Attachment Flashcards
What is interactional synchrony?
Mirroring of the same action between the mother and the child.
What did Meltzof + Moore (1977) found with interactional synchrony?
Found it in babies as young as 2 weeks.
What did Isabella et al. (1989) note with interactional synchrony?
High levels of synchrony were associated with better quality infant-mother attachment.
What is reciprocity?
One person responding to the other, involves close attention to verbal signals and facial expression.
How did Brazleton et al. (1975) describe reciprocity?
Like a dance.
Give 2 strengths of research carried out into caregiver-infant interactions
1) Uses well controlled procedures
- fine details recorded and analysed.
- babies don’t know they’re being observed so behaviour doesn’t change.
2) Potential value to society:
- Crotwell (2013) - 10 min Patient-Child Interaction Therapy (PCIT) improved IS in 20 low-income mothers compared to a control group.
Give 2 negatives of research carried out into caregiver-infant interactions
1) Observations don’t tell us purpose of both:
- Feldman (2012) both reciprocity and synchrony simply happen at the same time
- observable but what’s the purpose?
2) Research into this area socially sensitive:
- suggests children may be disadvantaged by particular responses; e.g. mothers returning to work restricts opportunity for IS.
From Schaffer + Emerson’s (1964) findings, when did children form attachments with fathers; and how many did?
(i) by 18 months
(ii) 75% of cases
What did Grossman (2002) note about the role of the father?
- Quality of attachment less important with father, also less important in long term development of children’s emotions.
What is considered very important to the role of the father?
The father’s play; not nurturing.
What do fathers tend to do when they’re primary caregivers?
Adopt mother-like behaviours, e.g. smiling, imitating.
How does research into the role of the father have economic implications?
- Challenges traditional views that just mothers are primary care givers.
- Men can do the job just as good as females.
Give 3 limitations in to inquiries of the role of the father?
1) Research interested in different questions:
- primary or secondary caregivers.
- cannot clearly answer what the role of the father is.
2) Evidence undermines distinct father role:
- McCallum + Golombok (2004) - children in single or same sex families don’t develop indifferently.
- father as secondary caregiver necessarily important?
3) No clear answer about fathers being primary attachment figures:
- is it based on traditional roles preventing father nurture or is it hormone based?
What are Schaffer’s four stages of attachment? Mention them in order.
1) Asocial stage: (first few weeks) - indiscriminate behaviour towards objects and humans.
2) Indiscriminate attachment: (2-7 months) - preference for humans; no one is favoured; stranger and separation anxiety not shown.
3) Specific attachment: (7 months (ish)) - stranger and separation anxiety when separated from one particular adult: those who respond to the ‘signals’.
4) Multiple attachments (around 1 year) - secondary attachment formed within a month 24% of the time.
What was the procedure of Schaffer + Emerson’s study?
- 60 Glasgow babies
- Visited at home monthly for a year and at 18 months.
- Separation anxiety measured by child’s behaviour to being left alone.
What were the findings and conclusions of Schaffer + Emerson’s study?
- 50% showed separation anxiety between 25-32 weeks.
- Attachment mostly with mother.
- Attachment = those who responded to the right signals and most interactive.
Give 2 evaluative strengths of Schaffer’s stages of attachment
1) External validity:
- in the home, natural environment to babies.
- behaviour observed by parents, thus natural: unaffected by researchers.
2) The study was longitudinal:
- high internal validity, observations and differences not due to participant variables e.g. temperament.
Give 2 evaluative weaknesses of Schaffer’s stages of attachment
1) How are multiple attachments assessed?:
- distress doesn’t necessarily mean that person is a primary figure –> behaviour between primary and secondary figures isn’t clear.
2) Timing of multiple attachments conflicting:
- Bowlby (1969) states a primary figure comes before multiple attachments.
- Van Ijzendoorn (1993) showed multiple attachment formed sooner where they are the norm: collectivist cultures.
Describe Lorenz’s procedure
- Divided 12 geese eggs, 6 saw their mother at first sight, the other 6 saw Lorenz.
- Also observed later courtship behaviours.
What were the findings and conclusions of Lorenz’s study?
- Geese followed who they saw first.
- Critical period of a few hours; after that no attachment is formed.
