Attachment: Institutionalisation: Romanian Orphan Studies

Question 1

Long-term deprivation:

Answer 1

: lengthy or permanent separations from attachment figures

Question 2

Privation:

Answer 2

children who have never formed an attachment bond, more likely to lead to lasting damage.

Question 3

Institutionalisation

Answer 3

 The effect upon attachments of care provided by orphanages and residential children’s homes.
 Institutional care involves distinctive patterns of attachment behaviour with a mix of privation and deprivation.
 Children show disinhibited attachment, such as clingy, attention-seeking behaviour.

Question 4

Romanian Orphan Studies

Answer 4

 Nicholas Ceausescu controlled Romania 1965-1989.
 Abortion and contraception were forbidden, and childless people were taxed.
 Many families could not afford so many children and were encouraged to leave them in orphanages.
 500,000 children in orphanages.

Question 5

Research: Romanian Orphans

Answer 5

Procedure:
Followed 165 Romanian orphans adopted in the UK.

Aim: to assess whether loving and nurturing care could overturn the effects of privation using physical, cognitive, and emotional development assessments at 4, 6, 11, and 16 years.

Control group: 52 UK children adopted at the same time.

Findings (intellectual development)
Age 4: Romanian orphans had delayed intellectual development and severely malnourished.
Age 11: different rates of recovery related to age of adoption. Adopted <6 months old IQ 102, >6 months old – 2 years old IQ 86, >2 years IQ 77.
Age 16: difference noted at age 11 persisted.

<6 months old ‘normal’ attachment
>6 months old ‘disinhibited’ attachment.

Disinhibited attachment symptoms include attention seeking, clinginess and social behaviour directed indiscriminately towards all adults, both familiar and unfamiliar.

Question 6

Zeanah et al. (2005): Bucharest Early Intervention Project

Answer 6

Procedure: assessed attachment using Strange Situation in institutional care.
Control group: 50 children (12-31 months) not in care.

Findings:

Institutional Group

• 19% securely attached
• 65% disorganized attachment
• 44% disinhibited attachment

Control Group

• 74% securely attached
• < 20% disinhibited attachment

Mackes (2020)

67 Romanian adoptees (with between 3 and 41 months of deprivation) were compared with 21 nondeprived UK adoptees.

Smaller areas in Romanians:

• Inferior frontal is involved in decision making.
• Temporal lobe is involved in memory.
• Orbitofrontal is involved in emotional responses.

Question 7

Evaluation

Real world application:

Answer 7

• The orphan study is an application to improving living conditions for people growing up outside their family home.
• The studies have helped psychologists understand the effects of early institutional care and how to prevent the worst of these effects (Langton 2006).
• Children’s homes now have several people looking after the children, who attach to one or two primary caregivers. This improvement in living conditions can help children lead a normal life.

Question 8

eval
Fewer confounding variables:

Answer 8

• The Romanian orphan’s study did not have many confounding variables compared to previous orphan studies, where those children had experienced several life traumas, which could have caused their lack of attachment. In the Romanian orphan study, parents essentially handed their children over, and most had not experienced physical abuse, neglect, bereavement and more before.

Question 9

Lack of adult data:

eval

Answer 9

• Most recent data is about the kids in their mid 20s.
• There is a lack of data to show the effects of institutional care on adult life, including the longevity of mental health problems, ability to form and maintain romantic relationships etc.
• This is difficult to do due to the study being longitudinal.

Question 10

Social sensitivity: eval

Answer 10

• Socially sensitive because the study shows late-adopted children have poor developmental outcomes.
• This means that parents, teachers, and more who have had access to these findings have changed their expectations of changed their behaviour toward them.
• Might even create a self-fulfilling prophecy.
• That being said, the findings have taught a lot which might benefit future institutionalized children.

Ethics is what happens to people in studies, but more importantly, social sensitivity is how it affect people not in the study.