Attachment Flashcards
Explain attachment
-Attachment is a strong, enduring emotional relationship between two poeple(especially an infant and caregiver)
-A two way process that is characterised by a desire for closeness and a feeling of security when the attachment figure is present
What are the two learning theories of attachment
Classical conditioning
Operant conditioning
Explain classical conditioning for the learning theory of attachment
-Food is the UCS and being fed gives a feeling of pleasure which is the UCR
-Caregivers starts as the NS - child has not learned to react to them in anyway
-When the same caregiver(NS) provides food(UCS) over a long time, the caregiver becomes associated with food
-After learning, the mother (CS) starts producing the response of pleasure(CR) by themselves
-According to the learning theory, fhd baby has become attached to the caregiver
Explain operant conditioning(based on negative reinforcement) for the learning theory of attachment
-In operant conditioning, behaviour is repeated due to reinforcement
-In the case of attachment, hunger acts as a drive(a feeling of discomfort that motivates behaviour)
-This leads to babies crying as a desired behaviour
-This may lead to the child being fed which will reduce the hunger and lead to drive reduction
-The food which is the reward is the primary reinforcer as it is the actual object reducing the drive
-The mother is the secondary reinforcer as it is the person who provides the food
-As the process repeats, the child becomes attached to the mother as she is the agent of drive reduction and source of reward
Bowlbys theory name
What did he believe all humans had?
He thought forming attachments had an…
Whats the acronym for this process
Bowlby monotonic theory of attachment
All humans have an intrinsic tendency to form an attachment and it I’d not something that is merely learnt
He thought forming attachments had an evolutionary value/advantages
ACSMI
Explain ACSMI for Bowlby Monotropic theory of attachment
ADAPTIVE AND INNATE serves an important survival function for infants, infants who are well protected are likely to survive. Also, forming an attachment ensures that the offspring survives so it ensures to parents that their genes can be passed on to next generations
CRITICAL PERIOD This innate drive to form an attachment has a special limited time period for its development which in humans is 0-2 years
Children who do not have the opportunity to form an attachment during the critical period have difficulty forming attachments later on
SOCIAL RELEASERS
During the critical period, the quality of attachment is determined by their parents sensitivity to their social releases
Social releasers are behaviours like crying, smiling, cooing that elicit caregiving responses from the carer
The tendency of demonstrating social releasers is innate and done to capture the attention of the carer
MONOTROPY
The child will form a monotropic attachment with the caregiver who is most responsive to their social releasers
Monotropic attachment is when an infant forms one special, emotional bond which is a primary attachment
This is often the biological mother, but that is not always the case
INTERNAL WORKING MODEL
The first monotropic attachment formed provides a template for future relationships and forms a concept of what to expect our of future, intimate relationship. This is called internal working model
This led to development of the continuity hypothesis
Individuals who had secure relationships in infanct have positive templates, they continue to be socially and emotionally competent abs bave secure relationships with others in the future
Difficult relationships in infancy create negative templates, more likely to have the same difficulties in adult relationship
What is the strengths, limitations and one alternative for Bowlbys Monotropic theory of attachment
STRENGTH: Research support for continuity hypothesis, Practical applications
LIMITATION: Refuting evidence for the concept of critical period
Refuting evidence for the concept of monotropy
One strength of Bowlby’s monotropic theory of attachment is there is research support for continuity hypothesis
One strength of Bowlby’s monotropic theory of attachment is there is research support for continuity hypothesis
The minnesota parent child study followed participants from infance to late adolescence and found continuity between the quality of early attachment and late emotional and social behaviour ghat the person engaged in. Participants who has secure attachments at infancy were highest rated for social competence in childhood, were less isolated, more popular and more empathetic
This is a strength as it is consistent with the continuity hypothesis as those with strong attachments in infancy go on to be more socially and emotionally competent than those who lacked strong attachments during infancy
Therfore this increases the validity of Bowlby’s theory
One strength of Bowlby’s theory of attachment is it has practical applications for the care of adoptive children
One strength of Bowlby’s theory of attachment is that it has practical applications for the care of adoptive children
For example, Bowlby’s stated that children form attachments during the critical period and this has led to adoptive agencies to ensure that children are adopted from 0 to 2 years or at the youngest possible age
This is a strength as it gives the children the best possible chance to form an attachment with their new caregiver so they will go on to form good relationships in the future as the theory states
Therefore, Bowlby’s theory I’d not purely theoretical as jt has been applied and is useful in improving the lives of adopted children
One limitation of Bowlby’s theory is there is Refuting evidence for the concept of the critical period
One limitation of Bowlby’s theory is there is Refuting evidence for the concept of the critical period
