Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Psychology - Paper 1 > Attachment > Flashcards

Attachment Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
Psychology 101 flashcards GRE® Psychology flashcards AP® Psychology flashcards
1
Q

Define reciprocity

A

A description of how two people interact. Mother infant interaction is reciprocal in that both infant and mother respond to each other’s signals and each elicits a response from the other, almost as if taking turns

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Define interactional synchrony

A

When mother and infant both reflect the actions and emotions of the other in a coordinated, synchronised way

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Summarise research into reciprocity

A
  • Brazleton found children as young as two weeks old could attempt to copy the caregiver and described reciprocity as a dance
  • Feldman (2007) found mothers pick up on babies social interactions 2 thirds of the time and these increase in frequency from three months
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Summarise research into interactional synchrony

A
  • Feldman (2007) stated this was temporal coordination of microlevel social behaviour
  • Meltzoff + Moore (1977) observed interactional synchrony. Parents made one of three expressions. Child response filmed and association found between gesture and action of baby
  • Isabella (1989) observed 30 mothers and infants and assessed degree of synchrony and quality of relationship. Positive correlation found
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Summarise research into parent infant attachment

A
  • Schaffer + Emerson (1964) found the majority of babies attached to mother within seven months and formed secondary attachments after
  • 75% attached with father by 18 months determined by protest when father absent
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Summarise research into the role of the father

A
  • Grossman (2002) carried out longitudinal study looking at parent behaviour and relationship to quality of attachment
  • Quality of attachment with mother but not father related to adolescent attachment
  • Quality of fathers play related to adolescent attachment suggesting father is for play not nurture
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Summarise research into the role of a father as a primary caregiver

A
  • Evidence to suggest when fathers take on role they adopt motherly behaviours
  • Field (1978) filmed 4-month old babies in face to face interaction with primary mothers, fathers and secondary fathers
  • Primary spent more time smiling and imitating
  • This behaviour can be seen to be important in formation of attachment
  • Key to attachment is responsiveness and not gender
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

AO3: Why is it hard to know what is happening when observing infants?

A
  • Studies with observation show same interactions (Gratier 2003)
  • Only expression and movement is observed
  • Difficult to be certain what takes place from infant perspective (conscious or not)
  • Cannot know that these behaviours have a special meaning
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

AO3: Why are controlled observations good in attachment studies?

A
  • Well controlled observations such as Brazleton who filmed different angles
  • Fine detail captured and babies do not know they are filmed so demand characteristics do not change behaviour
  • Strength as good inter-rater reliability and therefore valid conclusions
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

AO3: Why don’t observations tell us the purpose of behaviour in attachment research?

A
  • Feldman (2012) points out synchrony and reciprocity only describe behaviour
  • Reliable observed but not useful as purpose unknown
  • Bremner distinguished between behavioural response and behavioural understanding
  • Although evidence shows important for attachment
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

AO3: Why are there inconsistent findings on fathers?

A
  • Psychologists aim to find different things
  • Primary attachment father research shows fathers more maternal and secondary attachment father research does not
  • Psychologists cannot still determine role of the father
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

AO3: Why are children without father’s not different?

A
  • Grossman (2002) found fathers as secondary attachment figures were important
  • Other research (MacCallum and Golombok 2004) found children growing up with one or same sex parents are not different
  • Suggest fathers role as secondary attachment figure not important
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

AO3: Why don’t fathers become primary attachment figures?

A
  • Result of traditional gender roles where women expected to nurture
  • Fathers feel they don’t act like that
  • Female hormones create higher levels of nurture and are biological predisposed to be primary attachment figure
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

AO3: Why is research into caregiver infant interaction socially sensitive?