- Sexual imprinting occurs from a template of desirable characteristics.
Give;
(i) 1 evaluative strength of Lorenz’s study
(ii) 1 evaluative weakness of Lorenz’s study
(i) Support for imprinting:
- Guiton (1966) - found that chickens imprinted on yellow washing-up gloves and tried to mate with the as adults
= innate mechanism to attach?
(ii) Generalising from birds to humans:
- mammals different to birds e.g. mammals show more emotion to young.
Describe Harlow’s (1958) procedure
- 16 rhesus monkeys.
- (Condition 1) Plain-wire monkey with milk
- (Condition 2) Cloth covered but no milk
- Reactions to frightening situations were measured.
What were the findings and conclusions of Harlow’s study?
- Babies preferred cloth covered mothers.
- When frightened, babies went to the cloth mother.
- Monkeys suffered severe consequences in future: more aggression, killing offspring, less skill mating.
Give;
(i) 1 evaluative strength of Harlow’s study
(ii) 2 evaluative weaknesses of Harlow’s study
(i) Practical applications:
- Howe (1998) helped social workers understand risk factors in child abuse and how to prevent it.
- understand monkey attachment better too.
(ii) 1) Ethical issues:
- Monkeys similar to humans; Harlow aware of damage he was causing.
2) Generalising from monkeys to humans:
- more similar than geese, but babies babble which may influence attachment formation.
Explain Dollard + Miller (1950)’s learning theory of attachment?
1) Classical conditioning - learning by association.
(i) UCS (food) –> UCR (pleasure)
(ii) NS (caregiver) –> No response as he/she hasn’t been associated with food yet.
(iii) UCS + NS (food + caregiver) –> UCR (pleasure)
= (iv) CS (caregiver) –> CR (pleasure)
= caregiver is associated with food.
Explain the role of operant conditioning in attachment?
OC explains why babies cry for comfort.
- Crying -> response from caregiver.
- As long as a response is provided, crying is reinforced as it produces a pleasurable consequence.
- The caregiver receives negative reinforcement.
What is a primary drive?
An innate biological motivator, e.g. eating to reduce hunger.
Give 1 strength of the learning theory
- Elements of conditioning could still be involved:
main problems around that feeding provides reinforcement, UCS or primary drive
= human development still affected by conditioning.
= classical conditioning between comfort and caregiver.
How do Schaffer + Emerson counter the learning theory?
- Show that babies did not attach to those who fed them, (no UCS or primary drive involved)
- Other factors > food in attachment.
What does learning theory ignore?
Other factors associated with quality of attachment such as developing reciprocity and good levels of interactional synchrony.
(i) What new explanation of attachment has been provided,
(ii) By who
(iii) What is it about?
- Hay + Vespo (1988).
- Parents teach children to love them by modelling attachment behaviours e.g. cuddling –> interactions.
- Based off SLT.
According to Bowlby, why is attachment innate?
For survival.
What does Bowlby call one main primary caregiver?
Monotropy.
According to Bowlby, more time spent with the primary caregiver is beneficiary, for what two reasons is this the case?
1) Law of continuity = constant –> better quality
2) Law of accumulated separation = effects of separation add up.
What are social releasers?
- Innate cute behaviours that elicit a response from an adult, encouraging attention and attachment - e.g. crying.
According to Bowlby, how long is the critical period?
2 years
What is an internal working model?
- First attachment forms an IWM of relationships.
- A template of initial relationships that affect how we view future relationships.
- Loving relationships –> loving relationships later in life.
Give 2 strengths of Bowlby’s theory of attachment
1) Clear evidence of social releasers:
- Brazleton et al. (1975) told primary caregivers to stop responding to their baby’s social releasers.
= babies who received response normally showed distress
= significant –> social behaviour and role of releasers in initiating social interaction
2) Research support for IWM:
- Bailey et al. (2007).
- 99 mothers; those with poor attachments to their own mum were likely to have it with their own 1 y/o baby.
How is evidence for monotropy mixed?
Schaffer + Emerson showed that multiple attachments did form: contradictory to Bowlby
How is monotropy socially sensitive?
- Law of accumulated separation states that all separations add up, this may confine women to a traditional role.
- Burman (1994) –> was it intended?
