attachment case study Flashcards
what are the three cases for care giver infant reaction
Fedlham
Brazleton
Mezletoff and Moore
According to Feldman (2007), reciprocity can be seen in interactions from 3 months of age
Interactional synchrony refers to how a parent’s speech and infant’s behaviour become finely synchronised so that they are in direct response to one another. It was defined by Feldman (2007)
Meltzoff & Moore (1997) who demonstrated that babies as young as 12-27 days would attempt to imitate facial and physical gestures.
Brazelton et al. (1975) identified trends in mother-baby interactional synchrony. Videotapes of 12 mother-baby pairs’ play behaviour was examined up to 5 months of age, which revealed three phases of play:
Attention and build-up
Recovery
Turning away
1
Konrad Lorenz (1935) found that geese automatically ‘attach’ to the first
moving thing they see after hatching, and follow it everywhere (I bet this
gets quite annoying). This is called imprinting.
2)
He randomly divided a clutch of greylag goose eggs into two groups.
He left one group with the mother and incubated the other eggs.
3)
Lorenz observed that the goslings from the incubator eggs followed him
around in exactly the same way that the goslings from the other eggs would
follow their mother.
4
He put both sets of goslings together and observed that when they were
released, the two groups quickly re-formed as the goslings went off in search
of their respective ‘mothers’. Both sets of goslings had imprinted on the first
moving object that they had seen.
Lorenz wasn’t an experiente:
father, but his geese loved h
5
After further experiments, Lorenz determined that imprinting was most likely between
13 and 16 hours after hatching.
6)
As such, he concluded that imprinting seems to occur during a ‘critical period’
It’s a fast, automatic process.
7) He also noted that after this critical period, it was too late for the young birds ever to imprint
8) It’s unlikely to occur in humans. Our attachments take longer to develop and we don’t
automatically attach to particular things - quality care seems more important in human
attachment formation.
Harlow (1959) - The need for ‘contact comfort’
Harlow aimed to find out whether baby monkeys would prefer a source of food or a source of
comfort and protection as an attachment figure. In laboratory experiments hesus monkeys
were raised in isolation. They had two ‘surrogate’ mothers. One was made of wire mesh and
Results:
contained a feeding bottle, the other was made of cloth but didn’t contain a feeding bottle.
The monkeys spent most of their time clinging to the cloth surrogate and only used the
wire surrogate to feed. The cloth surrogate seemed to give them comfort in new situations.
When the monkeys grew up they showed signs of social and emotional disturbance.
Is
A
The females were bad mothers who were often violent towards their oftspring.
Conclusion: Infant monkeys formed more of an attachment with a figure that provided comfort and protection.
Growing up in isolation affected their development.
Evaluation: This was a laboratory experiment, so there was strict control of the variables. This means that its
unlikely the results were affected by an unknown variable. However, it can be argued that you can’t
generalise the results of this study to human beings, because humans and monkeys are qualitatively
different. There were also ethical problems with this study
the monkeys were put in a stressful
situation, and later they showed signs of being psychologically damaged by the expenment. Monkeys
are social animals, so it was unfair to keep them in isolation. The fact that they were in isolation also
means that the study lacked ecological validity
the monkeys weren’t in their natural environment,
so the results can’t be reliably applied to real life. Laboratory experiments can usually be replicated.
but ethical guidelines now in place mean that you couldn’t repeat this study today to see whether ywid
get the same results,
Schaffer and Emerson (1964) studied 60 babies from Glasgow at monthly intervals for the first 18 months of life using a longitudinal method.
Children were all studied in their own homes and visited monthly for approximately one year. Interactions with their carers were analysed to establish if and when infants started to display separation anxiety.
Results revealed that attachments were most likely to form with carers who were sensitive to the baby’s signals, rather than the person they spent the most time with.
By 10 months old, most of the babies had several attachments, including attachments to mothers, fathers, siblings and extended family. It was observed that the mother was the main attachment figure for roughly half of the babies when they were 18 months old and the father for most of the others.
Based on this finding, this would suggest that being sensitive and responsive (including playing and communicating an infant) is more instrumental in attachment development than physical care.