A
  • Suggests some children disadvantaged due to certain child rearing practices
  • E.g mother who returns to work
  • Suggests parent should stay at home
  • Benefit of research must be considered
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Define stages of attachment

A

Many developmental theories identify a sequence of qualitatively different behaviours linked to specific ages. In stages of attachment some characteristics of behaviour to others changes as the infant ages

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Define multiple attachments

A

Attachments to two or more people. Most babies appear to develop multiple attachment once one has been formed with the main carer

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Summarise the procedure of Schaffer and Emerson (1964)

A
  • Longitudinal study with 60 babies, 31 male, 39 female
  • Glasgow estate and from skilled working class
  • Babies visited at home every month for a year and at 18 months
  • Researcher asked about protests e.g separation anxiety and stranger anxiety and analysed interaction
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Summarise the findings of Schaffer and Emerson (1964)

A
  • Between 25 and 32 weeks of ages, 50% showed separation anxiety to an adult, usually the mother
  • Attachment tended to be to the adult who was most interactive and sensitive and not who spent the most time
  • By 40 weeks, 80% had a specific attachments and 30% had multiple attachments
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

State and describe the stages of attachment

A 
Asocial stage (first few weeks) = Baby's behaviour towards non human and human similar. Preference for familiar adults
Indiscriminate attachment = 2-7 months where babies more sociable and prefer humans more. Accept affection from all adults
Specific attachment = From 7 months the baby displays anxiety to strangers and separation from particular adult (primary attachment figure) who offers the most interaction
Multiple attachments = Babies begin to show attachment to other adults who they spend time with. 29% have one within a month of a specific attachment with multiple by the age of 1
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

AO3: How does Schaffer and Emerson (1964) have good external validity?

A
  • Families own home and most observation carried out by parent
  • Behaviour unaffected by presence of observers and hence behaviour natural increasing external validity
  • However, parent measuring behaviour may cause problems with internal validity
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

AO3: Why is it a strength that Schaffer and Emerson (1964) had a longitudinal design?

A
  • Same children observed and followed up. Although cross sectional designs are quicker, they suffer from confounding variables due to individual differences
  • Hence longitudinal has better internal validity
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

AO3: Why does Schaffer and Emerson (1964) lack population validity?

A
  • Sample size of 60 with large volume of data
  • All families from same city, same district and same social class
  • Practices vary from one culture to another and between historical periods
  • Results may not generalise socially and historically
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

AO3: What is the problem with studying the asocial stage?

A
  • Schaffer and Emerson (1964) describe first few weeks as asocial
  • In this time, babies are immobile and coordination bad
  • Difficult to observe and infer this behaviour
  • Does not mean child is not social, just that evidence cannot be relied on
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

AO3: Why is there conflicting evidence on multiple attachments?

A
  • Not clear when this occurs
  • Some research indicates most if not all form after attachment to main carer formed (Bowlby 1969)
  • Others who work in cultures with multiple caregivers believe multiple attachments form first (van Ijzendoorn 1993)
  • These cultures are collectivist
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

AO3: Why is there a problem how multiple attachments are measured?

A
  • Hard to signify multiple attachments
  • Just because distress caused when leaving does not signify attachment
  • Bowlby (1969) pointed out children get distressed when play mates leave
  • Weakness as does not allow distinction between behaviour for secondary attachment and playmates
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

Define animals studies

A

Studies in psychology carried out on non-human species rather than on humans, either for ethical or practical reasons. Practical as animals breed faster and researchers are interested in seeing results across more than one generation of animals

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

Define imprinting

A

When an animal forms an attachment to the first moving object or person they see directly after birth

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q

Summarise the procedure of Lorenz

A
  • Classic experiment and divided goose eggs

- Half hatched with mother and half hatched in incubator with Lorenz as the first object they saw

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q

Summarise the findings of Lorenz

A
  • Those hatched in incubator followed Lorenz and control group followed mother
  • When two groups mixed, they still followed the same object/person as before
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
30
Q

What did Lorenz identify in his research?

A

A critical period in which imprinting needs to occur or animals will not form an attachment. This can be as brief as a few hours and is species dependant

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
31
Q

Other than imprinting, what else did Lorenz research?

