Attachment Flashcards
what is attachment and how long does it take to develop in humans
- close 2-way emotional bond
- each person sees the other as important for security
- takes months to develop fully
what is attachment characterised by
- proximity seeking
- separation distress
- secure-base behaviour
definition of reciprocity
definition of interactional synchrony
- reciprocity: mother and infant respond to each other
- interactional synchrony: mother and infant reflect both actions and emotions. they do this in a coordinated, synchronised way.
order the stages of attachment (with ages)
who’s theory was it?
Asocial - first few weeks
indiscriminate attachment - 2-7 months
specific attachment - from 7 months
multiple attachments - by 1 year
theory by Schaffer and Emerson
Schaffer and Emerson
- year
- investigation into what?
- type of study
- method
1964
- an investigation into the formation of early attachment
- longitudinal study in natural environment
method:
- 60 babies (roughly 50/50 male /female)
- skilled working class families in Glasgow
- mothers reported babies behaviour every month
- used interviews, observations and diary records
- operationalised attachment : separation distress, stranger anxiety
Schaffer and Emerson
- evaluation
- good external validity
- natural environment (at home)
- researchers rarely visited - behaviour was natural
longitudinal design
- same children were followed up
- high internal validity
- no confounding variables due to individual differences
limited sample
- 60 babies
- same area and social class
- may not generalise
- low population validity
Asocial stage
-first few weeks
baby recognises and forms bonds with carer
baby does not discriminate between human and non human objects
-hard to observe behaviour in babies this young
unreliable evidence
indiscriminate attachment
- 2-7 months
display social behaviour
show preference for humans
do not show stranger anxiety or separation distress
specific attachment
- around 7 months
show stranger anxiety
baby has specific attachment to one carer
this is the primary carer
multiple attachments
- by one year
attach to other familiar adults
these are secondary attachments
strange situation
- 7 steps and what they test for
1: child is encouraged to explore
- tests exploration and secure base behaviour
2: stranger interacts with child
- tests stranger anxiety
3: caregiver leaves child and stranger together
- separation and stranger anxiety
4: caregiver returns, stranger leaves
- reunion behaviour, exploration / secure base
5: caregiver leaves child alone
- separation anxiety
6: stranger returns
- tests stranger anxiety
7: caregiver returns
- reunion behaviour
strange situation method
- ainsworth 1969
- controlled observation
- 2 way mirror
- non participant
strange situation
- what are the 3 types of attachment
A - insecure avoidant
B- secure
C - insecure resistant
secure attachment A - characteristics - reunion behaviour -% -carer type
show: moderate proximity seeking moderate secure base moderate stranger anxiety moderate separation anxiety
reunion:
require and accept attention
- 60-75% british babies
- sensitive and responsive carer
insecure avoidant B - characteristics - reunion behaviour -% -carer type
show: low proximity seeking low stranger anxiety low secure base low separation anxiety
reunion:
don’t require attention
- 20-25% british babies
- unresponsive carer
insecure resistant C - characteristics - reunion behaviour -% -carer type
show: high proximity seeking high secure base high stranger anxiety high separation anxiety
reunion:
resist attention
- 3% british babies
- inconsistent carer
strange situation conclusion
- carers behaviour towards child determines child’s attachment type
- this in return determines carers behaviour
strange situation evaluation
good internal validity - lab expt, well controlled good external validity - attachment type is good at predicting later relationships good reliability - different observers agree on results - replications have similar results
may be culture bound
- results may differ in different cultures
learning theory for attachment
dollard and miller 1949
- attachment is learnt
- through trial and error you can work out what behaviours work
classical conditioning for attachment
- infant associates feeding with carer
- carer becomes reinforced by association
UCS - drinking milk
UCR - feeling happy
NS - mum present - CS
CR - happiness
operant conditioning for attachment
- childs love behaviour is reinforced by feeding
- adults love behaviour is reinforced:
positively by child smiling after feeding
negatively when child stops crying after feeding
explaining attachment
- conditioning process increases proximity. this leads to separation distress
attachment as a secondary drive
- hunger is a primary drive
- through association with primary drive, comfort from carer becomes a secondary
schaffer and emerson conclusion
- attachment not always to feeder, mother or time spender
- instead, attachment is to the most responsive and emotionally caring person
Lorenz’s study
procedure: randomly divided a group of goose eggs. half hatched naturally. the other half hatched in an incubator where Lorenz was the first thing they saw
findings:
control: followed mother everywhere
condition: followed Lorenz everywhere
conclusion:
this is imprinting. where bird species attach to the first moving object they see. Lorenz identified a critical period for imprinting to take place
-imprinting was not effected by whether Lorenz fed the geese, contradicting learning theory
Lorenz evaluation
poor generalisability to human as geese are a very different species
conflicting evidence suggests imprinting is not as permanent as Lorenz thought
harlow’s research
procedure: reared 16 baby monkeys with two surrogate mothers. surrogate mothers were made of wire, and one had cloth over the top making it soft. in one condition, milk was dispensed by the wire mother, in the other milk was dispensed by the cloth mother.
