Attachment (animal studies - Lorenz)

Question 1

Lorenz (procedure) 1935

Answer 1

• Took a clutch of gosling eggs
• divided into two groups (one with natural mother and the other with an incubator)
• when the incubator eggs hatched the first living thing they saw was Lorenz and then followed him around.
• To test the effect of imprinting Lorenz marked two groups to distinguish them and then placed together.
  -They had become imprinted in on him.
  -Both Lorenz and their natural mother were present

Question 2

Lorenz (findings)

Answer 2

• The goslings divided themselves up one followed the natural mother and the other followed Lorenz.
  -Lorenz’s brood showed no recognition of the natural mother.
  -This process of imprinting is restricted to what was called a critical period of young animals life. If the animal is not exposed to moving object. The animal will not imprint.
• Seen to imprint with the moving object on the first few days.
  Lorenz observed that imprinting does not happen on some animals e.g curlews.

Question 3

Noticed long-lasting effects -

Answer 3

• Seen as irreversible
• Seen as long lasting
  -Early imprinting had an effect on later mate preferences.

Question 4

Research support for imprinting - strength

Answer 4

Guiton (1966) demonstrated that leghorn chicks exposed to rubber gloves, while being fed for the first few weeks became imprinted on the gloves, suggests that animals do not imprint on anything but something that is moving during the critical window of the period, Guiton’s findings offer clear support on research on conclusions and findings.

Question 5

Critic of imprinting - limitation

Answer 5

Imprinting was always seen as irreversible. The object they encountered was stamped permanently on their nervous system, it is now seen as more forgiving. Guiton also found that he could reverse the idea of imprinting. He found the chicks initially began to mate with the gloves, he found later that when spending time with their own species, they engaged in normal sexual behaviour of other chickens. Suggesting that imprinting may not be very different from any kind of other learning theory, learning is seen as reversible.