A
  • Relationship between imprinting and mate preferences
  • Sexual imprinting is where the animal attaches to and displays sexual/courtship behaviour to first moving object
  • Case study of peacock reared in reptile house
  • As an adult it only showed courtship behaviour to tortoises
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
32
Q

Summarise the procedure of Harlow (1958)

A
  • Tested idea soft objects serve some function of the mother
  • 16 rhesus monkeys reared with wire mothers, one with milk one with fur
  • Frightened and observed which monkey was ran to
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
33
Q

Summarise the findings of Harlow (1958)

A
  • Baby monkeys cuddled soft object and went to soft one when frightened regardless of dispensing milk
  • Shows contact comfort important in attachment over food
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
34
Q

What happened to the monkeys in Harlow’s experiment?

A
  • Monkeys deprived of real mother to see if early maternal deprivation had an effect
  • Monkeys with wire mothers dysfunctional
  • Even monkeys with soft mothers were not socially adept
  • As mothers some attacked and killed their offspring
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
35
Q

What was the critical period for development according to Harlow?

A
  • Critical period for behaviour
  • Mother must be introduced to infant in 90 days
  • After this attachment was impossible and damage irreversible
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
36
Q

AO3: Evaluate the generalisability of Lorenz’s research to humans

A
  • Mammalian attachment different to birds
  • Mammalian mothers show more emotion and mammals can form attachment anytime, even if it is harder after infancy
  • Not appropriate to generalise to humans
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
37
Q

AO3: Why have some of Lorenz’s observations been questioned?

A
  • Lorenz claimed imprinting permanent
  • Guiton (1966) found chickens imprinted on yellow washing up gloves but with experience preferred other chickens
  • Weakness as impact of imprinting not permanent as thought
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
38
Q

AO3: Why does Harlow’s research have high theoretical value?

A
  • Profound effect on human mother infant attachment
  • Showed attachment does not develop as the result of feeding but rather due to contact comfort
  • Showed importance of quality of early relationships for later social development including rearing children
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
39
Q

AO3: Why does Harlow’s research have high practical value?

A
  • Application to a range of contexts
  • Helped social workers understand risk factors in child neglect and abuse and helped to intervene/prevent (Howe 1998)
  • Important for captive monkeys and the importance of proper attachment
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
40
Q

AO3: Why does Harlow’s research suffer from ethical issues?

A
  • Suffered greatly
  • Considered similar enough to generalise which means suffering also similar
  • Harlow aware of suffering e.g iron maiden mothers
  • However research was important to justify effects
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
41
Q

Define learning theory

A

A set of theories from the behaviourist approach that emphasis the role of learning in the acquisition of behaviour. These include classical and operant conditioning

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
42
Q

Who proposed learning theory in attachment?

A

Dollar + Miller (1950)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
43
Q

Summarise the role of classical conditioning in the learning theory of attachment

A
  • Learning to associate two stimuli together
  • Caregiver is NS
  • Food is UCS
  • Pleasure is UCR
  • Caregiver associated with food and becomes and become CS
  • Pleasure is then CR
44
Q

Summarise the role of operant conditioning in the learning theory of attachment

A
  • Learning to repeat or not dependant on consequences
  • Explains why babies cry for comfort
  • Crying leads to a response from caregiver
  • Caregiver gives correct response (social suppressor behaviour) so crying reinforced
45
Q

How can we think of attachment as a secondary drive

A
  • Draws on the concept of drive reduction (Acting to satisfy biological needs to reduce a drive)
  • Hunger is a primary drive
  • Sears (1957) suggested as caregivers provide food, the primary drive of hunger generalise to caregiver and secondary drive learned
46
Q

AO3: What is the counter evidence for learning theory of attachment?

A
  • Animals do not imprint or attach to those who feed them. Lorenz’s geese imprinted before feeding. Harlow’s monkeys attached to a soft surrogate in preference to the one with food
  • Clear attachment does not develop as result of feeding
  • Same must be same for humans as learning theorists thought humans and animals equivalent
47
Q

AO3: What is the contradictory evidence for learning theory of attachment?

