Attachment Flashcards
Reciprocity
How 2 ppl interact Caregiver - infant interaction is reciprocal in that both caregiver ad a baby respond to each others signal and each elicits a responce from the other.
This is an essential part of any conversation otherwise people will talk over each other. Babies have alert phase in which they signal that they are ready for a spell of interaction.
Active involvement: Traditional views of childhood have portrayed babies in a passive role, receiving care from an adult. However it seems that babies as well as caregivers actually take quite an active role. Both caregiver and baby can initiate interactions and they appear to take in doing so.
Interactional synchrony
2 ppl are said to be synchronised when they carry out the sme actions simultaneously.
Caregiver and baby reflect both the actions and emotions of the other and do this in a synchronised way.
This takes place when caregiver and baby interact in such a way that their actions and emotions mirror the other. Meltzoff and Moore observed interactional synchrony in babies as young as 2 weeks old. An adult displayed one of the 3 facial expressions or one of 3 gestures. The babies response was filmed and labelled by independent observers. Babies expression and gesture were more likely to mirror those of the adults more than chance would predict.
High levels of synchrony associated with better quality of mother - baby attachment.
strength of Caregiver interaction
One strength of this is the reserach is that caregiver-infant interactions are usually filmed in a lab. This means that other activit might distract a baby, can be controlled. Also using films means that observations can be recorded and analysed later. Therefore it is unlikely that research will miss seeing key behav. furthermore having filmed interactions can record data and establish the inter-reliability of observation. Finally babies dont know they are being observed, so behav wont change. Therefore the data collected has good reliablity and validity
limitation of Caregiver interaction
One limitation of caregiver interaction is that it is hard to interpret a baby’s behv. Young babies lack coordination and much of their bodies are immobile. The movements being observedare just small hand movements or subtle changes in expression so it is difficult to be sure. Also it difficult to determine what is taking place from the baby’s perspective. THis means that we cannot be certain that the behav seen in caregiver-infant interaction have a special meaning.
Stages of attachment
Asocial stage
Indiscriminate attachment
specific attachment
Multiple attachment
asocial stage
behav towards human and inanimate object is fairly similar. Schaffer and emmerson did not believe this as at this stage babies showed signs that they prefer to be with other people. Babies also tend to show a preference for the company of familiar people and are more likely to be comforted by them.
first few weeks of life
indiscriminate
Baby makes more obvious and observable social behav.
They now show a more clear preference for being with humans than inanimate objects.
They can recognise and prefer the company of familiar ppl.
However they accept cuddles and comfort from any person.
They don’t show separation anxiety when caregiver leaves and they don’t shoe stranger anxiety in the presence of unfamiliar people.
2-7 months
Specific attachment
babies start to display the classic signs of attachment towards one particular person. These signs include anxiety direct towards stranger esp when the caregiver leaves and anxiety when they are separated from their attachment figure. Attachment figure is known as primary attachment and these are the people who offers the most interaction.
around 7 months
Multiple attachment
Shortly after babies start to show attachment behav towards one person they usually extend this behav to multiple attachment with whom they regularly spent time with. These are called secondary attachment. Schaffer and emerson found that 29% of the children formed secondary attachment within a month of forming a primary attachment. By the age of one most babies had developed multiple attachment.
Schaffer and emerson research on diff stages
study involves 60 babies - 31 boys and 29 girls. Were from Glasgow and the majority was skilled working class family. Researchers visited the babies and mothers every month for the first year and then again at 18 months. Researchers asked the mothers qs about the kind of protest their babies showed in 7 everyday life. This was designed to measure the babies’ attachment.
Schaffer and emerson found 4 distinct stages in the development of infant attachment. These make up the stage theory.
evaluation for the different stages of attachment
one strength of Schaffer and emerson’s research is that there is external validity. Most of the observations were made by parents during ordinary activities and reported to the researchers. The alternative would have been to have the researcher present which might have made distracted the baby or made them feel anxious.
One limitation of schaffer and emerson’s study is the validity of the measure they used to assess attachment in the asocial stage. Young babies have poor coordination and are fairly immobile. So if babies were less than 2 months old felt anxiety in everyday situations they might have displayed this quite subtle, hard to observe and report back to researchers on signs of anxiety and attachment in this age group. This means they could have been social but due to flawed methods, they appear to social.
