Attachment Flashcards
what is interactional synchrony?
adults and babies respond in time to sustain communication
move in the same pattern and tend to mirror what other is doing
what is reciprocity?
two way/ mutual process: each party responds to the others signals to sustain interactions (turn-taking)
behaviour of each party elicits a response from the other
(+) interactional synchrony is supported by research
P- strength of interactional synchrony is that it is supported by research
E- Meltzoff and Moore (1977) observed the beginnings of the interactional synchrony in babies as young as 12 days old. An adults displayed one of three facial expressions or one of the three distinctive manual gestures. the baby’s responses were filmed and labelled by independent observers. they found that babies expressions and gestures were more likely to mirror those of the adults more than chance would predict i.e there was a significant association.
E- this is a strength of interactional synchrony because the research suggests that infants ability to mirror these gestures to communicate with care givers is innate
L- this suggest that the theory of interactional synchrony has validity.
KEY STUDY: Meltzoff and Moore (1977)
INTERACTIONAL SYNCHRONY
AIM: investigate how early infants are able to mirror adults
METHOD: six infants between the age of 12 and 21 days were each shown three facial gestures (e.g. smiling) and one manual gesture ( e.g. raising hands ) sequentially. their responses were videotaped and scored by observers who didn’t know which gesture the infants had seen the adults do.
FINDINGS: the results showed that infants of this young age were able to mirror all 4 gestures.
CONCLUSION: this suggests that synchronised behaviours are innate.
KEY STUDY: Brazleton et al (1974)
RECIPROCITY
AIM: investigate the reciprocal social interactions between mother and their young infants.
METHOD: sample consisted of 12 mother- infant pairs who were repeatedly seen over the infants first five months of their life. during each videotaped and coded session, mothers would come behind a curtain to play ( using a lots of positive facial expressions)with their infants for 3 minutes. mothers would then leave and recording would continue for 30 secs whilst infant was alone. the mother would then return for a second, 3 minute face to face interaction. the mothers were instructed to sometimes present a still, unresponsive face.
FINDINGS: it was found that when a mother carried out face-to-face interactional play the infants moved their bodies in a smooth circular motion and looked frequently at their mothers. however when the mothers stopped responding to them, the infants movements became jerky and they averted their gaze, followed by a short period of attempting to get their mothers attention until they finally curled up and laid motionless.
CONCLUSION: this suggests that reciprocal behaviours are crucial to attachment formation.
(+) Reciprocity is supported by research
P- strength of reciprocity is that it is supported by research
E- Brazleton et al (1974) found that a caregivers actions did elicit a response from the infant when a mother carried out face-to-face interactional play the infants moved their bodies in a smooth circular motion. however when the caregivers behaviour changed and stopped responding to the infant, the child’s movement became jerky and eventually motionless.
E- this is a strength of reciprocity because the research demonstrates that infants do respond to a caregivers behaviour and that these reciprocal behaviours are crucial to attachment formation
L- suggesting that the theory of reciprocity has validity
CAREGIVER-INFANT INTERACTION
(-) Low population validity
P- a criticism of the research into caregiver infant interactions is that the supporting research has low population validity.
E- Meltzoff and Moores sample consisted of six infants and Brazelton et al studied 12 mother-infant pairs. these are both very small sample sizes and may or may not be representative of all infants.
E- this is a limitation because the findings about caregiver infant interactions may be difficult to generalize to other infants (low external validity). in addition because of small sample sizes, the conclusions drawn about imitation being innate/reciprocity may not be valid.
L- therefore this reduces the validity of the claim that caregivers and Infants communicate via interactional synchrony and reciprocity.
CAREGIVER-INFANT INTERACTION
(-) Problems with testing infants’ behaviours
P- a limitation of observational research testing caregiver-infant interactions is that it is difficult to reliably test and is open to Observer bias.
