Attachment- animal studies of attachment Flashcards
What is imprinting
The process by which young animals follow and form an attachment to the first large moving object they meet. It is mainly exhibited by nidifugous birds (ones that leave their nests early).
What are the consequences of imprinting
Short term survival
Longer term forming internal templates for later relationships
What was the aim of Lorenz’s research
To investigate the mechanisms of imprinting where the youngsters follow and form an attachment to the first large moving object that they meet.
What was Lorenz’s procedure
Lorenz split a large clutch of greylag goose eggs into two batches, one of which was hatched naturally by the mother and the other hatched in an incubator, with Lorenz making sure he was the first moving object the newly hatched goslings encountered. He then recorded their behaviour.
Lorenz marked all of the goslings so he could determine whether they were from the naturally hatched batch of eggs or the incubated ones, and placed them under an upturned box. The box was then removed and following behaviour again recorded.
What did Lorenz find the goslings did immediately after birth
The naturally hatched baby goslings followed their mother about, while the incubator hatched goslings followed Lorenz around.
What did Lorenz find happened to the goslings from the upturned box
When released from the upturned box, the naturally hatched goslings went straight to their mother, whilst the incubated goslings went to Lorenz, showing no bond with their natural mother. These bonds proved to be irreversible; the naturally hatched goslings would only follow their mother and the incubated ones would only follow Lorenz.
What did Lorenz find happened to the gosling mating behaviour
Lorenz subsequently reported on how goslings imprinted onto humans would, as matured adult birds, attempt to mate with humans.
What did Lorenz find imprinting to be (quantitative)
Imprinting would only occur with a brief, set time period of between 4 and 25 hours (critical period) after hatching.
How long did Lorenz find imprinting had to be
The imprinting and following must have lasted for at least 10 mins to fully imprint.
Evaluation, generalisability
- Lorenz
P: Very difficult to generalise to human beings from research with geese.
E: This is because we have qualitative differences that make each species too dissimilar - arguments of evolutionary discontinuity state extrapolation of findings is not possible.
E: For instance, geese can fly and have wings, that make for very species specific behaviour that will affect the attachment process. What’s more geese can walk as soon as they are born - which will undoubtedly affect the attachment process in comparison to humans (humans are more dependent on their caregivers for survival). Geese also have no LAD
L: As a result, we need to be careful when applying these findings to humans, weakening the credibility this research provides to attachment theory.
Evaluation, reliability
- Lorenz
P: A strengths is that Lorenz’s research into imprinting is highly reliable.
E: This is because his study can be replicated due to the use of standardised procedures that he employed.
E: For instance, Lorenz took half a clutch of geese eggs and put them under the mother goose in their nest and hatched the other half in an incubator. When they hatched he called out to them and made geese noises to attract them as the first moving object they saw.
L: This ultimately means the work on imprinting can be carefully replicated and checked for consistency (which is exactly what Hess did with ducklings in 1960’s findings similar results).
Evaluation, application
- Lorenz
P: There are many practical and theoretical applications of this work.
E: Lorenz’s findings reiterate the importance of the early formative years of an infant’s life and how important they can be for development and survival. He is also often credited for igniting a host of further attachment research.
E: For example, Hess (1960’s) later showed that unborn ducklings can process auditory information before hatching - which has been applied and verified with human foetus (from 24 weeks of gestation).
L: This implies Lorenz research has been instrumental in our knowledge of attachment.
Evaluation, ecological validity
- Lorenz
P- Many aspects of Lorenz’s research contains high levels of ecological validity, as the geese’s environment after birth was very similar to how it would have been for that species if he hadn’t intervened.
E- For instance, they had access to lakes and rivers and were foraging for food.
L- However, the findings do not relate to real life human attachment behaviour, and as such could be criticised for lacking credibility.
Evaluation, ethical issues
- Lorenz
P: Many argue that the research is unethical.
E: Ethical guidelines state psychologists should minimise discomfort to animals as much as possible and removing the goslings from their mothers could have unwanted effects in adulthood - e.g. the foraging problems as well as abnormal reproductive behaviours Lorenz found.
E: Nowadays, researchers are obliged to procure animals from designated licensed establishments, we are unsure as to where Lorenz sourced his goslings.
L: Coupled with the fact generalisations to humans is very difficult, Lorenz’s research has many ethical and moral dilemmas
How many monkeys did Harlow use
8
How old were the monkeys Harlow used
newborn- separated at birth
What was the aim of Harlows research
Wanted to investigate whether attachments were primarily formed through food as explained by learning theory or comfort
What does altricial mean
Animals that are born undeveloped and need constant care
What does precocial mean
Animals that walk as soon as there are born
What is a critical period
The time during which a given behavior is especially susceptible to, and indeed requires, specific environmental influences to develop normally.