How might have Bowlby overemphasised the role of attachment?
- Temperament is important in how development entails; more anxious/sociable (Kagan, 1982).
- Temperament –> later social behaviour?
What 5 categories were used in the Strange Situation to assess attachment quality?
1) Proximity seeking
2) Exploration + secure base behaviour: exploring but using caregiver as a point of safety.
3) Stranger anxiety
4) Separation anxiety
5) Response to reunion with caregiver
What were the findings of the Strange Situation?
1) Secure attachment:
- 60-75% of British kids
- Happy to explore, but sought proximity.
- Moderate separation and stranger anxiety.
- Requires and accepts comfort on reunion
2) Insecure-avoidant:
- 20-25% British kids.
- Explore freely: don’t seek proximity
- Little/no separation and stranger anxiety.
- Don’t require comfort on reunion
3) Insecure-resistant:
- 3% British kids.
- Explores less, seeks more proximity.
- Considerable separation and stranger anxiety.
- Resists comfort at reunion
What are the 3 attachment types?
1) Secure attachment
2) Insecure-avoidant
3) Insecure-resistant
Give 2 strengths of the Strange Situation
1) Very good inter-rater reliability:
- Bick et al. (2012) found 94% agreement.
- Observable behavioural categories, controlled conditions.
2) Predictive validity of attachment types:
- predict later development e.g. secure babies have greater success at school.
- Kokkinos (2007) insecure-resistant children more likely to be bullies.
- Ward et al. (2006) insecure-resistant children more likely to have adult mental health problems
Give 2 evaluative weakness of the Strange Situation
1) Culturally bound?:
- experiences differ = responses different
- caregivers behaviour differs.
- Takahashi (1990) - Japanese mothers rarely leave their children so may show high levels of separation anxiety
2) Other attachment types?:
- Ainsworth identified 3.
- Main + Solomon (1986) - some children are atypical in that they are in two attachment types; a mix of avoidant and resistant.
Describe Van Ijzendoorn + Kroonenberg’s meta-analysis procedure
- Looked at the 3 attachment types across countries and within them.
- 32 studies in total, just under 2000 kids.
What did the meta-analysis find?
- Secure attachment most common type: 50% in China, 75% in Britain.
- Insecure-avoidant rates similar to Ainsworth’s findings; high levels in collectivist cultures.
- Variations between countries lower than within; up to 150% difference.
Give 1 evaluative strenght of van Ijzendoorn + Kroonenberg’s sitdy
1) Very large samples:
- vI + K used nearly 2000 babies
- raises internal validity as result aren’t down to bias methodology or unusual participants.
Why might the meta analyses not be representative of different cultures?
- Compares countries not cultures.
- van Ijzendoorn + Sagi (2001) found attachment types in urban Tokyo were similar to Western studies.
Why might be the Strange situation be a product of imposed etic?
- Created by an American, based on British theory.
- Tries to apply a technique/theory to multiple cultures.
How is Temperament a confouding variable of the strange situation?
- Assume stranger and separation anxiety is because of attachment.
- Kagan (1982) - genetic personality more important.
What’s Bowlby’s other theory a part from his theory of attachment?
Maternal deprivation theory
According to Bowlby’s Maternal deprivation theory, why is continuous emotional development needed?
To ensure normal emotional and intellectual development of the child
How is maternal deprivation caused?
Excessive duration of separation
What is the critical period, and how long is it according Bowlby’s Maternal deprivation theory
The period in which essential to attachment
- extended separation –> psychological damage
- first 30 months
What two things can maternal deprivation lead to?
1) Lower IQ
- Goldfarb (1947) found lower IQs in children in institutions compared to foster children.
2) Affectionless psychopathy
- inability to feel guilt or empathise
What study was used to support Bowlby’s Maternal deprivation theory?
Bowlby’s 44 thieves study
Describe the procedure of the 44 thieves study
- 44 delinquent teenagers accused of stealing
- Interviews - establishing any prolonged separation from mothers.
- Thieves interviewed for signs of affectionless psychopathy
What was found in the 44 thieves study
- 14/44 could be seen as affectionless psychopaths: 12 of these had experienced prolonged separations.
- Remaining 5/30 had experienced separations.