Tizard and Hodges found that attachment does generally happen in starting years of life. They studied orphanage children’s who have been adopted at the age of 3 and 4 and found that they were still capable of forming new attachments with their new adoptive parents at that age
This is a problem as Bowlby stated that children can only form an attachment during the critical period which is 0 to 2 years, howver this study suggests that close attachments can still be formed outside the critical period
This refutes the existence of a strict critical period so reduces the validity of Bowlby’s theory
One limitation of Bowlby’s theory of attachment is there is Refuting evidence of the concept of monotropy
One limitation of Bowlby’s theory of attachment is there is Refuting evidence of the concept of monotropy
Studies have shown the babies’attahcment to the first figure is not necessarily special or unique
Schaffer and Emerson studied 60 Glasgow babies and found that jt was the norm to have multiple attachments
Around the age of 10 months, 30% of the babies had multiple attachments
Furthermore, Bowlby implied that the main attachment is likely to be with the mother but the study found that a third of the babies were strongly attached to their fathers
This is a limitation as Bowlby underestimated children’s potential of forming attachments with their fathers and also contradicts the idea that children only form one special bond
This therefore reduced the validity of Bowlby’s theory
JUST READ THIS
ALTERNATIVE EXPLANATION OF BOWLBY’S MONOTROPIC THEORY OF ATTACHMENT
A weakness of Bowlby’s theory of attachment is that he failed to acknowledge the role of learning in the attachment process. According to learning theory, attachments are formed when infants associate the primary caregiver with the pleasure they experience from tbe food they provide of recognise that the caregiver has a role in removing the unpleasant experience of hunger. This indicated Bowlby’s explanation of attachment is too narrow and that he focused too much on the innate mechanisms involved in the formation of attachments and failed to acknowledge the role of learning and consequences. Therefore, Bowlby’s theory of attachment can be considered an incomplete explanation of attachment
What is one strength, 2 limitations and one alternative for the learning theory of attachment
STRENGTH: Practical applications
LIMITATIONS: Refuting evidence from animal research, Refuting evidence from human research
One strength of the learning theory is there are practical applications
One strength of the learning theory is there are practical applications
The learning theory explains that feeding behaviour forms attachments(e.g. through associating the caregiver with pleasure provided by food). This can be utilised to allow both parents to form an attachment with the infant. For the father, this can be achieved by feeding the infant expressed milk or formula milk.
This is a strength as it means both parents can look after the infant which creates a lot more flexibility in the household in terms of childcare and parental leave
Therefore, it is not purely theoretical and it increases the utility of the explanation
What are the two animal studies of attachment
Lorenz’s Goslings
Harlow’s monkeys
What do animal studies of attachment look into
Why is this behaviour of interest to psychologists
Animal studies have looked into formation of early bonds between non human parents and their offspring
We can learn more about attachment behaviour in humans by observing it in other species
Define imprinting
Animal forms a special bond with the first moving thing it sees after birth
LORENZ’S GOSLINGS
Procedure
Findings
Conclusion
PROCEDURE: Lorenz investigated the idea of imprinting. He took a clutch of goose eggs and divided them into two groups. The cotton geoup was left with their natural mother while in the experimental group, eggs were placed in an incubator. When these eggs hatched, the first living thing they saw an had contact with was Lorenz. Lorenz then interacted with the goslings and observed their behaviour
FINDINGS The incubator group followed Lorenz everywhere whereas the control group followed the mother group. Furthermore, Lorenz goose showed no recognition of their natural mother. Lorenz claimed that a young animal will form an attachment to a moving object it observes during its critical period (up to 2 days). Lack of an object will mean a primary attachment is not formed. He also claimed that animals (especially birds) will chosoe to mate with the same kind of animal they were imprinted and this is called sexual imprinting
CONCLUSION Animals form attachments through imprinting and have ab evolutionary need to form attachments to improve their survival chances
HARLOW’S MONKEYS
Procedure
Findings
Conclusion
PROCEDURE: Harlow placed monekys(that were raised in isolation until they were eight months old) in cages with two ‘surrogate’ mothers. One was made of wire with a monkey like head that dispensed milk for the monkeys. The other was made from a wooden block covered in a soft towel which provided comfort to the monkeys
FINDINGS It was found that baby monkeys cuddled the towel mother more than the wire mother to seek comfort. When they were frightened, they always went to the towel mother. This shows that contact comfort is more important than food when forming attachments
Harlow did a follow up on the monkeys and found that later in life, even those that did have contact comfort developed abnormally as they all showed abnormal social interactions and mating behaviours with other monkeys. Harlow concluded that this may be due to them not forming healthy attachments during the critical period(up to 90 days after birth)
CONCLUSION: Food does not form attachments, contact comfort and social interaction is the key factor to forming attachments. Any theory that states that attachments forms through providing food is too simplistic.
