Attachment 16 marker Flashcards
1
Q
- WITH REFERENCE TO RECIPROCITY AND INTERACTIONAL SYNCHRONY DISCUSS INFANT CAREGIVER INTERACTIONS
A
- Interactions between caregivers and infants provide an insight into the type and nature of attachment
- RECIPROCITY is when an infant responds to the actions of another by turn taking
- The actions of the primary caregiver elicit a response from the infant.
The interaction between both individuals flows back and forth. - Meltzoff & Moore (1977) conducted an observational study whereby an adult displayed facial expressions or a hand gesture.
- Following the display from the model, a dummy was removed from the child’s mouth and standing their expressions filmed.
- There was an association between the infants’ behaviour and that of the adult model, showing reciprocity.
2
Q
- WITH REFERENCE TO RECIPROCITY AND INTERACTIONAL SYNCHRONY DISCUSS INFANT CAREGIVER INTERACTIONS
- EXPLAIN INTERACTIONAL SYNCHRONY
A
- Interactional synchrony takes place when infants mirror the actions or emotions of another person, e.g. their facial expressions.
- The child will move their body, or carry out the same act as their caregiver simultaneously, and the two are said to be synchronised.
- This serves to sustain communication between the two caregiver and infant.
3
Q
- WITH REFERENCE TO RECIPROCITY AND INTERACTIONAL SYNCHRONY DISCUSS INFANT CAREGIVER INTERACTIONS
- COINCIDENTAL/ CHANCE
A
- One limitation of research into caregiver-infant interactions is the questionable reliability of testing children.
- This is because infants move their mouths and wave their arms constantly, which is an issue for researchers investigating intentional behaviour.
- Therefore, we cannot be certain that the infants were engaging in interactional synchrony or reciprocity, as some of the behaviour may have occurred by chance.
- This questions the validity of research in relation to reciprocity and interactional synchrony and suggests that psychologists should cautious when interpreting the findings from research in this area.
4
Q
- WITH REFERENCE TO RECIPROCITY AND INTERACTIONAL SYNCHRONY DISCUSS INFANT CAREGIVER INTERACTIONS
( observer bias)
A
- There methodological problems with studying interactional synchrony using observational methods.
- There is the possibility of observer bias where the researchers consciously or unconsciously interpret behaviour to support their findings.
- To address this problem, more than one observer should be used to examine the inter-observer reliability of the observations.
- Recent research by Koepke et al (1983) failed to replicate findings of Meltzoff& Moore which suggests that their results of research examining infant-caregiver interactions unreliable.
5
Q
- WITH REFERENCE TO RECIPROCITY AND INTERACTIONAL SYNCHRONY DISCUSS INFANT CAREGIVER INTERACTIONS
Isabella et al
A
- A further criticism of Meltzoff& Moore’s research is that recent research found that only securely attached infants engage in interactional synchrony.
- Isabella et al. (1989) found that the more securely attached the infant, the greater the level of interactional synchrony.
- This suggests that not all children engage in interactional synchrony and that Meltzoff & Moore’s original findings may have overlooked individual differences which could be a mediating factor.
6
Q
- WITH REFERENCE TO RECIPROCITY AND INTERACTIONAL SYNCHRONY DISCUSS INFANT CAREGIVER INTERACTIONS (innate)
A
- Psychologists suggest that caregiver-infant interactions, such as reciprocity, are present from birth and therefore are the product of nature in order to help infants form and maintain an attachment.
- However, such innate behaviours do not act in isolation and interact with the environment (caregivers) to prompt a response (e.g. attention).
- Consequently, researchers should consider the interaction of innate infant behaviours with the environment (e.g, their caregivers) to fully appreciate and understand the complex nature of caregiver- infant interactions.
7
Q
- OUTLINE AND EVALUATE THE ROLE OF THE FATHER IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF ATTACHMENT
A
- Traditionally, the role of the father in attachment would have been limited, as they would go to work to provide resources for the family whilst the mothers took care of the children.
