attachment Flashcards
What did Bowlby base his theory on?
-why?
Evolutionary principles
- he preferred Harlow and Lorenz’s suggestion from their animal studies that attachment is an innate, pre programmed system that has developed through evolution
- he believed attachment formation gives a survival advantage
What did Bowlby reject as an explanation for attachment?
Learning theory
What are the 5 components of A.S.C.M.I
- adaptive
- social releasers
- critical period
- monotropy
- internal working model
Describe adaptive
- they give our species ‘adaptive advantage’
- this is because if an infant has attachment to a caregiver they are kept safe, given food and kept warm
Describe social releasers
- ‘cute’ behaviours baby’s are pre-programmed to do e.g gripping fingers
- encourages attachment from adults to activate the adult attachment system
Describe critical period
- babies have an innate drive to attach, and innate biological behaviours often have specific time frames
- critical period is believed to be between birth and 2 and a half years, after this point they will no longer be able to form attachments
- if this didn’t happen, the child would be damaged for life- socially, emotionally, intellectually and physically
What is the critical period thought to be
between birth and 2 and a half years
Describe monotropy
Bowlby placed great emphasis on one particular caregiver, the attachment to this person is different and more important than others
Bowlby called this person the ‘mother’ but said it didn’t need to be the biological mother
What are the two principles in monotropy?
- ) The law of continuity
2. ) The law of accumulated separation
Monotropy: what is the law of continuity?
The more constant and predictable a Child’s care, the better the quality of their attachment
Monotropy: what is the law of accumulated separation?
The effects of every separation from the mother add up, the safest if therefore a zero dose
Describe the Internal working model
Monotropy means the infant has just one special relationship- this helps them form a mental representation of the relationship, known as working memory model
AO3: Bowlby’s monotropic theory, a strength is that there is a wealth of supporting evidence (Brazelton et al)
*BRAZELTON ET AL: observed mothers-reported the existence of interactional synchrony. In an experiment they told the primary attachment figure to ignore the baby social releasers. They found that initially the baby was upset at being ignored but eventually responded by curling up and lying motionless-supports significance of social releasers
AO3: Bowlby’s monotropic theory, a strength is that there is a wealth of supporting evidence (Suess et al)
- SUESS ET AL: Studied children attachments to both their mother and father and their later relationship formation. They found attachment to the mother was most important in predicting future relationship behaviour. This suggests that Bowlby’s ideas on montropy are correct.
- However some argued while the primary attachment is stronger it does not mean It is qualitatively different
AO3: Bowlby’s monotropic theory, however Schaffer & Emerson provide evidence against the idea of monotropy
- found that babies developed attachments that weren’t necessarily the primary caregiver
- monotropy therefore isn’t correct as attachment to the primary caregiver isn’t more important than others
AO3: Bowlby’s monotropic theory, Monotropy is a socially sensitive idea
- Bowlby is saying that the law of accumulated separation means the more time that the mother has separate from the child the more disadvantages the child will have in a range of ways when they are older
- Feminists like Eric Burman have pointed out that this places a burden on mothers, setting them up to take the blame for anything that goes wrong in a Childs life
- it also implies that women should not go to work, this feeds on traditional stereotype gender roles and limits the options
- Bowlby felt HOWEVER that he was boosting the status’s of mothers by emphasising their importance
AO3: Bowlby’s monotropic theory, a strength is that there are real world applications
- critical period research has had a significant impact on maternity leave, accumulated separation states having substantial time apart from the primary attachment risks poor quality attachments
- because of this women are offered longer maternity leave
- HOWEVER whilst this may be advantageous for the baby. Feminists point out the burden this places on mothers as if they have to go back to work they take the blame
AO3: Bowlby’s monotropic theory, it could be argued that this period is sensitive not critical
- according to Bowlby it is not possible to form attachments after the critical period
- Rutter et al showed that this is true but only to an extent. Attachments are less likely to form after this period but it is not impossible
- For this reason researchers refer to this as a sensitive period to reflect the view that attachments are much easier to form within this time
What is reciprocity?
- Responding to the actions of another with an action (where the action of one partner elicts a response from the other)
- the interaction flows back and fourth between the caregiver and the infant
- serves to reinforce the attachment bond
Reciprocity: what are ‘alert phases’
When babies are ready for interaction and they signal this to the mother
Reciprocity: What proportion of the time do mothers pick up and respond to ‘alert phases’
2/3 of the time
Reciprocity: The … is important for later communication skills. The sensitivity level is also a … to the attachment type that follows
- ) Rhythm
2. )Pre cursor
What is interactional synchrony?