This study lacks generalisability. They only looked at one sample which had unique features in terms of the cultural and historical context. 1960s working class Glasslow. In other cultures, for example collectivist culture, multiple attachment from a very early age are more the norm.
Animal studies of attachment
Animal Studies of Attachment
1. Lorenz (1952) – Imprinting in Geese
Aim: Investigate the process of imprinting in geese.
Method: Lorenz split a group of goose eggs into two groups. One group hatched naturally with the mother, and the other group hatched in an incubator with Lorenz as the first moving object they saw.
Findings: The incubator-hatched geese imprinted on Lorenz and followed him around, while the naturally hatched geese followed their mother.
Conclusion: Imprinting occurs in a critical period (first few hours of life), and it is irreversible.
- Harlow (1958) – Rhesus Monkeys
Aim: Investigate the role of comfort vs. food in attachment.
Method: Harlow raised rhesus monkeys with two surrogate mothers – one made of wire and provided milk, and one made of soft cloth but with no milk.
Findings: The monkeys preferred the cloth mother for comfort, even when the wire mother provided food. They only went to the wire mother for feeding and immediately returned to the cloth mother.
Conclusion: Comfort and security are more important than food in forming attachments.
Imprinting: A form of attachment that occurs in a sensitive period (Lorenz).
Comfort over Food: Comfort and security are more important than food for attachment (Harlow).
Animal studies show the importance of early attachment experiences, but findings are not always directly applicable to humans.
Evaluations for Animal studies of attachment
Lorenz (1952) – Imprinting in Geese
1. Lack of Generalizability
Evaluation: Lorenz’s study was conducted with geese, which are very different from humans in terms of attachment behaviors. Humans don’t imprint in the same way, so it’s difficult to generalize the findings to human attachment. This limits the external validity of the study.
- Ethical Issues
Evaluation: While Lorenz’s study didn’t involve direct harm to the animals, the geese were removed from their natural environment, which could have caused stress or confusion. However, Lorenz’s geese appeared to have normal behaviors once they were older, so the long-term impact might have been minimal.
- Questionable Methods
Evaluation: Some critics argue that Lorenz’s conclusions about imprinting may be oversimplified. For example, it is possible that the geese weren’t truly “imprinting” on him in a way that humans would form attachments; they may have just followed the first moving object out of curiosity or instinct. This raises concerns about the internal validity of his findings.
- Confounding Variables
Evaluation: In Lorenz’s study, it’s possible that other variables influenced the geese’s behavior, such as the size or appearance of Lorenz, which could have affected whether they followed him or not. This weakens the strength of the study’s conclusions.
Harlow (1958) – Rhesus Monkeys
1. High Internal Validity
Evaluation: Harlow’s study had strong internal validity because it clearly showed that comfort and emotional security were more important for attachment than food. The controlled experimental design provided clear evidence about attachment behavior in the monkeys.
- Ethical Issues
Evaluation: One of the biggest criticisms of Harlow’s study is the ethical concerns surrounding the treatment of the monkeys. The monkeys were subjected to significant distress, as they were isolated from other monkeys and deprived of maternal care. This raises concerns about the ethics of using animals in psychological research.
- Ecological Validity
Evaluation: Although Harlow’s study was groundbreaking, the laboratory conditions may not accurately reflect how attachment behaviors unfold in natural environments. The artificial setup (monkeys being raised with surrogate mothers) could limit the generalizability to real-life attachment experiences.
- Long-Term Impact on the Monkeys
Evaluation: Harlow’s study showed that the monkeys raised without proper maternal contact had severe emotional and social problems later in life, such as being unable to form relationships and showing aggressive behavior. This has practical implications for understanding the importance of early attachment, but it also highlights the potential long-term harm caused by early neglect.
- Support for Bowlby’s Theory
Evaluation: Harlow’s findings provided strong support for Bowlby’s attachment theory, particularly the idea that attachment is not just about food but about the emotional bond that provides comfort and security. This connection strengthens the ecological validity of Bowlby’s work in human attachment.
what are the 2 types of explaination of attachment
learning theory and bowlby theory
Learning theory
The Learning Theory suggests that attachment is a learned behavior, not something we’re born with.
