Attachment

Question 1

SRCD

Answer 1

Society of Research in to Child Development

Question 2

NIPJR

Answer 2

Non-harmful, Informed consent, parental consent, Jeopardy, Results reported to parents in a sensitive way.

Question 3

3 principles of experimentation.

Answer 3

Observation, Correlation, Experimentation.

Question 4

Houston, Price, C, Nakai, S

Answer 4

Preferential looking tests in 2004

Question 5

Preferential looking tests in 2004

Answer 5

Houston, Price, C, Nakai, S

Question 6

Gallup

Answer 6

Rouge 1970

Question 7

rouge 1970

Answer 7

gallup

Question 8

three ways of testing Habituation in infants

Answer 8

Sucking, heart rate, looking SHL

Question 9

Frank and Bloom

Answer 9

Asked babies to choose a puppet after seeing the two puppets being either good or bad. babies chose the good puppet 80%, 2010

Question 10

Asked babies to choose a puppet after seeing the two puppets being either good or bad. babies chose the good puppet 80%, 2010

Answer 10

Frank and Bloom

Question 11

counter balancing in experiments

Answer 11

changing the order or the pos/neg orientation so as to not get a biased result.

Question 12

why Study attachment ?

Answer 12

Developmental - early patterns can inform later behaviours e.g. relationship style.
Evolutionary - Strong attachments may have given a survival advantage.
Clinical - implication for infants with damaged or poor attachments = Pathology.

Question 13

Lorenz - the ethological perspective.

Answer 13

“Attachments formed due to innate need of infant to engage in social behaviour and interact with others and not driven by biological drive reduction” an Ethological perspective

Question 14

How does Psychoanalysis explain attachment?

Answer 14

Drive reduction

Question 15

Harlow, Bowlby and Ainsworth all thought

Answer 15

the primacy of the first primary care giver is Irreversible.

Question 16

Harlow

Answer 16

Affectional systems theory. teri cloth monkey experiments. monkey deprived of all early social interaction overwhelmingly preferred the teri cloth monkey with no milk to the wire mesh milk giving monkey. this demonstration of the necessity for “contact comfort” lent empirical evidence to Bowlby’s assertions on the importance of love and mother/child interaction.

Question 17

Bowlby ( 1953-69) argued…..

Answer 17

separation between primary care giver and child (maternal deprivation) should be avoided between 6 months and 3 years (critical period) , otherwise there is a profound affect on the social and cognitive Development of the child.

Question 18

bowlby used as his sources…

Answer 18

1) Institutionalized boys long and short stay.
2) Goldfarb’s 1947 US research

3 Harlow’s work with Rhesus Monkeys.

Question 19

Bowlby’s 4 phases of infant attachment were…?

Answer 19

1) Pre-attachment (0-2 months) produce innate signals which summon the care giver.
2) Early attachment (2-7 months) - stranger anxiety- prefers familiar people.
3) Separation Protest, (7-9 months - 2 years) seeks contact with the regular care giver and typically shows separation protect or distress when they leave.
4) Goal Corrected (2-3 years) they take an active role in developing a working partnership with their care givers.

Question 20

describe Ainsworth’s strange situation.

Answer 20

A 7 stage procedure , lasts 20 minutes and uses 3 stressors - separation anxiety, stranger anxiety and reunion behaviour.

1)M + I left together in a strange room with strange toys.
2) S enters tries to engage the infant.
3) M leaves I with S
4) M returns S leaves
5) M leaves I alone in the room
6)S enters ( S and I are alone!!)
7 M returns, S leaves.

Question 21

list Ainsworth’s attachment types

Answer 21

Secure 70%, Insecure Avoidant - 20%, Insecure resistant 10%. Insecure disorganised.

Question 22

how does an insecure avoidant infant react?

Answer 22

indifferent towards care giver and stranger. becomes upset when they are left alone but as easily comforted by the care giver as by the stranger. - found in later “heart rate” tests to be stressed but may have learned that its pointless to demonstrate this.

Question 23

how does a secure infant react?

Answer 23

Up set when care giver leaves , cannot be consoled by strayer. Happy to see care giver return and recovers quickly from distress. seeks contact based response on reunion.

uses Care giver as a secure base

Question 24

How does an insecure resistant infant react?

Answer 24

Clingy - not keen to explore. very up set when care giver leaves and not readily comfort by the stranger. . when CG returns infant seeks comfort but resists efforts. look almost resentful.

Question 25

type 4 insecure disorganised. who found this and when ?

Answer 25

Main et al in 1984 . a child reacts oddly in the strange situation test. with conflicting and inappropriate patterns of behaviour and reunion. most common with children from high risk families.

Question 26

Ljzendoorn and Kroonberg found what when?

Answer 26

in a correlational study in 1988 they found that different countries has different rates of Ainsworths main three attachment types in infants. notable Japan had a high incidence of resistant infants - this could be because they have a culture of keeping the child very close to their PCG primary care giver so the child would not be at all used to any thing involved in the Strange situation. and Germany had a high incidence of Avoident infants - perhaps because they raise their children with a higher level of independence.

