attachment: caregiver infant interactions Flashcards
what is reciprocity?
interactions are two way and mutual processes, each party responds to each other to sustain an interaction, each party’s behaviour elicits a response
why is reciprocity important?
it is argued this is the most basic ‘rhythm’ and is important to later communications.
it increases in frequency as the infant and caregiver pay increasing attention to each others verbal and facial communications.
it is suggested that showing sensitive responsiveness when the caregiver pays attention towards behaviour will lay the strong foundations for attachment to develop lated between caregiver and infant.
what is interactional synchrony?
when infants mirror the actions or emotions of another person (facial expressions), this mirroring can be referred to as imitation, it is coordinated, simultaneous movements
how is interational synchrony different to reciprocity?
mirroring same behaviour, reciprocity is not.
learn timing is communication whilst reciprocity is mutual exchanges
what did meltzoff and moore study?
examining interactional synchrony in infants: an adult model displayed one of three facial expressions, or a hand gesture. to start with the child had a dummy placed in their mouth to prevent facial response. following the display from the adult model, the dummy was removed and the childs expressions were filmed.
what were the results of meltzoff and moore?
clear association between infants behaviour and adult model, later research found the same findings in 3 days old infants- innate drive.
what is the conclusion from meltzoff and moore?
findings that interactional synchrony is innate and reduces the strength of any claim that imitative behaviour is learnt.
what are the issues with studying infant behaviour?
babies can’t communicate so inferences must be drawn,
issue of intentionality,
lots of infants were withdrawn: crying, sleeping, hiccupping during study,
expressions measured in research happen regularly: infants mouths are constantly moving, so its hard to distinguish between imitation and behaviour.
how is the study reliable?
it was a double blind with the researchers and judge.
it has a high internal reliability and a low external reliability.
what are the problems with replicating the study?
the first study was a fluke, and the second was badly assigned compared to first attempt.
koepke failed to replicate the study, suggesting this lack of research support suggests that the results are unreliable and more research is required to validate their findings
what is the research to support reciprocity?
murray: infants first interacted on video with their mum, the screen did not respond to the childs facial expressions and bodily gestures, this caused distress in infants. the child tries to attract their mothers attention but gaining no response turned away. this shows the child was actively showing a response rather than displaying a response that has been rewarded
why is the murray study good?
it adds credence to the view that reciprocity is innate, it suggests that reciprocity is a norm as children were distressed when they did not get reciprocity.
what did isabella et al find?
the more securely attached the infant, the greater the level of interactional synchrony. this suggests there is individual differences in how children react to interactional synchrony.
before during after
secure fine worried fine
ir fine mad fuming
ia fine ok ish fine