Key Ideas:
Classical Conditioning (Pavlov) - Learning through association. - A baby learns to associate the caregiver (who provides comfort or food) with the feeling of pleasure.
The caregiver = neutral stimulus.
Food = unconditioned stimulus (causes pleasure).
Over time, the baby associates the caregiver with food and feels pleasure from the caregiver.
Conclusion: The baby forms an attachment to the caregiver because of this learned association.
Operant Conditioning (Skinner) - Learning through rewards and punishment. The baby learns to behave in ways that lead to positive outcomes (like comfort and food).
When the baby cries (behavior), the caregiver responds (reinforcement) by giving food or comfort. The baby learns that crying results in positive rewards (attention, food, comfort).
Conclusion: Attachment forms because the baby’s behavior (crying) is reinforced by the caregiver’s responses (comfort, food).
The Role of the Primary Caregiver (Mother)
According to Learning Theory, the primary caregiver becomes the attachment figure because they provide essential rewards like food (through operant conditioning) and comfort (through classical conditioning).
Key Points:
Attachment as a Learned Behavior: Babies aren’t born with attachments; they learn them through experiences with caregivers.
Association and Reinforcement: Classical and operant conditioning explain how attachments form through association and reward.
Caregiver’s Role: The caregiver becomes a source of comfort and security, which leads to the attachment.
Evaluation of Learning Theory
- Reductionist
Evaluation: Learning theory oversimplifies attachment by focusing only on learning processes (food and comfort), ignoring other factors like emotions or biological influences, such as Bowlby’s theory of innate attachment.
- Contradictory Evidence
Evaluation: Harlow’s study with monkeys and Lorenz’s study with geese show that attachment can form without the need for food, suggesting that attachment is not just about learning through rewards or comfort.
- Real-Life Applications
Evaluation: Although the Learning Theory has been criticized, it has contributed to practical applications, such as improving child-care practices where caregivers use positive reinforcement to encourage attachment behaviors.
Bowlby’s theory
Bowlby’s Theory of Attachment
Bowlby believed that attachment is an innate (inborn) behavior that is essential for survival. He proposed that children are born with a biological need to form attachments to their primary caregiver.
Key Concepts:
Monotropy (One Main Attachment)
Bowlby argued that the child forms one primary attachment (usually to the mother), which is more important than all other attachments.
This attachment is special and has a unique role in the child’s development.
Internal Working Model
Bowlby suggested that the first attachment forms a mental representation, called an internal working model. This is how the child expects relationships to be.
If a child has a secure attachment, they are likely to expect other relationships to be positive. If they have an insecure attachment, they may expect relationships to be negative or untrustworthy.
Critical Period (Sensitive Period)
Bowlby proposed that there is a critical period (around 2-3 years) when the attachment system is most active.
If a child does not form an attachment during this period, it could lead to long-term problems in social and emotional development.
Adaptive Value of Attachment
Attachment is evolutionary – it helps the child stay close to the caregiver for protection and care. This increases the chances of survival.
Bowlby believed that attachment behaviors (like crying or clinging) are biologically programmed to promote the child’s survival.
The Role of the Caregiver
The caregiver is the most important person for forming a secure attachment.
The caregiver’s sensitivity and responsiveness to the child’s needs are key to forming a secure attachment.
Evaluation of Bowlby’s Theory
Support for the Critical Period
Research shows that attachments formed in early childhood are crucial for later emotional and social development. Studies on children who were deprived of care (e.g., Romanian orphans) support the idea of a critical period for attachment.
- Overemphasis on Monotropy
Bowlby places too much focus on the primary attachment figure, suggesting that the first bond is always the most important. However, other research shows that children can form multiple attachments that are equally significant, like those to fathers or siblings. - Real-Life Applications
Bowlby’s theory influenced childcare practices and policies, such as encouraging bonding between mothers and babies right after birth and supporting the importance of a stable caregiver in early childhood. - Cultural Bias
Bowlby’s theory is based on research in Western cultures. In other cultures, multiple caregivers might be common, and children can form attachments to various people. This suggests that the theory may not fully apply across all cultures.
types of attachment
Mary Ainsworth conducted a study called the Strange Situation to identify different types of attachment between infants and their caregivers. She found three main types of attachment:
- Secure Attachment (Type B)
What it is: This is the healthiest type of attachment. The child is confident that the caregiver will return when they leave, and they feel safe to explore the environment.