How is the evidence used to support Bowlby’s Maternal deprivation theory flawed?
- Goldfarb studied orphans traumatised by war and had poor after-care = these factors caused later developmental difficulties?
- Bowlby knew what he was looking = validity?
Who counters the 44 thieves study, and can you describe it?
- Lewis (1954)
- Replicated 44 thieves study on 500 people.
- Prolonged separation did not predict criminality or difficulty forming relationships.
- Other factors e.g. poverty??
Who find evidence to say that the critical period is actually more of a sensitive period?
- Koluchova (1976)
- Studied Czech twin boys isolated from 18 months
= later looked after by 2 loving parents and appeared to recover fully
= interaction and after-care key
How does Rutter (1981) criticise Bowlby’s Maternal deprivation theory?
1) Didn’t distinguish between deprivation and privation:
- Deprivation = loss of caregiver once attachment has been formed.
- Privation = failure to form one at all.
- Many thieves moved from home to home so may have never formed an attachment.
What are the 2 effects of institutionalisation?
1) Disinhibited attachment - equally affectionate towards those they know well and to strangers
- adaptation to situation?
2) Damage to intellectual development - mental retardation; effect not pronounced pre-6 month adoption.
Describe Rutter et al.’s (2011) procedure into Romanian orphans?
- 165 Romanian Orphans adopted by British parents.
- Longitudinal study to test how good care can make up for poor early experiences in institutions.
- Followed up 52 British adoptees too.
What were the findings of Rutter et al’s study into Romanian orphans?
- Recovery rates related to age of adoption.
1) Before 6 months = mean IQ of 102.
2) Between 6 months-2 years = mean IQ of 86.
3) After 2 years = mean IQ of 77. - Disinhibted attachment related to age of adoption.
= Apparent in children adopted after 6 months
= Rare in children adopted before 6 months.
How has research into Romanian orphans had important practical applications?
- Langton (2006) led to improvements in the way children are cared for in institutions.
- More care givers now play a ‘central role’ for children –> develop normal attachment?
A part from important practical applications, give an evaluative strength of Romanian orphans studies
Few confounding variables
- Normal studies have CVS like neglect, trauma before institutionalisation –> thus the effects may be down to more than one factor.
- Most Romanian orphans abandoned at birth –> IV.
Give 2 evaluative limitations of Romanian orphan studies
1) Generalising?:
- Conditions in orphanages so bad, particularly poor.
- Can they be applied to institutional care as we know it?
2) Long term effects not clear:
- Signs shown by children short-term or long-term?
- Currently lag behind –> may catch up as adults
In terms of influence of early attachment on later relationships, describe the IWM
1) First attachment is template for future relationships
- Good experience of attachment = good relationship expectations and vice versa as you assume all relationships will be like the first.
2) Kerns (1994) - securely attached infants more likely form better friendships in childhood.
3) Myren-Wilson + Smith (1998) - insecure-avoidant children more likely to be victims of bullying; insecure-resistant more likely to be bullies.
4) IWM affects parenting - base their style on IWM, so attachments are passed on.
Describe Hazan + Shaver’s (1987) procedure
- Analysed 620 replies from a love quiz. Questioned on: - Current and most important relationships - Love experiences - Attachment type
What were the findings of the love quiz?
- 56% securely attached, 25% insecure-avoidant, 19% insecure-resistant.
- Secure respondent –> good+long lasting relationships.
- Avoidant respondent –> jealous, feared intimacy.
How do studies into influence of early attachments on later relationships have validity issues?
- Don’t use SS but interviews or questionnaires.
- Honesty needed to increase validity, also dependent on recollection
How is evidence of continuity of attachment mixed?
- IWM –> attachment predicts future relationships.
- Zimmermann (2000) assessed infant attachment types and adolescent attachment types to parents.
= very little relationship between quality of infant attachment and adolescent attachment.
Who says influence of early attachments on later relationships is exaggerated?
- Clarke + Clarke (1998) - calls this influence ‘probabilistic’ - not doomed, just greater risk of problems.
What is the theoretical problem with research related to IWM?
- IWMs are unconscious, so we are unaware of its influence.
= can we accurately record, if at all?
= is a self-report reliable –> falsifiable?
