Attachment Flashcards
What are the stages of attachment?
- Asocial stage: 0-7 weeks , similar responses to people and objects but quickly show bias to human-like stimuli and learning to discriminate familiar and unfamiliar by smell and voice.
-indiscriminate attachment: 7 weeks- 7 months, infants are more sociable, prefer humans, distinguish people but don’t show anxiety.
-specific attachment: 7 months onwards, develop attachment with PCG, and stranger and separation anxiety
-multiple attachments : 10-11 months onwards, shows attachment behaviour to several people
Discuss Glasgow baby studies into attachment
-Schaffer and Emerson conducted research into the stages of attachment using 60 infants and their mothers from working class Glasgow, aged 5-23 weeks. T5hey were assessed every 4 months until 1 year old and again at 18 months. There were 2 measure: separation anxiety and stranger anxiety. Structured interviews were used to ask mothers to rate their infants response to various situations.
-they found attachment is first formed around 7 months old with separation anxiety. And stranger anxiety forms one month after the separation anxiety forms. By 18 months multiple attachments had formed.
Evaluate Schaffer and Emmerson’s Glasgow baby studies into attachment
- a strength of Schaffer and Emmerson’s research into attachment is that it has high external validity, meaning it can be easily generalised to wider society. This was because observations were carried out in their own homes with their parents present so behaviour was natural and less affected.
-a limitation of Schaffer and Emmerson’s research into attachment is that there is problems when assessing multiple attachments. Bowlby said that the children may become upset when a playmate leaves a room but it doesn’t signify an attachment. This makes us question the Reliability of their research, as they suggested an attachment was formed when the attachment figure left the infant cried.
-a final limitation is that there are also problems with measuring the asocial stage. This is because young babies have poor coordination and mobility. Therefore judgements made are difficult and may be inaccurate, lowering the internal validity of their research.
Discuss research into the role of the father
- its suggested mothers provide nurturing, affectionate and emotional care, educational or imaginative play , whilst acting as a source of comfort and caretaking. It supports emotional , social and cognitive development.
-fathers proved active, physically stimulating, rough-and-tumble play. They support confidence and ability to risk assess.
-as Schaffer and Emerson developed the stages of attachment their theory suggested 3% of cases the father was the first person they formed an attachment with and by 18 months 75% of infants formed an attachment with them.
-Grossman found in a longitudinal study that quality of an infants attachment to their mother was related to their attachment in adolescence, but the fathers wasn’t suggesting the role may be less important. However they found quality of father’s play was related to quality of adolescent attachments instead, suggesting a different role in attachment.
-field found when fathers take on the role of PCG, they adopt behaviours more typical of mothers. She filmed 4 month olds face-to-face interactions with PCG mother and fathers finding PCG fathers, like mothers, spent longer smiling, imitating and holding infants than secondary care giver fathers. Suggesting attachment is due to responsiveness, not gender.
Evaluate research into the role of the father
- a limitation of research into the father is that it doesn’t give a clear answer about fathers and primary attachment. The fact they tend not to become the PCG could be related to traditional gender roles, where the mother stays at home tending to the home and children and the father acts as the breadwinner. Therefore it could be that fathers don’t feel they should act in a nurturing way. It could be instead female hormones create higher levels of nurturing and so are predisposed to be the PCG.
- a strength of research into the role of the father is that it has convincing evidence to support it. Grossman found fathers, as a secondary attachment figure, had an important role in their children’s development involving play and stimulation. But contradicting research from McCallum and Golombok found children in the same sex or single parent families don’t develop differently to those in two-parent/traditional households. This suggests the fathers role isn’t really important
- a limitation is that as some research suggests the father does play an important and unique role in development and attachment in infants, there may be implications for the economy. This means government and businesses may need to make changes to paternity leave and be more flexible with working hours of fathers . Indeed the 2015 shared parental leave act means instead of just 2 weeks for the father, they may choose to work less and so they’ll contribute less to taxes and the government will have less money to fund other services. This shows changing norms based on existing studies can have wider implications going beyond the findings of the research.
Discuss learning theory as an explanation for attachment
-dollard and miller suggested infant-caregiver interactions can be explained by learning theory. It focuses on an importance of a caregiver being seen as a provider of food.