- Although recently the role of the father has changed significantly. However, psychologists disagree over the exact role of the father.
- Some researchers claim that men are simply not equipped to form an attachment.
- Such psychologists point to biological evidence which suggests that the hormone oestrogen underlies caring behaviour in women and the lack of oestrogen in men is why they are unable to form a close attachment.
- Other researchers argue that fathers do not take on a caregiver role and, in fact, provide a different role, as a playmate.
- Finally, some researchers argue that fathers can demonstrate sensitive responsiveness and react to the needs of their children and thus can form a strong emotional tie or bond
8
Q
- OUTLINE AND EVALUATE THE ROLE OF THE FATHER IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF ATTACHMENT
(Father is a playmate? Geiger?)
A
- There is research evidence that provides support for the role of the father as a ‘playmate’.
- Research by Geiger (1996) found that fathers’ play interactions were more exciting in comparison to mothers’.
- However, the mothers’ play interactions were more affectionate and nurturing.
- This suggests that the role of the father is, in fact, as a playmate and not as a sensitive parent who responds to the needs of their children.
- These results also confirm that the mother takes on more of a nurturing role.
9
Q
- OUTLINE AND EVALUATE THE ROLE OF THE FATHER IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF ATTACHMENT
(Hardy 1999?)
A
- Furthermore, research evidence also suggests that fathers do not provide a sensitive and nurturing attachment.
- Hardy (1999) found that fathers were less able to detect low levels of infant distress, in comparison to mothers.
- These results appear to support the biological explanations highlighted above; the lack of oestrogen in men means that fathers are not biologically equipped to form close attachments with their children.
- This suggests that the role of the father is, to some extent, biologically determined and that a father’s role is restricted because of their biological makeup.
- This provides further evidence that fathers are not able to provide a sensitive and nurturing type of attachment, as they are unable to detect stress in their children.
10
Q
- OUTLINE AND EVALUATE THE ROLE OF THE FATHER IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF ATTACHMENT
(Belsky et al)
A
- However, research suggests that fathers are able to form secure attachments with their children if they are in an intimate or close marriage.
- Belsky et al. (2009) found that males who reported higher levels of marital intimacy also displayed a secure father-infant attachment, whereas males with lower levels of marital intimacy displayed insecure father-infant attachments.
- This suggests that males can form secure attachments with their children; however, the strength of the attachment depends on the father and mother relationship.
- Therefore, while fathers may be biologically determined to form a different relationship with their children, this relationship is mediated by their environment (the intimacy of their marriage) suggesting that while a father’s role may be determined, it is only determined to an extent and therefore a softer view of determinism is more appropriate.
11
Q
- OUTLINE AND EVALUATE ANIMAL STUDIES OF ATTACHMENT
(lorenz experiment?)
A
- Lorenz conducted an experiment where he divided goose eggs into two batches.
- One batch was hatched naturally by the mother and the second batch were placed in an incubator, that the goslings saw after hatching.
12
Q
- OUTLINE AND EVALUATE ANIMAL STUDIES OF ATTACHMENT
(Lorenz conclusion)
A
- Lorenz found that straight after birth the naturally hatched goslings followed the mother goose, whereas the incubator- hours after hatching and the relationship persisted over time with Lorenz maling sure he was the first large moving object Lorenz found that straight after birth the naturally hatched hatched goslings followed Lorenz.
- Lorenz noted that this imprinting only occurred within a critical period of 4-25 and proved to be irreversible.
13
Q
- OUTLINE AND EVALUATE ANIMAL STUDIES OF ATTACHMENT
(generalisation)
A
- Since Lorenz only studied animals, we cannot generalise the would behave in the same way.
- The attachment formation in results to humans as we are unable to conclude that they mammals appears to be very different to that of bird species Human parents, specifically mothers, show more emotional reactions to their offspring and can form attachments beyond the first few hours after birth.