Schaffer’s observational research led to the formulation of four distinct stages of developmental progress
Dollard & Miller (1950) used the term secondary drive hypothesis to describe the processes of learning an attachment through operant and classical conditioning. Secondary drive hypothesis explains how primary drives which are essential for survival, such as eating when hungry, become associated with secondary drives such as emotional closeness. They extended the theory to explain that attachment is a two way process that the caregiver must also learn, and this occurs through negative reinforcement when the caregiver feels pleasure because the infant is no longer distressed.
bowlby internal working model
(IWM) provides a template for future attachments. It allows individuals to predict, control & manipulate their environment. As a result, it plays a role in later development – this is known as the continuity hypothesis.
Bowlby’s monotropic theory of attachment suggests attachment is important for a child’s survival.
Attachment behaviors in both babies and their caregivers have evolved through natural selection. This means infants are biologically programmed with innate behaviors that ensure that attachment occurs.
Bowlby’s maternal deprivation hypothesis suggests that continual attachment disruption between the infant and primary caregiver (i.e., mother) could result in long-term cognitive, social, and emotional difficulties for that infant.
Evaluation of Bowlby
Strengths
The need for monotropy appears to be universal
Ainsworth (1967) observed the Ganda tribe of Uganda. Infants form one primary attachment even when reared by multiple carers
Weaknesses
bowlby
he importance of monotropy is overemphasised
Thomas (1998) questions the benefits of monotropy & suggests it may be more beneficial having a network of attachments to support infants & their social/ emotional needs.
Parke (1981) found that qualitatively different attachments provide different benefits.
Similarly, Van Ijzendoorn, & Tavecchio (1987) argue that a stable network of adults can provide adequate or better care than a mother who has to meet all a child’s needs.
Ainsworth et al (1978)
The strange situation
Method:
In a controlled observation, 12-18 month old infants were left in a room with their mother.
Eight diflerent scenarios occurred, including being approached by a stranger, the infant being
left alone, and the mother returning. The infant’s reactions were constantly observed.
Results:
About 15% of infants were ‘insecure-avoidant’ (type A) they ignored their mother
and didn’t mind if she left. A stranger could comfort them.
About 70% were “securely attached° (type B)- they were content with their mother, upset when shek
and happy when she returned. They also avoided strangers.
About 15% were “insecure-resistant’ (type C) .
they were uneasy around their mother and upset it ste
left. They resisted strangers and were also hard to comfort when their mother returned.
Conclusion: Infants showing different reactions to their carers have different types of attachment.
Evaluation: The research method used allowed control of the variables, making the results reliable. However, the
laboratory-type situation made the study artificial, reducing the ecological validity. The parents may ha
changed their behaviour, as they knew that they were being observed. This could have had an effect on t
children’s behaviour. Also, the new situation in the experiment may have had an effect on the children’s
behaviour - the study might not accurately represent their behaviour in real life. Another problem is ti
the mother may not have been the child’s main attachment figure.
Types of attachment
Van .ljzendoorn and Kroonenberg (1988) - Cross-cultural studies
Nan ljaendoor and Kroonenberg carried out a meta-analysis of 32 studies of the strange situation” in
different countes (e.g, Japan, Britain, Sweden, ete. J. They were analysed to find any overall patterns.
The percentages of children classified as secure or insecure were similar across the coumuries tested -
there were more differences within the actual countries than between them. Secure artachments were the
mast common type of attachment in the countries studied. Some differences were found in the distribution
of insecure attachments. In Western cultures, the dominant type of insecure attachment was avoidant, with
the highest proportion of insecure-avoidant children coming from Germany. However, in non- Western
cultures, the dominant type of insecure attachment was resistant. Here, Japan had the highest proportion
of insecure-resistant children.
Cindusion; There are cross-cultural similarities in raising children, with common reactions to the ‘strange situation’
Emitation; Children are brought up in different ways in different cultures. This might result in ditferent types of
attachment in different cultures, Because of this, the ‘strange situation’ might not be a suitable method tor
studying cross-cultural attachment. Using a different type of study may have revealed different patterns
or types of attachment in different cultures. Also, the study assumes that ditterent countries are the
same thing as different cultures. One problem with the research method is that meta-analyses can hide
individual results that show an unusual trend,