-classical conditioning
-> LT. suggests attachments are initiated via classical conditioning. They associate the PCG with the pleasure associated with being fed, and so will maintain proximity with them. Before conditioning an infant has an innate primary drive for food (UCS) which produces pleasure (UCR), whilst the PAF acts as a NS. During conditioning, as the PAF is present at feeding the infant associates them with pleasure ( PCG (NS) + food (UCS) -> pleasure (UCR)). After conditioning, the infant now associates PAF with pleasure and is motivated to maintain proximity so separation anxiety forms. PAF (CS) -> Pleasure (CS).
-operant conditioning
->invloves learning to repeat a behaviour or not based on its consequences. Operant conditioning can explain why babies cry for comfort, which is important in developing attachment. Crying leads to a response from the caregiver e.g. food. When the caregiver gives the correct response, crying is reinforced. The baby will then direct crying to the caregiver in anticipation of the same reward. Reinforcement is a 2-way process, when a baby is positively reinforced for crying, the caregiver is negatively reinforced as the crying stops. This mutual reinforcement strengthens the attachment.
-attachment as a secondary drive:
-LT looks at drive reduction. Hunger can be thought as a primary drive as it’s a biological motivator.sears et al suggested because the caregiver is the person who provides food , the primary drive of hunger becomes associated with them so attachment is a secondary drive.
Evaluate learning theory as an explanation for attachment
- a limitation of learning theory is that there’s research against the idea of food as the basis of attachment from human and animal studies. From a range of animal studies it was found that young animals don’t necessarily attach to whoever feeds them. Lorenz’s geese imprinted before they were ever fed and maintained this attachment once mixed up. Harlow’s monkeys maintained attachment with the cloth monkey, preferring contact comfort over food. These show attachments don’t develop as a result of feeding and contradict LT as food isn’t the key element and so there isn’t an unconditioned stimulus or a primary drive.
- another is that it ignores other factors linked to attachment. Caregiver interaction suggests the quality of attachment is associated with factors such as developing reciprocity and interactional synchrony. Research has shown best quality attachments are formed with carers sensitive to their infants signals and respond appropriately. If attachments developed primarily as a result of feeding, then these interactions would have no purpose and so we wouldn’t expect to find relationships between them and the quality of infant-caregiver attachment.
- however a strength of learning theory as an explanation for attachment is that there’s a newer explanation based on social learning theory. Hay and Vespa suggest parents teach children to love them by modelling attachment behaviours. Parents reward children with approval when they display their own attachment behaviours , suggesting babies could learn attachment behaviours through interactions; this fits with research on the importance of interactional synchrony and reciprocity.
Discuss infant-caregiver interactions as an explanation for attachment
- attachment between an infant and primary attachment figure is reinforced though 2 innate behaviours and its argued theyre part of a conscious effort to sustain communications which helps form attachment:
-reciprocity: (turn-taking)
-> the process in which a behaviour is responded to with a corresponding action during an interaction. Infants coordinate behaviour with caregivers in a kind of conversation. This basic rhythm is important for later interactions as it allows the caregiver to anticipate the babies need and respond appropriately. Theres compelling evidence from Papousek et al whop found parents in China, America and Germany all used a ‘rising tone’ to show an infant it was their turn in the interaction. As this was cross-culturally, it shows it may be an innate ability to aid attachment.
-interactional synchrony: (simultaneous action)
->refers to how a parents and infants behaviour become finely synchronised; mirroring each other. Infants imitate specific facial expressions and hand gestures to mirror their caregiver including mirroring emotions as well as behaviours. It’s been suggested that it serves a role in self-regulation, symbol use and capacity for empathy. Strong evidence from Melzoff and Moore, who found infants aged 2-3 weeks old mimicked 3 adult facial expressionsand 1 hand movement suggesting it may be an innate aid for attachments. Evidence to support importance of interactional synchrony comes from Isabella et al who observed 30 mothers and babies to find degree of synchrony were associated with a better-quality mother-infant attachment.
Evaluate infant-caregiver interactions as an explanation for attachment.