A
  • Schaffer + Emerson showed babies developed primary attachments even though other figures carried out feeding
  • Show feeding is not a key elects of attachment and so UCS or primary drive involved
48
Q

AO3: What is negative about learning theory of attachment ignoring other factors?

A
  • Research into reciprocity and synchrony ignored
  • Studies showed infants with best attachment had carers who responded most appropriately
  • Hard to reconcile these ideas with learning theory as if attachment was due to feeding, there would be no point of these actions
  • Limited explanation of only some aspects of attachment
49
Q

Define monotropic

A

A term used to describe Bowlby’s theory meaning one particular attachment is different from all others and of central importance to the child’s development

50
Q

Define internal working model

A

The mental representations we all carry with us of our attachment to our primary caregiver. They are important in affecting future relationships and our perception of what relationships are like

51
Q

Define critical period

A

Refers to the time within which an attachment must form if it is to form at all. Lorenz and Harlow noted that attachment in birds and monkeys have a critical period. Bowlby extends thus to humans where infants have a sensitive period after which it is much harder to form an attachment

52
Q

What was attachment according to Bowlby?

A
  • An innate evolutionary system that gave a survival advantage as it ensures young animals stay close to caregivers protecting them form hazards
53
Q

What did Bowlby mean by monotropic?

A
  • Emphasis on a child’s attachment to one particular caregiver
  • This was different and more important
  • The more time spent with the primary attachment figure the better
54
Q

State and describe the two laws of Bowlby’s monotropic theory

A
  • Law of continuity stated the more constant and predictable a child’s care, the better the attachment and future relationships
  • Law of accumulated separation states the effects of every separation add up
55
Q

What did Bowlby conclude about social releasers and

A
  • Social releasers are cute behaviours that encourage attention from adults that activate adult attachment system
  • Both infant and adult predisposed to become attached
  • Critical period of around two years when attachment system of child active
  • More of a sensitive period, after which it is harder to form an attachment
56
Q

What did Bowlby conclude about the internal working model?

A
  • Child forms mental representation of their relationship due to primary caregiver as it serves a model of what relationships are like
  • Affects Childs ability to parent due to experience of being parented
57
Q

AO3: What is negative about Bowlby’s research in a social context?

A
  • Socially sensitive
  • Even thought Bowlby did not claim mother must be the primary figure, it is in 65% of cases
  • Pressure on mothers to delay return to work to ensure secure attachment
  • Developmental abnormalities may be blame on mother by default
  • Idea of monotropy stigmatises poor mothers
58
Q

AO3: What is the supporting evidence for internal working models?

A
  • Testable as predicts patterns of attachment passed to generations
  • Bailey (2007) assessed 99 mothers with one year olds on quality of attachment
  • Found that mothers who reported poor attachment to their parents were likely to have “poor” children classified by observations
  • Supports the idea of an internal working model passing through families
59
Q

AO3: What is the contradictory evidence for monotropy?

A
  • May not be evident in all children
  • Small minority of children in Schaffer and Emerson formed multiple attachments from the outset
  • Also support by van lzjendoorn and Kronenberg who found monotropy was scarce in collectivist cultures
  • Monotropy unlikely to be universal feature of attachment and is limited explanation
60
Q

Define the strange situation

A

A controlled observation designed to test attachment security. Infants are assessed on their response to playing in an unfamiliar room, being alone, with a stranger and being reunited

61
Q

Define secure attachment

A

The most desirable attachment type associated with psychologically healthy outcomes. This is shown by moderate stranger and separation anxiety and comfort at reunion

62
Q

Define insecure avoidant attachment

A

An attachment type characterised by low separation and stranger anxiety and weak attachment. Little response at reunion is also a key element

63
Q

Define insecure resistant attachment

A

An attachment type characterised characterised by a strong attachment and high separation and stranger anxiety and resistance to comfort at reunion

64
Q

Summarise the procedure of Ainsworth (1969)

A
  • Controlled observation

- Behaviours included proximity seeking, secure base, separation and stranger anxiety and reunion response