What is one strength and 3 limitations of animal research
STRENGTH: Research support for imprinting
WEAKNESSES: Problems extrapolating findings to humans
Imprinting effects are not fixed
Ethical issues
One strength of animal research is there is research support for imprinting
One strength of animal research is there is research support for imprinting
Mamy studies have shown support for Lorenz’s research and the concept of imprinting in animals. Guiton exposed leghorn chicks to yellow rubber gloves used to feed them and the chick’s became imprinted to the gloves. Guiton also found that male chickens later tried to mate with the gloves.
This shows the impact of imprinting as young animals are not brkn with innate ability to imprint to specific species, they imprint on amy moving thing they observe during their critical period
This shows the strength of imprinting in forming attachments in animals
Imprinting also affects characteristics of the desired mate
This therefore, increases the validity of Lorenz’s research
One limitation of animal studies of attachment is there are problems extrapolating the findings to humans
One limitation of animal studies of attachment js there are problems extrapolating the findings to humans
It is clear that human infants are significantly more complex than animals (e.g. showing much greater emotional attachments to animals). Additionally, the critical period is significantly different in human infants (0-2 years - Bowlby) compared to monkeys(90 days) and geese (up to 2 days).
This means it is difficult to generalise Lorenz’s and Harlow’s findings directly to humans as attachment behaviour is more complex and the critical period is very different between animals and humans.
Therefore, it is too problematic to apply animal findings to humans
One limitation of the learning theory is there is Refuting evidence from animal research
One limitation of the learning theory is there is Refuting evidence from animal research
For example, Harlow showed that feeding does not lead to forming attachments as the monkeys sought contact comfort and formed lasting attachments with the towel mother rather than the food providing wire mother. Also Lorenz found that geese imprinted with the first moving object they saw regardless of whether that object provided them with food. This shows animals don’t form attachments with those that feed them so it actively refutes the role of food based pairing and drive reduction in the formation of attachments
Therefore, this reduces the validity of the learning theory as an explanation of forming attachments
A limitation of the learning theory is there is Refuting evidence from human research
A limitation of the learning theory is there is Refuting evidence from human research
Schaffer and Emerson did a study where they found that attachments tended to be stronger with caregivers who was most interactive and sensitive to the infants needs, and not the person who fed them the most. In fact some of the children also had multiple attachments, energy though the mothers may have done more of the feeding
This is a problem as it further solidifies the notion that food is not the most important factor in forming attachments in humans
Therfore, this reduces the validity of the learning theory as an explanation for forgetting attachments
One limitation of animal research is the effects of imprinting are not as permanent as Lorenz believed
One limitation of animal research is the effects of imprinting are not as permanent as Lorenz believed
Imprinting is a ‘plastic’ or flexible mechanism. Guiton found that he could reverse the imprinting in chickens who tried to mate with gloves by making them spend time with their own species and he found that they were able to engage in normal sexual behaviour with other chickens
This suggests that the impact of imprinting on mating behaviours is not fixed and can be changed with experiences
This suggests that Lorenz overestimated its effect of the development of sexual and attachment behaviour
Therefore, this decreases the validity of animal research as an explanation to the formation of attachments
ANIMAL RESEARCH A limitation of Harlow’s research is there are ethical issues
A limitation of Harlow’s research is there are ethical issues
Monkeys suffered both physically(self mutilation) and emotionally due to the procedures of the experiment
This species is considered very similar to humans so suffering can be considered quite serious too
The damage caused was also long term as many of the moneys struggled to engage in normal sexual and social behaviour when older
Overall, this shows Harlow’s research causes significant psychological and physical harm to monkeys
Therefore, this reduces the credibility of Harlows research
JUST READ THIS
Alternative explanation for Learning Theory (Bowlby’s theory)
