attachment: Bowlby's monotropic theory Flashcards
What theory did Bowlby reject?
The learning theory
Bowlby proposed an evolutionary explanation instead.
What did Bowlby propose as the reason for attachments?
Attachments are innate systems that give a survival advantage > attachments (eg: imprinting) evolved to keep young animals safe.
What is the concept of monotropy in Bowlby’s theory?
The emphasis on the child’s attachment to one particular caregiver
Bowlby believed this attachment is more important than any others.
Who did Bowlby argue was the primary attachment figure?
The mother
This individual need not be the biological mother.
What are social releasers according to Bowlby?
Innate ‘cute’ behaviours like smiling, cooing, and gripping
Their purpose is to activate adult social interaction.
What does Bowlby mean by the term ‘reciprocal process’ in attachment?
Both mother and baby are hard-wired to become attached > this interplay builds the relationship over time
What is the critical period in Bowlby’s attachment theory?
The first 2 and a half years of life
This is when a human/animal infant is maximally ready to form an attachment.
What happens if no attachment is formed during the critical period?
The child will find it difficult to form an attachment thereafter
This highlights the importance of early attachment experiences.
what is an internal working model
when a child forms a mental representation of their relationship with their primary caregiver > this serves as a model for what relationships are like
What is the significance of the internal working model?
It serves as a model for what relationships are like and has a powerful effect on the child’s future relationships.
How does a loving and secure first attachment influence future relationships?
A child with a loving and secure first attachment will go on to form successful relationships with peers, romantic partners, and their own children.
What is the outcome for a child whose first relationship involves poor treatment?
They will expect poor treatment from others and will carry this expectation into future relationships.
Fill in the blank: An internal working model influences a child’s _______.
[future relationships]
True or False: A child’s first attachment has no impact on their future relationships.
False
AO3: contradicting evidence for montropy
There is mixed evidence to support the idea of monotropy
The theory suggests babies generally formed one attachment to their primary caregiver and that this attachment was different to others. Only after this attachment is formed could the child form multiple attachments.
He found that most babies did attach to one person first. But Schaffer and Emerson also found a significant minority appeared to form multiple attachments at the same time.
Additionally, although the first attachment does appear to have a particular strong influence on later behaviour, this may simply mean it is stronger, not necessarily different in the quality from the child’s other attachments
WEAKNESS as this means that Bowlby may be** incorrect that there is a unique quality and importance to the child’s primary attachment**
AO3: support for internal working model
The theory suggests a chid forms a mental representation of their relationship with their primary caregiver which serves as a model for what relationships are like.
This is tested and supported by Bailey et al They assessed 99 mothers with one-year-old babies on the quality of their attachment to their mothers using a standard interview procedure. The researchers also used observations to assess the attachments of the babies to the mothers.
They found that the mothers who reported poor attachment to their own parents were much more likely to have children classified as poorly attached.
This supports the theory as it suggests that an internal working model of attachment was being passed down through the family.
STRENGTH as the theory has empirical evidence to support their claims
AO3: support for social releasers
There is research to support the idea of social releasers
The theory suggests that cute infant behaviours are intended to initiate social interactions.
This is supported by Brazelton et al He observed mothers and babies during their interactions, reporting the existence of interactional synchrony. They then extended their study to an experiment where primary attachment figures were instructed to ignore their babies social releasers (signals) the baby showed distress and started to curl up and lie motionless.
STRENGTH as this illustrates the role of social releasers in emotional development and suggests that they are important in the process of attachment development