65
Q

Summarise the findings of Ainsworth (1969)

A
  • Secure attachment type B explore happily and show secure base behaviour. Moderate separation and stranger anxiety. Require and accept comfort at reunion. 60-75% of British toddlers this type
  • Insecure attachment type type A explore freely and do not show secure base behaviour. There is little to none stranger and separation anxiety. Comfort not required at reunion. 20-25% of British toddlers type A
  • These children seek greater proximity than others and explore less. Massive separation and stranger anxiety and resist comfort. 3% of British toddlers this type
66
Q

AO3: Why does the strange situation have good support for validity?

A
  • Attachment type strongly predictive of later development
  • Secure attachments go on to have better outcomes in relationships and friends
  • Insecure resistant associated with the worst outcomes including bullying (Kokkinos 2007) and mental health (Ward 2006)
  • Validity as it can explain consequent outcomes
67
Q

AO3: Why does the strange situation have good reliability?

A
  • Good inter rater reliability as others agree on the same attachment type
  • This is due to controlled conditions and behavioural categories
  • Bick (2012) looked at inter rater reliability in a team of strange situation trained observers and found 94% agreement
  • Confident attachment type does not depend on who is observing
68
Q

AO3: Why may the strange situation be culture bound?

A
  • Does not have same meaning in countries outside western cultures
  • Cultural differences in childhood experience mean children respond differently
  • Caregivers from different cultures behave differently
  • (Takahashi 1990) noted the test does not work in Japan as mothers so rarely separated so high anxiety
  • These babies were hard to observe as mother’s rushed to the baby
69
Q

Define cultural variation

A

Culture refers to the norms and values that exist within any group of people. Cultural variations are the differences in norms and values that exist between people in different groups. In attachment research this concerns the differences in proportions of attachment types

70
Q

Summarise the procedure of Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg (1988)

A
  • Study to look at proportions of three attachment types
  • Looked at differences within a country to see variation within a culture
  • 32 studies using strange situation in eight countries with 1990 children
  • Meta-analysed and weighted with sample size
71
Q

Summarise the findings of Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg (1988)

A
  • Wide variations in different cultures
  • Secure most prominent in all but varied 75% in Britain to 50% in Chin
  • Insecure resistant least common but varied 30% in Israel to 3% in Britain
  • Insecure avoidant was most prominent in Germany and least in Japan
  • Variations between the same country were up to 150% greater than between countries
  • E.g one study found 46% were securely attached compared to 90% in another
72
Q

Summarise the procedure and findings of Simonella (2014)

A
  • Study in Italy to see if data matches previous studies
  • 76 12 month olds observed in strange situation
  • 50% secure, 36% insecure avoidant which was lower than what has been previously found
  • Suggested due to mothers working long hours and childcare
  • Suggests cultural changes make a difference to patterns of secure and insecure attachment
73
Q

Summarise the procedure and findings of Jin (2012)

A
  • Study to compare attachment type in Korea
  • 78 children assessed with strange situation
  • Insecure and secure similar to most countries with secure most prominent
  • More insecure were resistant, only one was avoidant
  • Similar to results of Japan of Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg (1988)
  • Japan and Korea have similar child rearing so may be explained due to style of childrearing
74
Q

What are the conclusions that can be made from the strange situation and variations in attachment?

A
  • Secure is the norm in a range of cultures
  • Support’s Bowlby’s idea that attachment is innate and universal
  • Shows cultural practice have an influence on attachment type
75
Q

AO3: Why a large samples a strength in cultural variation in attachment research?

A
  • Large sample
  • Meta analysis of 1990 babies
  • Large samples increase internal validity as they reduce the impact of anomalous results caused by bad methodology or unusual participants with individual differences etc
76
Q

AO3: Why may samples of cultural variation in attachment research be unrepresentative?