findings:
monkeys sought comfort from the cloth monkey regardless of who dispensed the milk. this proved contact comfort was more important than food in forming attachments
Harlow’s monkeys and maternal deprivation
- critical period
- the monkeys grew up to be aggressive, less sociable and bred less often
- those who had been brought up with a wire monkey had more severe effects
- harlow created a critical period
- a mother had to be introduced within 90 days for an attachment to form
Harlow evaluation
- showed that attachment is formed through contact comfort and not feeding
- the importance of early relationships on later life
- real life application and generalisability
- helped to understand risks of child neglect and abuse
- ethical issues: monkeys suffered greatly
3 parts of Bowlby’s monotropic theory
- their definitions
- who the research evidence was done by
- what year
monotropy
- one of a childs attachments is more important than others
- schaffer and emerson DID NOT SUPPORT
- 1964
social releasers
- innate behaviours that activate adult attachment system and encourage attention
- brazleton et al
- 1975
internal working model
- mental representations of relationship with caregiver
- bailey et al
- 2007
brazleton at al
observed mothers and babies interactions
-reported interactional synchrony
-when mothers ignored the babies social releasers, they initially showed distress, and then lay motionless
bailey et al
assessed 90 mothers with babies on their quality of attachment with their mothers
they often had similar types of attachment with their mothers as with their babies
schaffer and emerson support for Bowlby’s monotropic theory
schaffer and emerson’s research does not support Bowlby’s monotropic theory because they found that children could form multiple attachments, not just one as the theory states
evaluation of Bowlby’s critical period
- critical period has been challenged
- tizard and hodges, 1984
- studied orphaned children until age 4
- orphanage discouraged attachment
- by age 8, 20/21 children had formed close relationships with their adoptive parents.
- suggests period is more sensitive, rather than critical
influence of attachment on later relationships - fraley 2002 meta analysis procedure results evaluation
- link between early attachment and later relationships through a meta analysis
inclusion criteria:
- test at 12
- retest between 13 months and 21 months
- 27 studies
results
- positive correlation of 0.39 between early and later attachment
- moderate stability
evaluation
+ longitudinal - doesn’t use retrospective assessment
- correlational - you can’t draw causality and there may be a third factor
schaffer and emerson stats about paternal attachment
- 29% develop multiple attachments simultaneously
- majority had multiple attachments by 1 year
- most children attached to mother first
- 75% attached to father after 18 months
grossman 2002
- research into role of the father
- longitudinal study on both parents attachments
- attachment type to mother correlated with adolescent attachments
- suggests mother is more important than father
- quality of fathers play is important
- shows role of mother is to care and nurture
- role of father is to play and stimulate
field 1974
research into the role of the father
- when fathers are the primary caregiver they become more maternal
- smile and imitate the baby more ( more interactional synchrony)
- relationship depends on responsiveness not gender
evaluation of research into role of father
- results inconsistent
- some studies show fatherless families have no effect on the child
- suggests father role is not needed
- other studies show any one can be the mother figure
- anyone can take on secondary care giver - doesn’t have to be biological father
reasons why it is the mother who is the maternal figure
- 90% of families with one parent working, have the mother at home
- mother is around the baby most of the time
- gender roles make the mother more nurturing
- hormones biologically predispose mothers to be more caring
implications for the economy
-role of fathers
research shows fathers can be a primary caregiver
- this means mothers can keep working
- higher earner can stay in work
- helps economy
cultural variations in attachment
- strange situation
universally:
type B is the most common
type A and C have a lot of variance between countries
westernised cultures have similar results
collectivist cultures have higher results of type C
- israels study was taken on a kibbutz - eg high type C
reasons for cultural similarity in attachment
- attachment is innate
- leads to universal norms
- norms are displayed through mass media
cultural variation within countries
- intravariation (variation within countries) was shown to be up to 1.5 times cross-cultural variation
- this variation comes from differences in social class, differences in opportunity etc
- these differences lead to environmental stress which could be a big factor in raising a child
procedure - cultural variation in attachment