- So, whilst some of Lorenz’s findings have influenced our understanding of development and attachment formation, caution must be applied when drawing wider conclusions about the results.
14
Q
- OUTLINE AND EVALUATE ANIMAL STUDIES OF ATTACHMENT
(Guitton et al)
A
- Later research has cast doubt on some of the conclusions which Lorenz drew.
- For example, Guiton et al. (1966) found that chickens would imprint on yellow washing up gloves if that was the largest moving object they first saw after birth.
- Later, they would then try to mate with that object in adulthood.
- However, they disagreed with Lorenz’s predictions that this relationship persists and is irreversible.
- This is because with experience, the chickens could eventually learn to prefer mating with other chickens instead, suggesting that the effects of imprinting may not be as permanent as initially thought.
15
Q
- OUTLINE AND EVALUATE ANIMAL STUDIES OF ATTACHMENT
(Harlow? Baby monkey?)
A
- Harlow investigated attachment behaviour in rhesus wire mother’ and a second soft ‘towelling mother’.
- The was recorded. Findings showed that the baby monkeys monkeys.
- He constructed two surrogate mothers: one harsh amount of time that the baby monkey spent with each mother preferred to make contact with the soft ‘towelling mother’ and the monkeys would even stretch across to the wire mother’ for food whilst still clinging onto the ‘towelling mother’.
- Harlow concluded that baby rhesus monkeys have an innate drive to seek contact comfort suggesting that attachment with parents is formed through an emotional need for security.
16
Q
- OUTLINE AND EVALUATE ANIMAL STUDIES OF ATTACHMENT
(HOWE ET AL)
A
- The results from Harlow’s study are of large practical value since they provide insight into attachment formation which has important real-world applications that can be useful in a range of practical situations.
- For example, Howe (1998) reports that the knowledge gained from Harlow’s research has helped social workers to understand risk factors in neglect and abuse cases with human children who can then serve to prevent it occurring or, at the very least, recognise when to intervene.
- In addition, there are practical applications which are used in the care of captive wild monkeys in zoos or breeding programmes to ensure that they have have adequate attachment figures as part of their care.
17
Q
- OUTLINE AND EVALUATE ANIMAL STUDIES OF ATTACHMENT
(Harlow ETHICS?)
A
- Harlow was criticised heavily for the ethics of his research on animals.
- The baby rhesus monkeys suffered greatly in terms of emotional separation from their biological mother at such an early age due to the procedure Harlow used.
- If the species of primates are considered sufficiently human-like to generalise the results, then it stands to reason that the effects of psychological harm that they will have endured are similar to that of a human baby.
- There is, however, the question of whether the insight obtained was sufficiently important to psychologists’ understanding of attachment that Harlow was justified in his approach.
18
Q
- OUTLINE AND EVALUATE BOWLBY’S EXPLANATION OF ATTACHMENT
( innate tendency )
A
- Bowlby argued that infants are born with an innate tendency to form attachments with their parents to increase chances of survival.
19
Q
- OUTLINE AND EVALUATE BOWLBY’S EXPLANATION OF ATTACHMENT
(Biological tendency to care?)
A
- According to Bowlby, infants possess inborn social releasers, which unlock a biological tendency in adults to care for them.
- Examples include ‘baby face’ features or smiling and cooing.
- Babies must form an attachment during the critical period which is between three and six months of age.
- However which unlock a biological tendency in adults to care for them.
- Bowlby later acknowledged that infants could form an attachment after this period (up to three years of age): however, he maintained that the successful formation of an attachment would be increasingly difficult after this initial period. Bowlby said that if an attachment didn’t form during this time frame then the child would be damaged for life - socially, emotionally, intellectually and physically
20
Q
- OUTLINE AND EVALUATE BOWLBY’S EXPLANATION OF ATTACHMENT
(Monotropic? Internal model?)