A
  • Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg claimed to investigate cultural variation but it was actually between countries
  • Within any country there is multiple cultures with different rearing practices
  • One sample may over represent people in poverty, as this stress may cause different parenting
  • Ijzendoorn and Sagi (2001) found urban settings such as Tokyo had similar distribution to western studies whereas rural samples were insecure resistant
  • Comparisons between countries may have little meaning
77
Q

AO3: Why may the method of the strange situation be biased?

A
  • Imposed etic as an Anglo-american theory being applied to other cultures
  • E.g lack of separation anxiety indicating universally and child who is insecure avoidant
  • However in Germany this may be seen as independence rather than avoidance and hence not a sign of insecurity within that cultural context
  • Negative as cannot be applied universally
78
Q

Define maternal deprivation

A

The emotional and intellectual consequences of separation between a child and its mother or caregiver. Bowbly proposed continuous care from a mother is essential for normal psychological development and prolonged separation from this adult causes serious damage to emotional and intellectual development

79
Q

Distinguish between deprivation and separation

A

Separation means being in the absence of a primary attachment figure whereas deprivation is losing the attachment figure after the bond has been formed and an element of care is lost

80
Q

What was the critical period as defined by Bowlby?

A

30 months in which if a child is separated from their mother in the absence of a substitute of care, deprivation occurs and psychological damage occurs

81
Q

State and describe the two main effects of maternal deprivation

A
  • Intellectual = Delayed intellectual development characterised by low IQ demonstrated by Goldfarb (1947) who found lower IQ who remained in institutions compared to those who were fostered and had more emotional care
  • Emotional development = Affectionless psychopathy causing no guilt or empathy preventing normal relationships developing
82
Q

Summarise the procedure of the 44 thieves study

A
  • Bowlby (1944)
  • 44 criminal teenagers accused of theft
  • Interviewed for affectionless psychopathy
  • Families interviewed to establish whether thieves had early separation periods
  • Control group of non criminal but emotionally disturbed children to see how often deprivation occured in those who weren’t thieves
83
Q

Summarise the findings of the 44 thieves study

A
  • 14/44 could be described as affectionless psychopathy
  • 14/12 experienced prolonged separation
  • Only 5 of remaining 30 experienced prolonged separation
  • 2/44 of control experienced separation
  • Concluded prolonged separation causes affectionless psychopathy
84
Q

AO3: Why may the evidence for maternal deprivation be poor?

A
  • 44 thieves study suffers from methodological issues and draws on evidence from war orphans
  • 44 thieves suffers researcher bias as he was aware of what he wanted to find. Questions may have been phrased in a certain way
  • War studies may have factors such as trauma which actually cause problems in relationships
85
Q

AO3: Why may the critical period be a sensitive one?

A
  • Bowlby used the term critical period as he believed separation inevitably caused damage
  • Later research shows damage not inevitable
  • Good outcomes provided good social interaction and aftercare
  • Koluchova (1976) reported two twin boys separated from 18 months until 7 years old
  • Looked after by two loving adults and fully recovered showing sensitive period
86
Q

AO3: Why is it a limitation that Bowlby did not distinguish between privation and deprivation?

A
  • Rutter (1981) argues Bowlby failed to distinguish between separation, deprivation and privation. All three have different long term effect which Bowlby overlooked
87
Q

Define institutionalisation

A

A term for the effects of living in an institutional setting. The term institution refers to a place like a hospital where children live for long continuous periods of time. In such places there is little emotional care provided. In attachment research we are interested in the effects of institutional care on children’s attachment and subsequent development

88
Q

Define orphan studies

A

These concern children placed in care because their parents cannot look after them. An orphan is a child who has been abandoned or parents have died

89
Q

Summarise the procedure of Rutter (2011)

A
  • 165 romanian orphans adopted in Britain to test the extent to which good care an make up for poor early experience
  • Physical, cognitive and emotional development assessed at age 4, 6, 11 and 15
  • British control of 52 adoptees at the same time
90
Q

Summarise the findings of Rutter (2011)