E- infant’s mouths are fairly in constant motion and the expressions that are tested occur frequently by chance (tongue sticking out and smiling)
E- this is a limitation as it makes it difficult to distinguish between general activity and specific behaviors (synchronized or reciprocal) and as a result there is a great deal of interpretation of what babies are actually doing
L- therefore the findings about caregiver infant interactions may not be valid
what is the first stage of attachment?
asocial attachment
first few weeks
happier in the presence of other humans
behaviour towards humans and non-human objects are quite similar
what is the second stage of attachment?
indiscriminate attachment
2-7 months
preference for humans over inanimate items , prefer familiar however accept attention and affection from all adults equally
what is the third stage of attachment?
specific attachment
from 7 months
both separation anxiety and stranger anxiety occur
B formed a specific attachment which is 65% cases is mother (primary attachment figure ) yet is mainly based on reciprocity
what is the fourth stage of attachment?
multiple attachment
8-12 months
B begins to form multiple attachments to those other than their primary attachment figure (secondary attachments)
KEY STUDY FOR STAGES OF ATTACHMENT
Schaffer and Emerson (1964)
AIM: investigate age at which attachments form ( including the intensity of the attachment relationship and the person whom it was with)
METHOD: Schaffer and Emerson studied 60 babies from working class families in Glasgow. Researchers visited babies and mothers in their own homes every month for a year and then again at 18 months. the mothers were asked questions about their babies reactions when they were separated from them (separation anxiety) and when there was a stranger present ( stranger anxiety)
FINDINGS: 6-8 months- most babies showed separation anxiety from attachment figures showing attachment has been formed
65% formed their first attachment with their mothers
3% formed their first attachment with their fathers
2% formed joint first attachment
18 months-87% had at least 2 attachments whereas 31% were attached to 5 or more people (multiple attachment)
CONCLUSION: mother is not always or necessarily the main attachment figure, attachments are more likely to be formed with those who displayed sensitivity and responsiveness, attachment develops in different stages
STAGES OF ATTACHMENT
(+) Stages of attachment supported by research
P- strength of Schaffer and Emerson is that it is supported by research.
E- Schaffer and Emerson studied 60 babies from working class families in Glasgow. Researchers visited babies and mothers in their own homes every month for a year and then again at 18 months. Found that 6-8 months babies started to show separation anxiety from their attachment figures. 18 months, 87% of babies had at least two attachments.
E- strength of stages of attachment because babies did demonstrate attachment behaviours associated with each stage and therefore demonstrates the theory’s claims are valid.
L- therefore Schaffer and Emerson’s research is
strong evidence to support that attachment develops in the same four stages for all children.
STAGES OF ATTACHMENT
(+) High ecological validity
P- strength of Schaffer and Emerson into stages of attachment is that it has high ecological validity.
E- most of the observations were made by parent during 0rdinary activities and then this was reported by the mothers to the researchers. this means that the behaviours of the babies were natural and was very unlikely to be affected by the presence of the observers.
E- strength of research because the findings about stages of attachment could be generalised to real life settings and therefore has high external validity
L- therefore Schaffer and Emerson’s research is strong evidence to support that attachment develops in the same four stages for all children.
STAGES OF ATTACHMENT
(-) Low population validity
P- Limitation of Schaffer and Emerson is that it has low population validity.
E- sample consisted only of babies from working class families in Glasgow. Glasgow remains the most deprived city in Scotland. high deprivation is often associated with single mothers, ‘stay at home’ mothering (while the father works), or both parents (and potentially extended family members) being unemployed. therefore this sample may not be representative of babies from middle class families. these babies may have different experiences in terms of how much time at home with their mothers, fathers , extended family members and staff members at nursery
E- limitation because the findings pf the research and the stages of attachment may be difficult to generalise to all babies in the population (low external validity) - the pattern of development in these children may be different.
L- therefore Schaffer and Emerson’s research is not strong evidence to support that attachment develops in the same four stages for all children.
STAGES OF ATTACHMENT
(-) Self-report data
P- Limitation of Schaffer and Emerson is that the data was collected from the mothers reports of their infants
E- some mothers might have been less sensitive to their infants protests and therefore were less likely to report them. in addition, some mothers may have given socially desirable answers because they may not want to disclose that their child is not attached to their fathers or that they do not get upset when they are separated.
E- limitation because conclusion drawn about the stages in which attachment develops may not be valid.
L- therefore Schaffer and Emerson’s research is not strong evidence to support that attachment develops in the same four stages for all children.
Role of the father
schaffer and emerson
3% formed their first attachment with their fathers
27% formed joint first attachment
75% formed attachment with father by 18 months
AO1: fathers role is different to the mother
PLAY
•Grossman (2002)- quality of attachment with their father was less important in teens than the quality with their mothers
• quality of the fathers play was related to childrens attachment.
• suggests different role and that father is to do with play and stimulation
• Geiger (1996)- fathers play interactiond were more boisterous than with their mums, more rough and tumble play. Both have important role
AO1: fathers role is different to the mother
LEVEL OF RESPONSIVENESS
Field (1978)
