country there are many different cultures with different child rearing practices
van Ijzendoorn and Sagi - analysed attachment types in Tokyo
urban areas = similar to western
rural - over-representation of insecure resistant
may have little meaning
cultural variations in attachment evaluation: biased AO3
cross cultural psychology includes ideas of etic and emic
strange situation is designed by a western psychologist based on another western theory
imposed etic - e.g.
stranger anxiety and lack of pleasure at reunion = insecure
in Germany thats seen as independence
etic meaning
cultural universals
emic meaning
cultural uniqueness
imposed etic
trying to apply a theory or technique based on one culture onto another culture
Bowlby’s theory of maternal deprivation
the continuous presence of a mother figure is essential for normal psychological development both emotionally and intellectually
Bowlby’s theory of maternal deprivation: separation vs deprivation
separation = child not being in the presence of primary attachment
deprivation = extended separations where the infant looses an element of care
Bowlby’s theory of maternal deprivation: critical period
first 30 months
critical period for psychological development
Bowlby’s theory of maternal deprivation: effects on development - intellectual.
intellectual
suffer from mental retardation - abnormally low IQ
Goldfarb
found lower IQ in children who had remained in institutions as a opposed to fostered children
Bowlby’s theory of maternal deprivation: effects on development - emotional
emotional
affectionless psychopathy - inability to experience guilt or strong emotions for others
prevents the person from developing normal relationships and is associated with criminality
Bowlby’s theory of maternal deprivation: 44 thieve study procedure
Bowlby
44 criminal teenagers - stealing
interviewed for signs of affection less psychopathy
families also interviewed
compared against group of emotionally disturbed teenagers
Bowlby’s theory of maternal deprivation: 44 thieves study findings
14/44 of thieves = affectionless psychopaths
12/14 had experience prolonged separation from their mothers in the first 2 years of their lives
5 out of rest of thieves had experienced separation
control:
2/44 experienced long separations
concluded:
prolonged early separation = affectionless psychopathy
Bowlby’s theory of maternal deprivation evaluation: poor evidence
Bowlby used evidence from his study and studies of children orphaned during WW2
these are all flawed as evidence
war-orphans are traumatised and often had poor-after care
children growing up in institutions were deprived of many aspects of care
44 thieves had major design flaws - bias (Bowlby carried out the assessments)
these factors could have caused problems to later development difficulties
Bowlby’s theory of maternal deprivation evaluation: counter evidence
Lewis
partically replicated 44 thieves on a larger scale
looked at 500 young people
history of prolonged separation didn’t predict criminality or difficulty to forming close relationships
suggests there are other factors for the theory of maternal deprivation
Bowlby’s theory of maternal deprivation evaluation: sensitive period
later research showed that damage isn’t inevitable
some cases of very severe deprivation have had good outcomes provided the child has some social interaction and good aftercare
Koluchova
twin boys
isolated at age of 18 months until 7 years old - locked in a cupboard by their step mother
after care - looked after by 2 loving adults and appeared to recover fully
show the critical period is a sensitive one instead
Romanian orphan study: Rutter’s ERA study procedure
English and romanian adoptee
165 Romanian orphans
52 British orphans
all adopted in Britain
physical, cognitive and emotional development assessed at ages 4, 6, 11, 15
Romanian orphan study: Rutter’s ERA study findings
first arrival:
signs of mental retardation
severely undernourished
11:
differential rates of recovery related to age of adoption
mean IQ:
adoption before 6 months = 102
adoption 6 months - 2 years = 86
adoption after 2 years = 77
these differences remained at the age of 16
those adopted after 6 months had disinhibited attachment - attention seeking, clinginess, social behaviour directed indiscriminately towards all adults
Romanian orphan study: Bucharest Early Intervention project
Zeanah
95 children that had spent 90% of their lives in institutional care, aged 12-31
control group - 50 children who had never lived in institutional care
attachment type measured using strange situation and carers were asked about unusual behaviour
findings:
74% of control = securely attached
19% of institutional group = securely attached
65% of institutional group = disorganised attached
44% vs 20% - showed disinhibited attachment
effects of institutionalisation pt 1
disinhibited attachment:
equally friendly and affectionate to everyone
Rutter - explained it as an adaption to living with multiple careers during sensitive period
effects of institutionalisation pt 2
mental retardation:
damage to intellectual development can be recovered provided adoption takes place before the age of 6 months
Romanian orphan study evaluation: real life application
enhanced our understanding of the effects of institutionalisation
led to improvements in the way children are cared for in institutions
orphanages and children homes avoid large numbers of caregivers for each child and ensure that a smaller number of people play an essential role for the child
research has had a lot of valuable practical terms
Romanian orphan study evaluation: fewer extraneous variables
other orphan studies often involved children who had experienced loss or trauma before they were institutionalised
therefore its hard to observe the effects of institutionalisation in isolation - confounding participant variables
NOT case with Romanian studies
increases internal validity
Romanian orphan study evaluation: unlikely
Romanian orphanages had such bad conditions that it might mean we cannot apply the findings onto institutional care and deprived children
unusual situational variables
lack generalisability
internal working model
quality of first relationship is crucial as its a template that will powerfully affect the nature of their future relationships
secure loving = assume this is how relationships should be = seek out functional relationships
insecure - avoidant = too uninvolved or too emotionally close
insecure - resistant = controlling and argumentative
attachment on later childhood
attachment type is associated with the quality of peer relationships in childhood
secure - form best quality childhood friendships
insecure - have friendship difficulties
bullying:
Wilson and Smith
questionnaire - 196 children aged 7-11
secure - unlikely to be involved in bullying
insecure - avoidant - most likely to be victims
insecure - resistant - most likely to be bullies
attachment on adulthood: McCarthy
40 adult women who had been assessed as infants
securely attached = best romantic and friendships
insecure resistant = struggled with intimacy in romantic relationships
attachment on adulthood: Shaver and Hazen
analysed 620 replies to a ‘love quiz’
3 sections:
- assessed current/ most important relationship
- assessed general love experiences
- assessed attachment type
findings
56% = secure = most likely to have longer and good relationships
25% insecure - avoidant = tended to reveal jealousy and fear of intimacy
19% insecure - resistant
suggests patterns of attachment behaviour
attachment on adulthood: parenting
internal working models also affect the childs ability to parent their own children
Bailey
99 mothers
attachments to their infants and mothers
using strange situation and adult attachment interview
majority of women had the same attachment classification to both
attachment on later relationships evaluation: mixed evidence
for continuity of attachment type
for:
McCarthy
support continuity
against:
Zimmerman
assessed infant attachment and adolescent attachment
found very little relationship between quality of infant and adolescent attachment
attachment on later relationships evaluation: validity issues
studies of attachment to primary caregiver and other significant people dot make sure of strange situation
use interviews or questionnaires years later = validity problems
self-report techniques = depend on honesty and realistic views = limited validity
retrospective evaluation of attachment = relies on accurate recall
attachment on later relationships evaluation: association DOES NOT = causation
attachment type is ASSOCIATED with the quality of later relationships
there are alternative explanations
environmental factors - parenting style, child temperament