- a strength of research into infant-caregiver interactions is that the research uses well-controlled procedures. This is because interactions between infants and caregivers are usually filmed , often from multiple angles, so very fine details can be later analysed. Babies also don’t know theyre being observed so their behaviour is natural . This is a strength as it means it’s high in validity.
-another is that that the research is potentially valuable to society. The identification of interactional Synchrony and reciprocity as important foundations in the formation of high quality attachments could have practical applications. E.g Crotwell et al found a 10 minute parent-child interaction therapy improved interactional synchrony in 20 low-income mothers and their infants compared to a control group. Suggesting research on interactional synchrony could lead to valuable methods for improving and developing infant-caregiver interactions.
-a limitation of infant-caregiver interactions as an explanation for attachment is that its socially sensitive. This is because it suggests children may be disadvantaged by certain child-rearing practices. Specifically, mothers who return to work shortly after a child is born restricting opportunities for interactional synchrony which Isabella et al has shown to be important. They found levels of synchrony to be associated with better quality mother-infant attachment suggesting mothers shouldn’t return to work so soon, which has obvious socially sensitive interactions.
Discuss Harlows animal studies into attachment
Harlow studied 16 baby rhesus monkeys taken at birth and placed in a cage with 2 conditions, a wire mock mother monkey that dispensed milk and a cloth mock mother monkey. The time spent with each was recorded , behaviour was observed when deliberately frightened by a toy drumming bear . Learning theory predicts the infant will spend more time with the wire mock monkey due to pleasure associated with food.
- it was found that the cloth monkey was preferred , regardless of which ‘mother’ dispensed milk , demonstrating contact comfort is more important in regards to attachment. This is evidence against LT and strong evidence or sensitive responsiveness.
- long-term he found monkeys who experienced this maternal deprivation experienced issues into adulthood. They were aggressive, less sociable, and bred less often. Some of the deprived mothers neglected their young and attacked their children. Harlow concluded there was a critical period for an attachment (90 days) and if outside of this irreversible damage is caused
Evaluate Harlows animal studies into attachment
- a limitation of Harlow’s animal studies into attachment is harm. Rhesus monkeys are similar enough to humans for us to generalise the findings, therefore th suffering they experienced could be assumed to be human-like and the monkeys have the right not to experience this. Harlow was aware of the suffering he was causing and referred to the wire mocks as ‘iron maidens’. On the other hand, it can be argued that the experiment can be justified because of its contributions to our understanding of attachments and how to care for human and primate infants.
- another is that there are problems with generalising findings from monkeys to humans. Although similar, they’re not human. E.G. human babies develop speech-like communication which may influence the formation of attachments. Therefore there is disagreement on the extent to which studies of non-human primates can be generalised to humans.
- a strength is that they have practical applications which is when research has led to real-world benefit. This is because its helped social workers understand risk factors in child abuse and therefore intervene to prevent this. It’s also highlighted the importance of attachment figures for baby monkeys in zoo’s and breeding programmes.
Discuss Lorenz’s animal studies as research into attachment
Before hatching, Lorenz randomly divided 12 geese eggs into 2 conditions, one being their natural environment with their mother and the other being incubated with Lorenz. They were then mixed together once hatched to see who they would follow. The natural group immediately followed their mother and continued to follow her after the mix. The group hatched with Lorenz immediately followed and continued to follow him. This continued even when mixed up too. Lorenz proposed the attachment process of imprinting; this causes infant birds to follow the first animal they see moving after hatching. Their ability to imprint is innate (it happens immediately after hatching so can’t be learnt) and Lorenz suggested it occurs during a critical period . (In geese = 20 hours).
He also suggested sexual imprinting and observed birds who has imprinted on a human would later show courtship behaviour to humans as well. Lorenz concluded the birds had experienced sexual imprinting whereby birds acquire a template of characteristics desirable in a mate.
Evaluate Lorenz’s animal studies as research into attachment
- a strength of Lorenz’s animal studies as research into attachment is that there is research support for his concept of imprinting. Lorenz’s concepts has been replicated in studies with other birds e.g. Guiton studied chickens who when exposed to yellow rubber gloves whilst eating would later try to mate with them as adults, showing young animals are born with an innate mechanism to imprint on a moving object present in their critical window of development. Therefore Guiton’s findings provide clear support for Lorenz’s conclusions about imprinting.