- when two people interact they tend to mirror what each other is doing, this includes facial and bodily movements, emotions and behaviours
- the actions and emotions are in a coordinated pattern
- mother and infant interactions mirror one another
How could interactional synchrony be defined
“as the temporal condition of micro-level social behaviour”
Describe the effects of bodily contact
-Klaus and Kennell compared mums who had extended physical contact with their babies lasting several hours a day with mums who only had physical feeding time in the three times after birth. One month later the mums with greater physical contact were found to cuddle the babies more and made greater eye contact with them. The effects were still noticeable a year later
Evaluate bodily contact
A practical application of the research was that hospitals placed mothers and babies in the same room in the days following birth, rather than the previous practice of rooming them apart
Describe motherese
-Papousek et al found that the tendency to show rising voice to show an infant that it was their turn in the interaction was cross-cultural. American, Chinese and German mothers all exhibited that behaviour
-this suggests that it is an innate device to facilitate the formation of attaachments
HOWEVER motherese is often used by all adults to all infants, not just ones they have attachments to. This suggests it helps communication with infants but not specifically attachment
AO3 :Caregiver-infant interaction: research support for caregiver infant interactions uses controlled observations. This is a strength because…?
- observations of mothers and infants are often well controlled with both mother and infant being filmed from multiple angles, this ensures that very fine details of behaviours are seen and can be analysed again and again
- because baby’s do not know they are being observed they act normally which increases the validity of the research
- HOWEVER there are difficulties in testing babies behaviours, their mouths are in a constant motion and some of the motions being tested (e.g sticking out tongue) occur frequently, making it difficult to identify wether it is response or normal behaviour
AO3 :Caregiver-infant interaction: There is a wealth of supporting research
- CONDON AND SANDER analysed frame-by-frame recordings of infants movements, they found that infants coordinated their movements in sequence of adult speech
- MELTZOFF AND MOORE observed the beginnings of interactional synchrony in infants as young as 2 weeks. An adult displayed one of the three facial expressions or 1 hand gesture, the baby had a dummy in it to stop them repeating the gesture straight away, this was then removed and the Childs response was filmed, there was found to be an association between the two
AO3 :Caregiver-infant interaction: A further strength is that behaviour is intentional and human specific
- ABREVAL AND DEYONG observed infant behaviour when interacting with two objects , one that simulated a tongue movement and the other a mouth opening and closing
- at 5 and 12 weeks babies showed little response to either object
- they concluded that this shows that infants do not just imitate everything they see. Their responses are a specific social response to other humans.
AO3 :Caregiver-infant interaction: However interactional synchrony is not universal
- interactional synchrony is not found in all cultures
- Le vine studied Kenyan mothers and found that they have little physical contact or interactions with their infants (low interactional synchrony)but go on to have secure attachments
- this weakness supports the idea that it is not necessary for attachments to form
AO3 :Caregiver-infant interaction: A further issue is that we do not know for certain that these interactions are specifically for attachment formation
- the ideas of synchrony and reciprocity simply decide what behaviours we are seeing in research. While they can be reliably observed this may not be useful as it does not tell us their purpose
- there are some ideas that they help develop attachments or relieve stress but simple observations of the behaviours do not help us identify wether this is the case
Describe Lorenz’s procedure
- Set up an experiment where he randomly divided a clutch of goose eggs into two groups
1. )Half hatched with mother
2. )The other half hatched in an incubator (the first moving object these Geese saw was Lorenz) - He wanted to see if they had imprinted
Describe Lorenz’s findings
- The goslings quickly divided up
- The incubator group followed Lorenz everywhere and showed no recognition of their mother, Lorenz called this imprinting, where birds attach to the first moving object that they see
- Lorenz identified a critical period where imprinting took place (this could be as brief as a few hours)
- if imprinting doesn’t occur the chicks don’t attach to anyone
What did Harlow predict that attachment was not based on?
Feeding, as learning theory suggests
Describe Harlow’s procedure
- He reared 16 baby monkeys with 2 fake model mothers
- 8 of the monkeys were studied for 165 days
- for 4 the milk that was dispensed was attached to the wire mother
- for the 4 other it was dispensed by the soft cloth mother
- the monkeys were observed and the measurements were taken of how long they spent with each other and who they went to when frightened.
Describe Harlow’s results
- all 8 monkeys spent most time with their cloth mother, wether or not she was the one that fed them
- the monkeys that fed from the wire mother only spent a short amount of time getting milk and then returned to the cloth mother. The babies would also keep on the foot of the cloth mother when playing
- this suggests the infants did not attach to the person that fed them but to the mother that offered them contact comfort
- concluded that there was a critical period- baby’s need a mother figure within the first 90 days in order to form an attachment, after this time attachment is impossible
What was the critical period that Harlow concluded upon?