Question 27

who did a correlation study of different countries’ different levels of attachment types? clue …. ll coolJ looking Zen on a door and a singer on a large block of ice in the sea. all researching attachment types… at sea?

Answer 27

LJZENDOORN and KROONBERG in 1988

Question 28

criticisms of Ainsworth’s 3 (4) attachment types and the Strange Situation test.

Answer 28

LAMB in 1977 - artificial environment- only assesses relations with the Mother - - what about the father- he may be PCG!

Unethical amount of stress to the child.

only conducted on children from middle class families in mainly developed countries.

Question 29

Deffense of Ainsworth’s 3 (4) attachment types and the Strange Situation test.

clue combine maralyn monrone for the first and a nasty contagious grown with her on the end for the next.

Answer 29

Marrone in 1998 pointed out that the SS is actually a simulation of a very every day situation (except for perhaps the japanese - hence Ljzendoorn and Kroonbergs 1988 findings)

Wartner in 1994 found that the types were reliable and reproducible over a 6 year study testing kids from the age of 1 to 6. She found that the types tested the same in 74 percent of the cases - example of a Longitudinal study.

Question 30

Ainsworth found that the responsiveness and sensitivity of the care giver at 3 months predicts the attachment quality at

Answer 30

9 months. (1978)

Question 31

What did Meins et al find in 2001- 2002 ?

Answer 31

Mind Mindedness - Shared talk about mental states is a better predictor of secure attachment than sensitivity to children’s needs. such and food and shelter.

Question 32

who talks about Mind mindedness?

“its not youys its….”

Answer 32

Meins et al 2001 2002

Question 33

dislike of physical contact with baby in the 1 - 3 month period is related to the development of which attachment type?

Answer 33

Insecure Avoidant. ( child may learn to become self sufficient?) also linked to low emotional expressiveness of CG and sometimes highly aggressive infants (aaaaahhhhh)

Question 34

maternal inconsistency can cause …..

Answer 34

Insecure Resistant Attachment.

Question 35

Heuristics are…..

Answer 35

simple, efficient rules, learned or hard-coded by evolutionary processes, that have been proposed to explain how people make decisions, come to judgments, and solve problems typically when facing complex problems or incomplete information

trail and error, rule of thumb, common sense, educated guess.

Question 36

what did Sroufe s thirty year study on attachment find.

Answer 36

since 1975 they have studied a group of mothers from lower middle class families and assessed their children over the years from infancy to adult hood. they found that the resistant and avoidant children had a higher likely hood of growing up to have social problems.

Question 37

Houston and Aronson

Answer 37

compared working mums to stay at home mums. in terms of how much time they spent with their kids and the quality of the time spent. Mums reported two times a day. Home visits and social cognition tests for the infants (18-30 months) . working mums spent more time than predicted by SACRIFICING. house work and socialising. economic and social benefits outweigh negatives.

Question 38

school level consequences of the different attachment types…

Answer 38

SROUFE (1983-84)
secure - positie affect in school, +empathy, +attention span +capacity for problem solving.

INsecure resistant - poor peer interaction, low dependency on teachers.

Insecure avoidant - Hostiile, distant, less likely to seek assistance, “seeks little maternal help in problem solving MATAS 1978

Question 39

collins and reed (1990)

Answer 39

N=71 dating couples from ages 18-44. (mean duration of dating 17 months)

participants questioned and tested on the following factors.

Adult attachment scale
parenting style
relationship satisfaction
perceived conflict 
communication
perception of partners responsiveness 
trust 
jealously

Question 40

securely attached and later life //////

Answer 40

securely attached

comfortable with closeness
\+self worth 
\+self confidence
\+expressive 
\+positive about others
\+trustworthy
\+dependable 

Love style - Less - game playing, obsessive and Less ‘Logical’

Question 41

Anxiously Attached in later life

Answer 41

Holds negative belief about self and others

less

• less self worth
• less self confidence
• less assertive
• percieved as having less control over life events

love style - More obsessive and more dependant

Question 42

Criticism of the attachment construct and its measures

Answer 42

1) too much emphasis on EARLY experience and its ramifications . i.e. determinism
2) Dependand on brief separation and reunion being a sure measure. - see japan and germany. they may just reflect CULTURAL child rearing practices.
3) just 20 mins is not long enough.
4) They vary in AGE and STATE (of mind that day)
5) “Primates do not imprint” noted by both Harlow and Tizard - we can have more transient allegiances to attachment figures.
6) Too much Burden of responsibility on the MOTHER

Question 43

N=71 dating couples from ages 18-44. (mean duration of dating 17 months)

Answer 43

Collins and Reed (1990)

Question 44

Wartner

Answer 44

1994

Attachment types were reproducible 74 % of the time between 1 - 6 years old.

Longitudinal study.