- a limitation is that some more recent researchers have questioned some of Lorenz’s conclusions. for example although Guiton found chickens imprinted on yellow rubber gloves and later tried to mate with them as adults, it was then found that with experience they actually learnt to mate with their own kind instead. Therefore Guiton’s findings don’t provide clear support for Lorens’s conclusions about imprinting after all.
- a final limitation of Lorenz’s research into attachment is that although some of the findings have influenced our understanding of human development, there is a problem with generalising findings from birds to humans. The mammalian attachment system is quite different from that of birds. For example, mammalian mothers show more attachment to their young than birds do. This means it’s inappropriate to generalise Lorenz’s ideas to humans.
Discuss Bowlby’s monotropic theory of attachment
-Bowlby rejected learning theory proposing an evolutionary explanation instead. In the same way as imprinting in animals, Bowlby argued ability to form attachments is innate. He suggests:
-> attachments have evolved
->social releasers
->monotropy:
-> critical period:
->internal working model
Describe Bowlbys Attachments have evolved theory
attachments have evolved: the ability to form an attachment is innate. Attachment behaviour has evolve through natural selection as it aids survival e.g. by maintaining proximity (facilitated by separation anxiety), an infant is more likely to survive because of the protection provided by the primary attachment figure.
Describe Bowlbys Social releasers
: innate infant behaviours such as smiling or crying that cause the primary caregiver to repsond. Bowlby said babies are born with a set of these ‘cute behaviours’ to encourage attention from adults. Primary caregivers who respond sensitively (sensitive responsiveness) help to create a secure IWM in the infant. Attachment is reciprocal; both PCG and infant have an innate predisposition to become attached and social releasers trigger that response.
Describe Bowlbys Monotropy
although an infant forms multiple attachments, they will form one that is more important than the others. Monotropy occurs with the PC. The law of continuity states the more constant a child’s care is, the better quality the attachment. The law of accumulated separation suggests the affects of being separated from the PCG add up and that its best to avoid this. The quality of this relationship shapes an infants internal working model.
Describe Bowlbys Critical period
the internal working develops during a critical period (around 2 &1/2 years from birth) which is a time when an attachment must form. If not, the infant will experience permanent emotional damage and lasting relationship difficulties into adulthood. Bowlby reviewed this as a sensitive period and if an attachment isn’t formed during this time, it will be harder to form one later.
Describe Bowlbys Internal working model
the IWM is a part-conscious, part-unconscious set of rules and expectations about how to carry out a relationship. This is based upon the relationship with the PAF. It’s a ‘cognitive blueprint’ for how to carry out a relationship . Ability to form an IWM is innate but the type is learnt. It also affects the type of parent they’ll become
Evaluate bowlbys monotropic theory of attachment.
- a strength of the concept of social releasers is that there is evidence to support it. Brazelton et al carried out an experiment where primary attachment figures were instructed to ignore their babies signals. They found the babies initially showed some distress but some eventually curled up and remained motionless. This supports bowlbys idea of the importance of social behaviour of infants and the role of releasers in initiating social interaction with their PCG.
- a further strength of Bowlby’s theory is that there is support for the idea of an internally working model. From Bailey et al , they found in a study of 99 mothers that those with poor attachent to their own parents were more likely to have one-year olds who were poorly attached. This supports bowlbys idea of an internally working model working model for attachment as its being passed down families.
- a limitation is that Bowlby may have emphasised the role of attachment. An alternative explanation is that temperament is important in the development of social behaviour. Kagan suggests that some babies are more anxious, and some are more sociable as a result of their genetics. Therefore, it could be that temperamental differences explain later social behaviour rather than attachment experiences.
Discuss ainsworths situation as research into attachment
- Ainsworth wanted to be able to observe attachment behaviours in order to assess the quality of an infants attachment to a caregiver and so developed the strange situation. He used controlled overt non-participant observation on 106 northern American infants aged between 12-18 months with their primary attachment figures. Each infant experienced 7, 3-minute episodes designed to show different attachment behaviours, including proximity seeking, secure base behaviour , stranger anxiety, separation anxiety and reunion behaviour.