A
- Furthermore, infants form one special attachment which Bowlby called monotropy.
- Through the monotropic attachment the infant forms an internal working model which is a mental template for future relationship expectations.
- If there’s a healthy attachment with the caregiver then the infant will develop strong relationships later in life.
- However if the child has a negative relationship with their caregiver they will have difficult social and romantic relationships.
21
Q
- OUTLINE AND EVALUATE BOWLBY’S EXPLANATION OF ATTACHMENT
(Hazen and shaver?)
A
- A strength of Bowlby’s theory comes from research by Hazan and Shaver (1987).
- They used a self-report questionnaire called The Love Quiz’ to assess the internal working model.
- They found a positive correlation between early attachment types and later adult relationships.
- This supports Bowlby’s idea of an internal working model and suggests that our early childhood experiences do affect our later adult relationships.
- Sroufe et al. (2005) also provide evidence for this in their Minnesota parent-child study, showing the outcome of early attachment type being carried forward and projected onto expectations of subsequent relationships.
22
Q
- OUTLINE AND EVALUATE BOWLBY’S EXPLANATION OF ATTACHMENT
(Innate mechanism to survive?)
A
- Bowlby’s theory suggests that attachments are an innate mechanism to aid survival, therefore supporting a nature adult relationships are, to some extent, determined by an nurture is critical when considering the effects of early view.
- His notion of an internal working model suggests that innate mechanism shaped by our nurturing early relationship experiences.
- This suggests that an interaction of nature and attachments and the internal working model, and that psychologists should consider both biological and environmental factors when examining attachment.
23
Q
- OUTLINE AND EVALUATE BOWLBY’S EXPLANATION OF ATTACHMENT
(mixed evidence for the importance of monotropy)
A
- There is mixed evidence for the importance of monotropy Schaffer and Emmerson (1964) refute the idea that infants must form one special attachment to their caregiver which supersedes all others and provides the foundation for subsequent, multiple attachments.
- They did recognise that some infants do, in fact, follow this pattern but that there are others who can form multiple attachments with different caregivers at the same time (e.g. the mother and father simultaneously).
- This goes against Bowlby’s notion of ‘monotropy’ which forms a central part of his theory of attachment.
24
Q
- OUTLINE AND EVALUATE BOWLBY’S EXPLANATION OF ATTACHMENT
(Alternative explanation?)
A
- There is an alternative explanation for attachment.
- Kagan (1984) proposed the temperament hypothesis which suggests that a child’s genetically inherited personality traits (temperament) have a role to play in forming an attachment with a caregiver.
- It is thought that infants have differing temperaments because of their biological makeup which means that some are more sociable and ‘easy’ and others are more anxious and ‘difficult’ babies.
- It is argued that Bowlby ignored the role of temperament, preferring instead to focus on the early childhood experiences and quality of attachment, which was an oversight since personality differences in the child can influence whether they become securely or insecurely attached.
25
Q
- OUTLINE AND EVALUATE LEARNING THEORY AS AN EXPLANATION OF ATTACHMENT
A
- Learning theory explains how infants learn to become attached through the processes of classical or operant conditioning.
- It is sometimes called the ‘cupboard love’ theory because of the focus on food.
26
Q
- OUTLINE AND EVALUATE LEARNING THEORY AS AN EXPLANATION OF ATTACHMENT
(Classical conditioning?)
A
- Classical conditioning is learning by association.
Before conditioning, food is an unconditioned stimulus (UCS) which produces an unconditioned response (UCR) of pleasure as a relief from hunger. - The caregiver is a neutral stimulus (NS), who produces no conditioned response.
- During conditioning, the child associates the caregiver (NS) who feeds them with the food (UCS).
- Through repeated pairing, the caregiver becomes a conditioned stimulus (CS) who is associated with the pleasure from feeding.
- This results in the caregiver eliciting a conditioned response from the child and the formation of an attachment.