ijzendoorm and kroonenburg 1988
- meta analysis of strange situation studies world wide
- 32 studies included, across 8 countries
- 1990 children
inclusion criteria
- infant - mother attachment studies
- ABC classification
- infants up to 24 months
- excluded special groups eg disabled children / twins
- excluded samples less than 35
evaluation of cultural variation meta analysis
strengths
- large sample size - 1990 children
- meta analysis reduces effect of anomalous results
- high internal validity
weakness
- 5/32 were collectivist cultures - they were under represented
- so not a reliable measure
- interpretation of behaviour was through western eyes so may not fairly record behaviour from other cultures
- studied variation in countries not cultures
what is maternal deprivation
- when can it happen
- where a child does not have a warm, intimate, and continuous relationship with a mother figure
- deprivation of a child up to 5 years old will impair development
- the younger the child the more severe the consequences
according to Bowlby’s theory, what does maternal deprivation lead to
- lowered IQ
- lack of empathy
golfard research into maternal deprivation
1955
-followed up 30 orphaned children to age 12
half were fostered at 4 months
- tested IQ at age 12
fostered group (control): IQ 96 orphanage group: IQ 68
Bowlby’s 44 thieves study
procedure
44 criminal teenagers were interviewed for affectionless psychopathy
a control group of emotionally disturbed but non criminals were also assessed
- families interviewed to see whether the teenagers had suffered maternal deprivation
findings:
14/44 were affectionless psychopaths
12/14 suffered maternal deprivation
5/30 remaining criminals had suffered maternal deprivation
2/44 control group suffered maternal deprivation
conclusion:
prolonged maternal deprivation in children under 2 could lead to a higher risk of affectionless psychopathy
evaluation of Bowlby’s 44 thieves study
- counter evidence
lewis 1954
partially replicated 44 thieves
could not predict criminality from results - not a critical period
Bowlby thought critical period inevitably caused damage
-other cases have shown that children can have good outcomes if shown the right treatment and after care - may be poor evidence
- Bowlby carried out interviews himself, knowing what result he wanted to find
- childrens backgrounds may have been much more complicated than just maternal deprivation leading to confounding variables
- correlational - cannot draw cause and effect conclusions
- used retrospective interviews
relies on accurate and honest answers
may not be reliable results
Rutter’s ERA study
ERA - English Romanian Adoptee study
- 165 Romanian orphans adopted in Britain
- tested how effectively good care could make up for institutionalisation
- measured physical, cognitive and emotional development in children adopted at different ages
- 52 british children adopted at the same time was a control group
findings:
adoption age mean IQ disinhibition?
before 6 months 102 9%
6-24 months 86 26%
after 24 months 77 too old to observe
control 100 4%
conclusion:
development is better when children are adopted ( and shown care) at a younger age
characteristics of disinhibited attachment
attention seeking, clingy behaviour, social behaviour in discriminant of familiar or non familiar adults
Zeanah’s study - the Bucharest Early Intervention study
procedure:
- assessed attachment in 95 institutionalised children aged 12-31 months
- control group of 50 children who had never lived in institutions
- measured attachment type using strange situation
- assessed for disinhibited attachment
findings:
secure disorganised disinhibited
institutionalised 19% 65% 44%
control 74% n/a <20%
what is disorganised attachment
an attachment type showing both A, insecure avoidant, and C. insecure resistant
- doesn’t show consistent behaviour types
- very insecure
effects of institutionalisation
Rutter conclusion
Institutionalisation causes:
- disinhibited attachment
due to adaptation to living with multiple carers during sensitive period
- mental retardation
often children are mentally retarded after institutional care. however, if adopted before 6 months, they are likely to catch up by the age of 4.
evaluation of Romanian orphanages
rutter and Zeanah
+ve - high internal validity
- majority of Romanian orphans did not suffer traumatic experiences pre institutionalisation
- fewer extraneous variables
- easier to judge effect of institutionalisation
+ve - real life application
- results applied to care homes
- orphans now assigned one key worker which allows for primary attachment
- ve - lacks generalizability
- institutional care in Romania was so bad that this research may not apply to other situations
Rutter’s study:
- ve - confounding variables
- did not randomly allocate children to adoption / institutionalisation
- confounding variables such as smart, sociable being adopted first
Bucharest study:
+ve - randomly allocated children
- controls for confounding variables
-ve - raises many ethical issues