-through a two-way mirror observations were made recording the participants behaviour against the 5 behavioural categories (event sampling). More than one experimenter carried out the observation using the same categories. The intensity of each behaviour was scored on a scale of 1-7. Generally all infantr5s explored and played with greatest confidence when just the primary atttachment figure was present. They explored with less confidence in the presence of the stranger and even less when the PAF left the room. Ainsworth found infants showed one of three attachments types
Describe ainsworths 3 attachment types
-secure attachment: (70% of American middle-class infants), do show proximity seeking and secure base behaviour, moderate separation and stranger anxiety, seek comfort from caregiver at reunion stage.
-insecure avoidant: (15% of American-middle class infants), don’t show proximity seeking or secure base behaviour , little to no separation anxiety or stranger anxiety. Don’t seek comfort at reunion, maybe ignoring caregivers on return.
-insecure resistant (15%…), seek greater proximity with caregiver and less secure base behaviour. Huge separation and stranger anxiety but resist comfort from caregiver at reunion stage.
What are the conclusions of ainsworths strange situation study
- it provides evidence for the role of “sensitive responsive” parenting (Ainsworth). Infants who experienced this have secure attachment. Further research has shown this is correlated with a large number of positive outcomes e.g. greater success at school and romantic relationships. Infants who didn’t experience this style of parenting have an insecure attachment. Further research both insecure attachment styles are correlated with a number of negative outcomes e.g. bulling and mental health problems.
Evaluate Ainsworth’s strange situation
- a strength is that the Strange situation shows good inter-rather reliability. Different observers generally agree on attachment type. Bick et al found 94% agreement in 1 team. This may be because the strange situation took place under controlled conditions and the behavioural categories are easy to observe. Therefore, we can be confident that the attachment type of an infant identitied in the strange situation doesn’t depend on who is observing them.
- a limitation is that there may be different attachment types. Ainsworth identified 3 attachment types . Secure, insecure- resistant and insecure-avoidant. However Main and Solomon point out that some children may display atypical attachments that don’t fit with types A, B and C known as disorganised attachment ( a mix of avoidant and resistant behaviours). This challenges Ainsworth’s idea of attachment types and whether of not the strange situation is a useful method to identify attachment types.
-a further limitation is that temperament may be a confounding variable. Ainsworth assumed the main influence on separation and stranger anxiety was the quality of the attachment however Kagan suggested temperament (the genetically influenced personality of a child) is a more important influence on behaviour in the strange situation as its meant to measure the quality of attachment not the temperament of the child.
Discuss cultural variation in attachment
-van Ijendoorn and Kroonenberg in a meta analysis reviewed findings from 32 different strange situation experiments using almost 2000 participants across 8 different countries. 27 of the experiments were from individualist cultures and 5 were from collectivist cultures. They found wide variations between the proportions of attachment types in different studies. In all countries, secure attachments were found to be the most common, but this varied from 75% in Britain. To 50% in china. Insecure-resistant attachment was found to be the least common and ranged from 3% in Britain to 30% in Israel. Insecure-avoidant attachments were shown to be most common in Germany (35%) and least common in Japan (5%). There was greater variation, up to 1.5 times, in the types of attachments within cultures than between countries. This means that the variation of attachment types within one country is much starker than between 2 different countries. E.g. 1 Japanese study found no insecure avoidant attachments but the second found 20%. They concluded in individualist cultures, rates of insecure-resistant were similar to Ainsworth’s originals but for collectivist they were a lot higher, although numbers of insecure-avoidant were reduced suggesting there’s cultural differences in distributions of insecure attachments.
Discuss the additional research into cultural variations into attachment and what they show
-further research from Simonella et al assessed 76 12-month olds in Italy using the strange situations and found 50% displayed secure attachment and 36% displayed insecure avoidant attachment. This was a lower rate of secure attachment that has been seen in previous studies. The researchers suggest this was due to increasing numbers of mothers working long hours. The study demonstrated that cultural changes affect patterns of secure and insecure attachment.
-Jin et al used the strange situation to assess 86 children in Korea and found overall proportions of secure and insecure attachments were similar to other countries with most children being classed as securely attached. The majority of the insecurely attached children were insecure resistant which is similar to the distribution of attachment types in Japan. Similarities in child-rearing between the 2 could explain this.