90 days
Describe Harlow’s results into deprivation of a proper mother figure - maternal deprivation
The monkeys reared only with a wire mother were the most dysfunctional, however even those with only a wire mother and a cloth mother did not develop normal social behaviour as adults , they did not show normal mating behaviours and did not cradle comfort their own babies, they also neglected their own young
A03: Lorenz’s Geese: Guitton et al
- found that chickens would imprint on washing gloves, shows they have the predisposition to imprint on any moving object that is present during the critical window
- the chickens tried to mate with the rubber gloves, supports link between imprinting and reproductive behaviour
- however over time the chicks learnt to prefer other chickens, suggesting the influence of imprinting on mating behaviour is not permanent
AO3 :Lorenz’s Geese: Mammalian attachment system is quite different to that of birds
- Lorenz tested on birds= problems generalising the findings to humans
- Mammalian attachment system quite different from birds e.g mammalian mothers show more attachment to infants, they can also form attachments later
A03: Harlow: A strength is Harlow’s research has theoretical value
- Harlow’s research has had a massive impact on our understanding of attachment
- It has mainly showed that attachments form as a result to the caregiver giving comfort, not them being the feeder
- has showed the importance of having high quality, early relationships
A03: Harlow: There have been many important applications from Harlow’s work
- It has helped social workers to understand the risk factors in child neglect and abuse, they can therefore prevent it more easily
- It helps us know how to best care for captive monkeys knowing the importance of helping them form proper attachments in zoos and breeding programmes in the wild
A03: Harlow: However a criticism of Harlow’s work is that is is unethical
- His monkeys suffered greatly as a result of these studies, there was lasting emotional harm
- We consider monkeys to be similar enough to us to be able to generalise findings so they are similar enough to. feel distress as we do
- HOWEVER it could be said the research was sufficiently important enough to justify the effects. It has led to better care for humans and primate infants
A03: Harlow: Can we really apply findings from monkeys to humans?
YES:-support from human studies (Schaffer) who found babies attach to the most comforting person (not the one who feeds them)
-monkeys are more closely related to humans than Lorenz’s Geese
NO:-
-they are still not human, huge differences = problems in generalising
-psychologists disagree on the extent to which we generalise
How did Dollard and Miller apply classical conditioning to attachment formation?
1.) BEFORE CONDITIONING
Food=Unconditioned stimulus … Happy baby = Unconditioned response
2.) DURING CONDITIONING
Mother=Neutral stimulus … Food=Unconditioned stimulus .. Happy baby=Unconditioned response
3.)AFTER CONDITIONING
Conditioned stimulus=mother … Happy baby=conditioned response
Describe how Dollard and Miller applied operant conditioning to attachment formation
They emphasised the importance of the caregiver as the provider of food
- the baby is hungry so cries (the behaviour)
- the baby gets fed by the caregiver positively reinforcing the crying behaviour
- this results in more crying behaviour for comfort linked to that one caregiver forming an attachment over time due to the reinforcement and repetition of the behaviour
Describe attachment as a secondary drive
-learning theory drives on the concept of drive reduction
-hunger= primary drive (it is an innate biological motivator)
-as caregiver provide food the primary drive of hunger becomes generalised to them
attachment is thus a secondary drive as it is learned by association and the satisfaction of the primary drive
Describe social learning theory in attachment
- modelling can explain attachment behaviours
- children observe their parents affectionate behaviours and imitate this
- parents also instruct children how to behave in relationships
- parents also reward appropriate behaviours such as hugs and punish non-appropriate behaviours
AO3: Learning theory: there is contradictory evidence from animal studies (Lorenz, Harlow)
- ) LORENZ’S GEESE: imprinted before they were fed, maintained these attachments regardless of who fed them
- )HARLOW’S MONKEYS attached to the cloth mother, despite being fed by the wire mother
- Animal behaviour can be applied to human behaviour, this is the case for humans too, the learning theory for attachment can be seen as incorrect
AO3: Learning theory: Schaffer & Emmerson also provide evidence against learning theory of attachment
- Schaffer & Emmerson found that babies developed primary attachment figures that weren’t necessarily the primary caregiver (feeder) who did most of the feeding
- indicates that feeding is not the only or even the most important aspect of attachment formation
AO3: Learning theory: Learning theory is largely based on studies with non-human animals
- e.g Skinners pigeons, Pavlovs dogs
- This is because behaviourists believe humans are no different in how they learn
- many behaviourists belive the same concept of stimulus and response, the argue it is legitimate to suggest that attachments might too
AO3: Learning theory: While learning theory may not provide a full explanation of attachment, it does have some value
- Infants do learn through association and reinforcement, it just might not be food that is the main reinforcement
- it may be that they learn attachments due to food and responsiveness from the caregiver as a reward instead
- these additional reinforces were not part of the learning theory
AO3: Learning theory: Bowlby’s monotropic theory may be a better explanation
-He preferred Harlow and Lorenz’s suggestion from their animal studies that attachment is an innate pre-programmed system that developed from evolution. He believed that attachment formation gives a survival advantage
What was Ainsworth et al’s ‘strange situation’ aim?
To produce a method of assessing the quality of attachment by placing an infant in a situation of mild stress (to encourage the seek comfort) and of novelty (to encourage exploration behaviour)
Describe Ainsworth et al’s ‘strange situation’ procedure
- A method of controlled observation
- Observers recorded the infants and mothers behaviour, especially noting the following
- separation anxiety: the unease the infant showed when left by the caregiver, Exploration: the infants willingness to explore
- stranger anxiety: the infants response to the presence of a stranger
- reunion behaviour:the way the caregiver was greeted on return