Behaviour:
Stranger anxiety: The child is upset when the stranger enters.
Separation anxiety: The child is distressed when the caregiver leaves.
Reunion behaviour: The child is happy when the caregiver returns and is easily comforted.
Characteristics: These children are usually independent but seek comfort from their caregiver when needed. - Insecure-Avoidant Attachment (Type A)
What it is: The child is independent and does not seek much closeness or comfort from the caregiver. They seem to avoid contact after the caregiver leaves and returns.
Behaviour:
Stranger anxiety: The child does not show much distress when a stranger enters.
Separation anxiety: The child shows little distress when the caregiver leaves.
Reunion behaviour: The child avoids the caregiver when they return, showing little interest in being comforted.
Characteristics: These children may appear emotionally distant and may not rely on their caregiver for comfort. - Insecure-Resistant Attachment (Type C)
What it is: The child becomes very anxious and clingy, showing intense distress when the caregiver leaves but also resisting contact when they return.
Behaviour:
Stranger anxiety: The child is very distressed by the presence of a stranger.
Separation anxiety: The child is highly distressed when the caregiver leaves.
Reunion behaviour: The child is ambivalent (mixed feelings) when the caregiver returns—seeking comfort but also resisting it (e.g., pushing the caregiver away).
Characteristics: These children have trouble exploring and are very dependent on their caregiver, but may not be easily comforted.
Key Points:
Secure Attachment: The child feels confident and safe, exploring the world while seeking comfort from the caregiver when needed.
Insecure-Avoidant Attachment: The child avoids or ignores the caregiver, showing little distress when separated.
Insecure-Resistant Attachment: The child is anxious, clingy, and struggles with both separation and reunion with the caregiver.
Evaluation of Types of Attachment
Predictive Value
Research shows that secure attachment is linked to positive outcomes later in life, like better social and emotional development, while insecure attachment is linked to problems, like difficulty forming relationships.
Cultural Differences
The Strange Situation was developed in Western cultures, and it may not apply in the same way to other cultures. For example, some cultures may value independence or emotional restraint, which might affect how attachment types appear.
Reliability of Classification
The Strange Situation has been shown to be reliable, meaning that it consistently categorizes children into the attachment types in a consistent way. However, some critics argue that children can show behaviors that fit more than one type, making the classification somewhat limiting.
Individual Differences
There can be individual differences within each attachment type. For example, children with a secure attachment may still have different attachment behaviors depending on their temperament or the caregiving style they experience.
Cultural variations in attachment
Western cultures: In countries like the U.S. and the UK, parents often encourage independence and self-reliance in their children. This might lead to a higher rate of insecure-avoidant attachment because infants are expected to be more self-soothing.
Non-Western cultures: In places like Japan, Israel, or some African cultures, there is often an emphasis on close physical contact and interdependence. These cultures may exhibit a higher rate of secure or insecure-resistant attachment because children are more likely to be held and carried often.
Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg (1988): They conducted a meta-analysis of 32 studies on the Strange Situation in 8 different countries. They found that secure attachment was the most common across all cultures, but the rate of insecure-avoidant attachment was higher in individualistic cultures (e.g., Germany) than in collectivist cultures (e.g., Japan). Japan, in particular, had a high rate of insecure-resistant attachment.
Secure attachment seems to be the norm in a wide range of cultures, supporting Bowlby’s idea that attachment is innate and universal and this is the universal norm. However, the research also clearly shows that cultural practices have an influence on attachment type.
Evaluations for cultural variation
Strengths:
The research shows that attachment is a universal phenomenon, but the way attachment behaviours are expressed can vary across cultures, emphasising the role of both biology and culture.
Meta-analyses, like those of Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg, provide large-scale, cross-cultural evidence of attachment behaviours.
Weaknesses:
Ethnocentrism: Many of the studies, including Ainsworth’s Strange Situation, were designed in Western cultures. This means that the attachment behaviors considered “secure” or “insecure” may not fully apply to non-Western populations, potentially leading to biased conclusions.