A
  • When arriving, half showed delayed intellectual development and malnourished
  • At 11, rate of recovery related to age at adoption
  • Mean IQ before six months was 102
  • Mean IQ between six and 24 months was 86
  • Mean IQ after 2 years was 77
  • Differences remained at 16
  • Adoption after 6 months saw disinhibited attachment and were clingy and show social behaviour to all adults
91
Q

Summarise the procedure of Zeanah (2005)

A
  • Attachment of 95 children assessed aged 12-31 months who spent most of their lives in care
  • Control of 50 who never lived in care
  • Strange situation and interview for disinhibited attachment
92
Q

Summarise the findings for Zeanah (2005)

A
  • 74% of control secure
  • 19% of institutional group secure
  • 65% disorganised
  • Description of disinhibited attachment applied to 44% as opposed to 20% of controls
93
Q

State and describe the two main effects of institutionalisation

A

Disinhibited attachment = Equally friendly and social to all adults and stranger anxiety expected. Rutter said this was an adaptation to multiple caregivers during sensitive period
Mental retardation = Damage to mental health and intellectual ability occurred after 6 months in Rutter’s study. Deprivation dwarfism also occured

94
Q

AO3: Why was Rutter’s study stronger than war studies?

A
  • Study and remove confounding and extraneous variables of PTSD and trauma in war orphans
  • Increases confidence that researchers can draw reliable conclusions about effects of institutionalisation and hence increases internal validity
95
Q

AO3: What is negative about the short term focus of Rutter’s research?

A
  • Rutter’s study did look into mid term effects
  • However, too soon to say whether a child suffered long term or short term effects
  • These people may still catch up as adults
  • Longer time scale would improve this as currently, the conclusions drawn do not have full confidence
96
Q

AO3: Why does Rutter’s study have poor ecological validity?

A
  • Conditions so bad and do not compare to other institutions
  • Cannot be applied to understanding better quality care where deprivation also occurs
  • Romanian orphans had poor care and low level stimulation
  • Unusual situational variables reduce generalisability
97
Q

Define childhood relationships

A

Affiliations with other people in childhood, including friends and classmates and with adults

98
Q

Define adult relationships

A

Relationships a child goes on to have later on in adult life. These include friendships, colleagues, but more importantly romantic relationships and relationships with children

99
Q

How do internal working models influence later relationships?

A
  • Quality of first attachment crucial as this forms internal working model
  • Functional = functional
  • Hence why families replicate behaviourally
100
Q

How are relationships influenced in later childhood?

A
  • Attachment type associated with quality of peer relationship
  • Secure infants form best friendship as opposed to insecure (Kerns 1994)
  • Bullying predicted by attachment type (Myron-Wilson 1998) assessed attachment type and bullying using questionnaires on 196 7-11 year olds from London
  • Avoidant victims and resistant bullies
101
Q

Summarise the procedure of Hazan and Shaver (1987)

A
  • 620 replies to love quiz

- Three sections, assessed current or most important relationship, general love experiences and attachment type

102
Q

Summarise the findings of Hazan and Shaver (1987)

A
  • 56% secure, 25% insecure and 19 insecure resistant
  • Secure reported good and longer lasting romances
  • Avoidant showed jealousy and fear of intimacy suggesting attachment reflected in romance
103
Q

AO3: What is the research support for the influence of attachment on later relationships

A
  • Bailey (2007)
  • Majority of 99 women had same attachment classification to their babies
  • Supports idea of continuity as suggested by Bowlby
104
Q

AO3: Why is there contradicting evidence for the influence of attachment on later relationships?

A
  • Zimmerman (200) assessed attachment type and adolescent attachment to parents
  • Little relationship between quality of infant and adolescent attachment
  • Does not support as we expects internal working models to be predictive
105
Q

AO3: Why does association not mean causality in the influence of attachment in later relationships?

A
  • Alternative explanations with third factors
  • Parenting style
  • Temperament
  • Both may influence infant attachment and later relationships
  • Limitation as Bowlby claims the internal working model causes the later outcomes of relationships

Psychology - Paper 1 (4 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions