Attachment Flashcards
Features of caregiver infant interaction
- sensitive responsiveness
- imitation
- Interactional synchrony
- reciprocity
- motherese
Sensitive responsiveness
The caregiver responds appropriately to signals from the infant
Imitation
The caregiver copies the caregivers actions and behaviour, for example Melzoff and Moore found infants between 2 and 3 weeks of age appeared to imitate the facial expressions and hand gestures of the experimenter
Interactional sychrony
Infants react in time with the caregivers speech, resulting in a conversational dance, Condon and Sander provided evidence for this as they showed that babies do not move in time with adult conversation
Reciprocity
Interaction flows back and forth between caregiver and infant
Motherese
The slow high pitched way of taking to infants however there is no evidence to support that this influences the
strength of an attachment between parent and infant
Attachment AO1
An emotional bond between two people in a two way process that endures over times which leads to certain behaviour such as clinging and proximity seeking and how this can protect the infant
Reciprocity AO1
When a parent and child respond to each others signals, response to each others action from response which the response is not necessarily coping the action, an example is if a baby cries the mum gives it a cuddle
Brazelton
1979, proves why reciprocity is important as it helps later communications and helps the caregiver anticipate the infants behaviour and responds to appropriately to protect the infant. It also lays foundation for later communication and attachment, which helps the infants social development and protects the baby
Interactional synchrony AO1
Caregiver and infant interact by mirroring each others actions and responses and emotion
Meltzoff and Moore
1977, conducted first observational synchrony research
Meltzoff and Moore conduct of research
A controlled observation on 48 infants as young as two weeks old which were imitated facial expressions by the caregiver and they waited to see if they would respond to this, the caregiver preforms the behaviour instructed by researcher and they record the infants reaction. Observer had knowledge of, the categories they made a tally of them, took count of infants behaviour, it was repeated twice to improve reliability
Meltzoff and Moore findings
They found an association between the infant behaviour and the caregivers model, which showed reactions must be innate (from birth) and behaviour can be learned. Over 90% of later study in 1983 which was done with infants of just 3 days old showed that they could imitate the reactions which shows the significance of the research
Conclusion of Meltzoff and Moore research
Due to the age of the infants Interactional synchrony must be innate as the observers had no knowledge to make sure its objective and also the behaviour was put into categories to make more objective and increase both inter-rater reliability and intra-rated reliability
Piaget research
Contradicting Meltzoff and Moore, He proposed Interactional synchrony was developed at the end of the first year due to response training and that imitation only occurs as it’s rewarding for the infant and therefore it’s learnt and not innate