Cultural bias: The methods used (like the Strange Situation) may not be suitable for all cultures. For example, the method assumes that the child’s distress is a sign of attachment, but in some cultures, children may not express distress in the same way.
Over-simplification: It is too simplistic to categorise children into just one attachment type. There is considerable variation within each culture that isn’t always captured in these broad classifications.
Bowlby’s maternal deprivation
Bowlby proposed that maternal deprivation (a loss of or lack of continuous care from the mother or primary caregiver) can have severe and long-lasting effects on a child’s emotional and cognitive development. He believed that for attachment to be beneficial, it needed to be continuous and consistent. If this relationship is disrupted, especially during the critical period (the first few years of life), the child can experience significant psychological consequences.
critical period for forming attachments, typically in the first 2-3 years of life.
Effects of Maternal Deprivation: Bowlby believed that deprivation during the critical period could lead to various psychological and emotional issues:
- Cognitive impairment: Deprivation may result in delayed intellectual development, such as issues with learning and problem-solving.
- Emotional issues: These can include difficulties in regulating emotions, anxiety, and a higher likelihood of forming insecure attachments.
- Social and behavioural problems: Children who experience maternal deprivation may struggle with forming healthy relationships and can exhibit antisocial behaviours or a lack of trust in others.
- Affectionless psychopathy: This term, used by Bowlby, refers to children who exhibit a lack of empathy, guilt, or emotional attachment. They may have difficulties forming emotional bonds with others and engage in criminal or antisocial behaviours.
Bowlby’s 44 Thieves Study (1944): Bowlby conducted a study of 44 adolescents who had been referred to a psychiatric clinic for stealing (known as the “44 thieves study”). He found that many of the young offenders had experienced early maternal deprivation (separation from the mother or a lack of consistent care) during their early years. These children were more likely to exhibit characteristics of affectionless psychopathy—showing little emotional attachment or guilt over their behaviour.
Findings:
Of the 44 thieves, 14 were diagnosed as affectionless psychopaths.
12 of these 14 affectionless psychopaths had experienced prolonged separation from their mothers in early childhood.
Only 2 out of the 30 control group participants (who were not involved in stealing) had experienced such early separations.
Evaluations for Bowlby’s maternal deprivation
Strengths:
Real-world applications: Bowlby’s theory has had practical implications for child welfare. For example, it contributed to changes in hospital policies regarding allowing parents to stay with their children during medical treatment.
Empirical support: Bowlby’s own research (e.g., the 44 Thieves study) and other studies suggest a link between maternal deprivation and later behavioural and emotional problems.
Influence on attachment theory: Bowlby’s work laid the foundation for further research into attachment, such as Ainsworth’s Strange Situation.
Weaknesses:
Causality issues: While there is an association between maternal deprivation and negative outcomes, it is difficult to prove direct causality. Other factors, such as genetic predispositions or later family environment, could also contribute to developmental issues.
Ethnocentrism: Bowlby’s theory was developed with a Western perspective, and it may not be applicable in the same way across all cultures. Some cultures might have different child-rearing practices that could influence attachment and the effects of maternal deprivation.
Overemphasis on the mother: Bowlby’s theory places a significant emphasis on the mother as the primary attachment figure. However, research has shown that fathers, grandparents, or other caregivers can play just as important a role in a child’s emotional development.
Romanian orphan studies - institutionalisation
Rutter’s English and Romanian Adoptee Study (ERA) (2007)
This longitudinal study, led by Rutter, investigated the outcomes of children who were adopted into the UK from Romanian orphanages during the 1990s, when Romanian’s orphanage system was notorious for its poor conditions.
Sample: The study followed 165 Romanian children who had been adopted into the UK. These children were compared with a control group of 52 British children who were also adopted.
Aim: To examine the long-term effects of early institutionalisation on children’s emotional, cognitive, and social development.
Findings:
Age of Adoption: Children who were adopted before the age of 6 months showed normal development in terms of emotional attachment and cognitive abilities, similar to the British control group.
Disrupted Attachments: Children who were adopted after 6 months of age showed more signs of disinhibited attachment (indiscriminately seeking attention from strangers) and attachment problems, such as difficulty forming close relationships.