What did Lorenz find out about imprinting
It is innate
How many conditions did Harlow use
4
What was the main condition in Harlow’s study
Wire mother could produce milk but cloth mother could not
What was the IV in Harlow’s study
wire mother or cloth mother or both
What was the DV in Harlow’s study
Time spent with each mother
How did Harlow test preference for each mother
By frightening them with loud noises
How long were the monkeys studied for
165 days
How much DNA do we share with monkeys
93%
What was in the cage with the monkeys
A cloth mother and a wire mother
What did Harlow find the monkeys prefered
The cloth mother despite her not being able to produce milk
How many hours did the monkeys spend with cloth mother
up to 15 hours
What was the procedure used in Harlows research
8 monkeys separated from their mothers immediately after birth and placed in individual cages with access to two surrogate mothers, one made of wire and one covered in soft terry towel cloth. They were studied for 165 days.
How were monkey’s degree of exploration tested
They were put in a larger cage with different objects to test their degree of exploration.
What were 2 qualitative findings of Harlow’s
The monkeys preferred contact with the cloth mother when given a choice, regardless of whether she produced the milk.
They would only go to the wire mother when hungry.
Monkeys with only a wire mother had diarrhoea, a sign of stress
What were two quantitative findings of Harlow
Infants spent up to 15 hours a day with the soft mother vs. 1 hour a day with the wire mother.
If time spent isolated with surrogate mothers was less than 3 months, other monkeys could help them resume some normality.
What was the conclusion of Harlow’s study
Supports the evolutionary theory of attachment (Bowlby) in that it is the sensitive response and security of the caregiver that is important, not food.
Also supports the critical period.
Evaluation, generalisability
- Harlow
P- Many suggest evolutionary continuity allows us to generalise results from monkeys to human attachment behaviours, due to minimal quantitative differences.
E- Not only do we share over 98% of genes with monkeys, but they also use social bonds and multiple attachments to ensure survival - just like humans.
L- Meaning the research findings about comfort over food is applicable to human attachment process.
P- However, due to evolutionary discontinuity it is difficult to generalise findings from monkeys to human attachment because of overwhelming qualitative differences across species.
E- For example, anatomical brain differences show humans have added extras within the language centres (e.g. Broca’s area) that influence the attachment process, which no other species possess to such an extent. As language is critical for attachment formation Harlow’s research is difficult to apply to human attachment.
Evaluation, reliability
- Harlow
P: The study of monkeys was set up in a controlled environment so has a high level of reliability.
E: Standardised procedures were used in setting up the conditions which all the individual monkeys were exposed to
E: For example, their access to the wire and/or cloth mother and a mother that provided milk, and same experience of exposure to loud sounds and scary toys.
L: This means the results can be considered to have more value to help us understand attachment behaviour studied, and we can check for consistency of findings.
Evaluation, application
- Harlow
P: The findings of Harlow’s research have multiple practical and theoretical applications.
E: For instance, they underline the importance of contact and physical comfort for infants (as well as feeding).
E: There are also useful applications in zoos as well as other conservation attempts by highlighting the important of keeping the young in contact with caregivers or surrogates to support healthy development wherever possible.
L: Hence, despite the unethical nature of research, the findings can help society in many ways, furthering our understanding of attachment behaviours in infants.
Evaluation, ecological validity
- Harlow
P: One of the problems with research conducted in artificial lab studies is that there is low ecological validity.
E: This is because Harlow set up a situation where he separated infant monkeys from their mothers and isolated them in a cage with access only to the cloth and wire mothers.
E: This is not a situation that would normally happen even if monkeys were orphaned and brought up in captivity; they would have others look after them and not be in such distressing, isolating circumstances.
L: This therefore suggests the attachment behaviours recorded would not reflect real life behaviour even if separated from an attachment figure in captivity and can therefore give us little valuable information about human attachments, so lacks credibility.
Evaluation, ethics
- Harlow
P: The monkeys in the research were arguably subject to harm in both the ST and LT and were exposed to aversive stimuli and stressful procedures.
E: E.g. in the ST they were purposefully stressed as infants to test the attachment; and in the LT being taken away from their mothers and raised in unnatural cages had long lasting psychological effects, including abusing their own infants as adults.
E: According to the Animal (scientific procedures) act (1986; 2012), these procedures should be avoided at all costs, especially when naturally occurring case studies of human infants existed (i.e., orphan studies).
L: Hence, this kind of research can be seen as detrimental to the monkeys and the harm caused to them may not justify the means.