-these studies show secure attachment seems to be norm in a wide range of cultures which supports bowlby’s ideas that attachment is innate and universal. Secure attachment is the universal norm. However it shows differences in patterns of attachment that could be related to differences in cultural attitudes and practices. These have an impact on attachment type.
- the main findings of the research into cultural variations have large implications for both the strange situation and the way human behaviour is measured in different cultures.
Evaluate research into cultural variations in attachment
-the strange situation can be criticised for being culturally biased as it was designed by Ainsworth, an American researcher, based on Bowlby’s theory (who is British) meaning it may not be applicable to other cultures. Applying a theory from one culture to another is imposed etic and disregards the idea of cultural emic. E.g. lack of separation anxiety and joy on reuinion are indicative of an insecure avoidant attachment, but in Germany it’s viewed as independence, not insecurity (grossman and grossman). Similarly, Takahashi found almost 1/3 Japanese children were insecure resistant and were particularly distressed when left alone. However in Japan, greater inter-dependence between parent and child is favoured so they’re rarely separated. Therefore the high proportion of insecure resistant children may simply be a reaction to this cultural difference, suggesting a lack of validity.
- a strength of meta-analyses is that you can end up with a very large sample size. E.g. in Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg’s study there were nearly 2000 infants and caregivers. Having a l;argue sample size increases internal validity as it reduces impacts of biased methodology or unusual participants. Therefore we can be more confident about conclusions.
-however a limitation of these samples is that they may be unrepresentative of cultures. Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg’s study made comparisons between countries, not cultures. Each country is made up of different cultures with different child rearing practices. They found distributions of attachment types in Tokyo were Similar to results from western studies, whereas a sample from a more rural area had a larger number of insecure-resistant individuals. Meaning comparisons between countries may have little meaning and that the cultures and caregiving styles of the sample need to be specified.
Discuss the continuity hypothesis
-it argues there is continuity in attachment behaviours. Attachment type experienced during the critical period acts as a template for all future relationships, continuing across generations into childhood friendships , later adult relationships and future parenting style. This is due to the formation of the internal working model, which acts as a ‘cognitive blueprint’ for all attachment behaviours.
- sensitive responsive parenting leads to secure IWM (bowlby) and so secure childhood friendships, adult relationships and parenting
-non sensitive responsive parenting leads to an insecure IWM and so insecure childhood friendships, adult relationships and parenting.
-key findings show infant attachent type is associated with quality of friendships in childhood, secure attachments have better experiences and insecure attachments have difficulties. (Kerns)
- Minnesota child-parent study, in a longitudinal study infants classified as securely attached had the greatest confidence in childhood friendships compared to those with insecure attachments. Those who were secure were more socially able and popular.
-myron-Wilson and smith study: 196 children aged 7-11 from London were assessed for their attachment type and involvement in bullying and found secure children were least likely involved , insecure -avoidant were most likely bullied and insecure-resistant were most likely to bully.
-Lyon’s Ruth et al study: longitudinal study finding insecure attachments type aged 18 months were the best predictor of problematic friendships aged 5. Insecurely attached children were also more likely than secure children to rely on teachers for support.
Conclusions:
- attachment type developed during the critical period acts as a template for future relationships, continuing into childhood friendships. Findings support the concept of IWM which is a ‘cognitive blueprint’ for how to carry out a relationship, based on quality of attachment to PAF.
-hazen and shaver looked at the association between attachment type and adult relationships. They recruited 620 participants with an advert. All participants completed a ‘love quiz’ questionnaire consisting of 3 components: current/ most important relationship, general love experience, attachment type. By asking which 1 of 3 statements described their feelings. Evidence for continuity was shown in the similar number of people experiencing a secure attachment in infancy and a secure relationship in adulthood: secure attachments were most common in infancy (70%) and adulthood (56%). 25% were insecure avoidant and 19 % insecure resistant. It was found those with secure attachments in childhood continued to have secure adult romantic relationships and their relationships lasted longer and were happier . Insecure avoidant continued to have avoidant adult romantic relationships and often experienced jealousy. These suggest the patterns of attachment behaviour are reflected in romantic relationships.