A limitation of the learning theory of attachment is there is an alternative explanation of attachment such as Bowlby’s theory, which explains why attachments have formed, not just how. Attachment has an evolutionary function. Infant-increases chances of survival. Parent-ensures genes are passed on to next generations. Bobby states that attachments form when a caregiver responds to social releasers of infants during a critical. Social releasers can be sings of care needs not just feeding related behaviours. Therefore, Bowlby’s theory is a more rounded and powerful explanation of attachment whereas the learning theory only provides a partial explanation
READ THIS
What animal studies tell us about human attachment
- Critical period for imprinting (Lorenz)/Attachment (Harlow), informs is that we have a limited window of opportunity for human attachments to form, otherwise it has long term negative effects, this idea was taken up by Bowbly in the monotropic theory
- Evidence from Harlow on importance of contact comfort helped shale theories of human attachment as researchers turned away from learning theory as food was no longer seen as a key factor is forming attachments
- Showed damaging effects of poor early attachments. Harlow claimed problems with social relationships and mating sbaled tbe idea of iwm in humans and had negative effects on attachment in future relationships
- Problems with extrapolation as humans are more complex(form stronger emotional attachment) and cp is different
- Idea of critical period not relevant to humans, human attachments occur in a sensitive period, early problems with attachment puts children at risk of negative consequences later in life, but evidence shows recovery can happen(Rutfeds evidence on memal redordation/koluchava twins)
Explain caregiver and infant
What are the two mechanisms involved within these social interactions and when do they occur
From an early age, babies have social interactions with their caregivers. These interactions form the basis of the caregivers infant attachments.
Interactional synchrony- First weeks of life
Reciprocity - around 3 months
CAREGIVER AND INFANT
Explain interactional synchrony
-When the child and parent are synchronised as they engaged in the same actions in unison
-It is believed that interactional synchrony is important for the development of mother infant attachments
-Isabella et al looked at the quality of mother infant attachments and levels of synchrony and found that higher levels of interactional synchrony was associated to better quality mother infant attachments
CAREGIVER AND INFANT
Explain reciprocity
-Two way process of communication between infant and caregiver
-Each party responds to the others signal to sustain the interaction
-The behaviour of each patty elicits a response from the other
E.g. mother smiling leads to the infant smiling back
-This basic rhythm is an important precursor to later communications
-If the infants signals are regular, it allows the caregiver to anticipate the infants behaviour and respond accordingly
-If there is effective back and forth interactions, the infant delvops a healthy attachment
What are 2 strengths and 2 limitations of Caregiver infant interactions
STRENGTHS: Supporting evidence for the role of interactional synchrony and reciprocity in infant carer interactions
Supporting cross cultural evidence
WEAKNESS: Studies don’t tell us exact purpose of interactional synchrony and reciprocity
Often difficult to form meaningful and valid observations to measure infants behaviour
One strength is there is supporting evidence for the role of interactional synchrony and reciprocity in infant caree interactions
One strength is there is supporting evidence for the role of interactional synchrony and reciprocity in infant carer interactions
Murray and Traverthan asked mother to interact with their two month old infants through live video chat in real time. In the next part of the study, the infant saw a video of the mother interacting. Since this was a pre recorded video, the mother didn’t not respond to the infants facial and bodily gestures. The results showed that this led to acute distress as infants tried to gain their mothers interest but could not.
This shows reciprocity and interactional synchrony are important as a lack of them can lead to the infant showing distress so it possibly harms the deployment of infant caregiver interactions and attachments. Therefore, this supports the notion that both of these processes are likely to lead to better attachments
A strength is there is supporting cross cultural evidence for the role of interactional synchrony
A strength is there is supporting cross cultural evidence for the role of interactional synchrony
Gratier studied the timings of spontaneous vocal interactions of 30 mothers and their 2 to 5 month old infants from India, France and US. She found that mother’s and infants from India, France and US coordinate their spontaneous vocalisations to eachother. This shows infants and carers from different cultures engage in interactional synchrony during social interactions. Therefore, it is a universal behaviour so it might be a fundamental part of forming attachments between the mother and infant. Therefore, it increases the validity of understanding caregiver infant interactions