Cognitive Development: There was a cognitive delay in children adopted later, particularly those who spent more time in the orphanage. They were more likely to show lower IQ and language delays.
evaluation for Romanian orphan studies - institutionalisation
Strengths:
Real-life Applications: The findings from these studies have had significant real-world implications, influencing child welfare policies, such as improving the care of children in orphanages and promoting adoption over institutional care.
Longitudinal Design: Many of the studies, like Rutter’s ERA, followed children over time, allowing researchers to assess the long-term effects of institutionalization.
Control Group: The studies often included control groups (e.g., children raised in families), making it easier to compare the effects of institutional care with more typical family-based care.
Weaknesses:
Ethical Issues: The studies raise ethical concerns because children were placed in institutions during a time when the conditions were extremely poor. The studies do not have the luxury of randomly assigning children to institutional care, meaning the effects observed may be due to other factors, such as pre-existing conditions or neglect.
Generalisability: While the Romanian orphan studies provide important insights, the conditions in Romanian orphanages may have been particularly extreme. Therefore, the findings may not generalise to other forms of institutional care worldwide, which may not be as severe.
Individual Differences: Not all children in institutions show the same outcomes. Some children are more resilient and may show fewer negative effects from institutionalisation. Therefore, individual differences should be considered when evaluating the impact of institutional care.
influence of early attachemnt on later attachment
Internal Working Model (IWM): Bowlby proposed that early attachment experiences shape the internal working model, a mental framework that influences how children perceive themselves, others, and relationships. For example, a child with secure attachment is likely to develop positive expectations about relationships, while a child with insecure attachment might struggle with trust and self-worth.
Securely attached babies later have friendship difficulties whereas insecurely attached babies later have friendship difficulties.
Insecure avidant attachment were more likely to be victims of bullyings.
insecure-resistant childrens were more likely to be bullies.
The aim of Hazan and Shaver’s study was to explore whether there is a link between the attachment style a person develops as a child and how they behave in adult romantic relationships.
Hazan and Shaver conducted a survey in the form of a love quiz published in a newspaper. The quiz asked respondents about their current romantic relationships and their childhood relationships with their caregivers. It also assessed the type of attachment they had, based on the three categories of attachment styles identified by Mary Ainsworth in the Strange Situation:
Secure attachment (healthy, trusting relationships)
Insecure-avoidant attachment (independence, avoidance of closeness)
Insecure-anxious/resistant attachment (intense dependence, fear of abandonment)
They used self-report methods, meaning participants answered questions about their feelings and experiences. They also categorized responses into the three attachment styles based on the patterns described by Bowlby and Ainsworth.
Hazan and Shaver found significant correlations between early attachment styles and how participants behaved in romantic relationships. The key findings were:
Securely attached individuals were more likely to have positive, trusting relationships with their partners. They tended to have higher levels of intimacy and commitment in their romantic relationships and were more able to handle conflicts.
Insecure-avoidant individuals were more likely to avoid intimacy in relationships and often struggled with closeness and dependence on their partners. They typically valued independence more and were uncomfortable with emotional closeness.
Insecure-resistant individuals were more likely to experience emotional highs and lows in their relationships. They tended to be overly dependent on their partners and often worried about rejection or abandonment.
Evaluation for influence of early attachmenton later attachement
Empirical Support for Attachment Theory:
Research like Hazan and Shaver’s study and other longitudinal studies support the idea that early attachment experiences are linked to adult relationships. These studies show that individuals with secure attachments in childhood are more likely to have stable and healthy romantic relationships in adulthood.
Many studies on the link between early attachment and adult relationships, including Hazan and Shaver’s, rely on self-report measures, which can be influenced by social desirability bias or memory distortion. Participants may not accurately recall their early attachment experiences or may give responses they believe are more socially acceptable or expected.
Additionally, self-reports don’t always provide a clear picture of the complexity of attachment styles or the nuances of individual experiences.
Some critics argue that the theory overemphasizes the role of early attachment in determining adult relationships, neglecting the influence of later life experiences, such as friendships, romantic relationships, or traumatic events, which can significantly alter or shape attachment patterns.
A dynamic systems perspective suggests that attachment styles can change throughout life depending on various experiences. Therefore, while early attachment might play a foundational role, it’s not necessarily deterministic or fixed.