Evaluate the continuity hypothesis as an explanation for attachment
- a limitation is that evidence on continuity of attachment is mixed . This is due to IWM’s predicting continuity between security of an infants attachment and of their later relationships. However Zimmerman assessed infant attachment type and adolescent attachment to parents and found little relationship between the quality of those. This isn’t what we would expect if IWM’s were important in development.
-another is that there’s issues of validity of the studies used. Most don’t use the strange situation, and use interviews, not in infancy, but years later. This leads to issues with validity as assessment relies on the retrospective nature of these assessments, as they rely on accurate recollections of early relationships in a primary attachment figure in adulthood. These rely on self-report methods so the validity is questionable.
- a final limitation is that the influence of early attachment on future relationships is exaggerated. Clarke and Clarke describe the influence of infant attachment on later relationships as problematic. People aren’t doomed to hav bad relationships just because they have had attachment issues; just a greater risk. By overemphasising, we become pessimistic about peoples cultures.
Discuss maternal deprivation and institutionalisation in attachment
-maternal deprivation = long-term or permanent separation from the PAF within the 2 & 1/2 years critical period.
-maternal deprivation hypothesis (bowlby) argued continuous care from a mother or suitable mother substitute is essential for normal psychological development. Prolonged separation can cause serious damage to emotional, social and intellectual development.
-poor intellectual development:
->infants who experience maternal deprivation are more likely to show low IQ. Goldfarb studied 30 orphaned children up to 12 yrs, half. Of whom had been fostered by 4 months of age whilst the others had remained in an orphanage. Their IQ was tested at 12 and results showed those who remained in institutions had an IQ of 68 whereas those who had been fostered had 96 as a result of a higher standard of emotional care.
-poor emotional development:
->infants who experience maternal deprivation are more likely to show affectionless psychopathy. This is an inability to show guilt or strong emotions for others, normal affection, or take responsibility for one’s actions. This can prevent the formation of relationships and has been associated with criminality. Affectionless psychopaths cannot understand the feelings of victims and so often lack remorse for their actions. Infants who have experienced maternal deprivation are also more likely to suffer from depression and anxiety disorders.
-poor social development:
-> infants who experience maternal deprivation are more likely to show quasi-autistic behaviour, where children experience difficulty in comprehending the meaning of social contexts and may display OCD - both are characteristics of autism. They’re likely to have difficulty interacting with peers and forming close relationships, as well as difficulties in forming and maintaining adult relationships and poor parenting skills (continuity hypothesis).
Evaluate maternal deprivation and institutionalisation in attachment
- a limitation is that the conflicting findings have led psychologists to question the concept of a critical period, proposing instead a “sensitive period” (rutter) when we are most sensitive to the development of a secure attachment. Unlike a critical period, when an attachment must be formed to avoid permanent emotional damage, a sensitive period is more forgiving as it merely predicts a vulnerability to attachment difficulties, which may be avoided. E.g Koluchovas’ case study of Czech twin boys who were isolated form the age 18 months by being locked in a cupboard , later went on to fully recover when looked after two loving adults. Suggesting that the potentially severe effects of maternal deprivation can be overcome provided the child has some social interaction and good aftercare, further supporting a “sensitive period” rather than a critical one.
- a strength of Bowlby’s maternal deprivation hypothesis is that it has practical applications as its led to real world benefit. This is because the theory has been used to change practices in a range of care settings/ for example hospital care has changed on paediatric wards since bowlbys research. In the past, children may have been separated from their PAF during their hospital stay , but now parents are encourages to spend as much time as possible with their young children. Often staying on site in special accommodation to avoid maternal deprivation. Therefore its clear bowlbys work has led to major social change in the way we care for our children.
- a further limitation of the maternal deprivation hypothesis is that Bowlby didn’t distinguish between deprivation and privation. Rutter claimed that when Bowlby talked about deprivation , he was muddling 2 concepts together. Rutter made a distinction between deprivation (loss of PAF after attachment has developed) and privation (failure to form an attachment). Many of the 44 thieves in Bowlbys study had moved from home to home in childhood and so may never have formed an attachment in the first place, and it could very this failure to form an attachment that caused the affectionless psychopathy shown. Rutter argues that this severe long term damage that bowlby associated with deprivation is actually more likely to be the result of privation.
Discuss Bowlbys research into the link between maternal deprivation and affectionless psychopathy
- he identified 88 children from a care home in London. Using naturally-occurring differences the experimental condition included 44 children identified as “thieves” who were compared with a control group of other “troubled” children. Using their histories, bowlby investigated whether the children had experienced any long-term emotional separation from their primary attachment figure during the first 2 &1/2 years of life. They were also given 16 tests.
- it was found that 14 showed affectionless psychopathy and out of these 12 had experienced long-term separation from their PAF. And all who experienced maternal deprivation had low iqs.
-conclusions suggested long-term separation from their PAF causes:
->poor cognitive development such as low IQ,
->poor emotional development including affectionless psychopathy
-> poor social development including increased chances of criminal behaviour.
Evaluate Bowlbys research into the link between maternal deprivation and affectionless psychopathy
- a limitation is that it has low population validity which is when findings can’t be generalised to wider populations, decreasing the external validity of the research. This is because the research used a small sample of just 88 children from the same care home. Similarly, Bowlby used a questionnable sample for his control condition as it wasn’t significantly different form his experimental group. In a large scale replication of Bowlby’s study with 500 children, Lewis found maternally deprived children didn’t demonstrate criminality or difficulties forming close relationships. This contradicts the maternal deprivation hypothesis by suggesting emotional separation from a PAF doesn’t necessarily cause poor emotional or social development.
-another is that there is difficulty in establishing cause and effect. Which is when it’s impossible to establish a casual relationship between 2 variables as there’s no control over the variables lowering internal validity. This is because the research simply showed a positive correlation between maternal deprivation and negative behaviour and being a natural experiment, we cannot be sure the long-term separation from their PAF was the cause of the children’s emotional, social and cognitive difficulties. The children recorded as thieves may have shown this behaviour as they’d been exposed to a subculture rewarding criminal behaviour.
Discuss the effects of institutionalisation. Refer to Romanian orphan studies
-Rutter led a longitudinal study of the effects of institutionalisation through his English and Romanian adoptees study. Using a control group of British orphans who were never institutionalised and three further groups who had spent time in a Romanian orphanage, he assessed the children upon adoption and again aged 4,6, 11 and 15 based on their cognitive , physical and social development. At their initial assessment, all Romanian infants showed significant signs of malnutrition. Furthermore, Romanian infants showed significant cognitive difficulties due to their institutionalisation, including fewer IQ and impaired language abilities. For example at the age 11, British children had an average IQ of 105 in comparison to the late Romanian adoptees who had an average IQ of 77. The most pronounced difficulties were seen in institutionalised children’s social development. Romanian children showed high levels of disinhibited attachment - attention seeking and clingy behaviour, where children respond to strangers in an inappropriate and overly-affectionate manner.
Evaluate effects of institutionalisation
-results from this research have led to improvements in the way that children are carted for in institutions (Langton) meaning they have real life applications. For example , day care centres now provide a key worker for each child, who is responsible for working most closely with them to act as a ‘suitable mother substitute’ (bowlby) whilst separated from the primary attachment figure. There have also been changes in adoption practices, with a move towards early adoption within the first 2 weeks of life when possible. In such cases, research has shown that these infants are just as securely attached as those born into sensitive responsive care (singer et al). These changes ensure that children have the chance to develop normal attachments and avoid disinhibited attachments.
- however there may be issues with the generalisability of Romanian orphan studies; the conditions of the orphanages were so bad that the results cannot be applied to understanding the impact of better-quality institutional care or any situation where children experience deprivation. These changes ensure Romanian orphanages had particularly poor standards of care, especially with regards to forming any relationship with the children and extremely low levels of intellectual stimulation. These unusual situational variables mean the studies may lack generalisability.
- a further limitation is that these long-term effects of early experience are not clear; its too soon to say whether children suffered short term or long term effects because the adopted orphans were only followed into their mid-teens. The children who spent longer in institutions and who currently fall behind in intellectual development or who show attachment difficulties may still catch up as adults. Similarly, early adopted, or fostered children who appear to have no issues may experience emotional problems as adults. This means that we cannot be certain that the effects of early experience can last into adulthood.
