Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Psychology > Attachment - paper 1 > Flashcards

Attachment - paper 1 Flashcards

1
Q

attachment

animal studies

A

a close , two way (reciprocal) , emotional bond between two individuals where each sees eachother as essential for their own emotional security

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

key study - kondrad lorenz

animal studies

A
  • geece
  • procedure - divided clutch of geece eggs into two , 1 group with mother and 1 in an incubator - see lorenz first
  • conc
  • demonstarted imprinting
  • there is a critical time period - after 32 hrs the gosling were unlikly to imprint, the most time between 13-16hrs
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

imprinting

animal studies

A

an inhertited trait that animals use as survival. altricial animals expirence hours after being born , where they develop an extremely close bond with animals they see first

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

lorenz case study

animal studies

A
  • observed peacoks who had been raised in a reptile house and imprinted on a giant tortise
  • in adulthood they only showed courtship towards giant toritise
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

key study - harry harlow

animal studies

A
  • rhesus monkeys
  • procedure 1 - raised the monkeys in a lad and some raised in isolation
  • findings - isolated monkeys - distruted behaviour , circuling blank stair , some straved to death
  • non isolated - social deficits , clung to cloth monther
  • procedure 2 - 16 babies with wire or cloth mum , both provided milk
  • findings - babes spent more time with cloth mother , when the wire one had milk they would go for food thn back to cloth mum
  • proceudre 3 - add scary noise
  • findings - run to mother when scared then venture out , with no mother they were paralyzed with fear
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

maternal deprivation

animal studies

A
  • being deprived of a mother
  • consequence - didnt develop normal social behvaiour , more aggressive , less sociable , neglected their own babies
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

critical period

animal studies

A
  • a period of time where something must happen or else it wont form (attachment)
  • rhesus monkeys - 90 days
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

postives of animal studies

animal studies

A
  • practicallity
  • have tight control over condtions
  • we can create condtions and manipluate them
  • application
  • profound effect on humands with child and mother
  • its not a result of food but comfort , helps with nurserys ect
  • generalisabilty
  • monkeys are similar to humans - all primates have simialr attachments
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

negtaives of animal studies

animal studies

A
  • ethics
  • monkeys suffered great psychological harm , and killed their own babys
  • generalisability
  • humans have bigger brains than monkeys and are psychologically more complex
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

operant condtioning

learning theories

A
  • postive reinforcment would be the care giver giving love/comfort
  • negative reinforcemnt would be the parents taken away hungery for the bay to feel happy
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

cupboard love theory

learning theories

A
  • infants attach to their caregiver for food
  • it can be a result of associating stimuli (classical condtioning) or altering behaviour through reinforcement and punishment (operant condtioning)
  • food (UCS) = happy (UNR)
  • food (UCS) + mum (NS) = happy (UCR)
  • mum (CS) = happy (CR)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

learning theory

learning theories

A
  • the baby has to learn to form an attachment
  • operant conditoning , the parent rewards the baby by feeding him , so he asscoiated the caregiver with food
  • food is the primary reinforcer
  • food doesnt come without the caregiver , so caregiver is the secondary reinforcer
  • the baby will then repeat actions taht bring the caregiver close e.g crying
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

harlow supporting and contriditiction learning theories

learning theories

A
  • support
  • operant condtioning - mum gives comfort and they come back
  • contridicts
  • comfort is the primary reinforcement not food
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

why does lorenz contradict learning theories

learning theories

A

the baby geece had no reinforcment and attachment with the first thing they saw - attachment is innate not learnt

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

learning theories is simplistic

learning theories

A
  • reductionist
  • the “feeding” is to simplistic
  • not as simple as giving food to somebody and forming an attachment
  • not just food - comfort , responsivness
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

schaffer and emerson

learning theories

A
  • first attachmnets that were fomred by 39% of babies were not the person who physically carried them
  • attachmnets are more likely to form with those who are more sentive and rewarding to the bay and who play with them
  • this is a weakness for learning theories
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Bowlby and evolutionary theory

Bowlby and evolutionary theory

A

attachment is an innate process that serves an important evolutionary function (survival)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

bowlbys monotropic theory

Bowlby and evolutionary theory

A
  • MISS CRIED
  • monotropy
  • innate
  • survival
  • social realsers
  • critical period
  • reciprocal
  • internal working model
  • evolutionary
  • dire consequences
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

monotropy

Bowlby monotropic theory

A
  • a vital close bond with just one attacment figure
  • did not rule out the possibility of other attachments
  • the primary bond is the most important one
  • believed it was qualitivly different from any subsequent attachments
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

innate

Bowlby monotropic theory

A
  • inborn , natural
  • children come into the work biologically pre-programmed to form attachments - help survival
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

survival

Bowlby monotropic theory

A
  • the state of fact of continuing to live or exist
  • attachments with others is more likely to ensure survival - lorenzo showed this with geece
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

social realisers

Bowlby monotropic theory

A
  • certain innate behaviours which help to ensure proximity and contct to attachment - smiling , crying
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

critical period

Bowlby monotropic theory

A
  • a period of development during a childs developments to form an attachment , after attachment will never be able to occur and damdage is done (irreversible)
  • took back hat he said “sensitve period” - attachments can still form later on
  • geece - 14-16hrs
  • monkey - 90 days
  • humans - 2.5yrs
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

reciprocal

Bowlby monotropic theory

A
  • given or felt by each towards the other
  • over time the focus of a child moves from hvaing needs met to taking oppurtunites for interactionist (not one sided)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

internal working model

Bowlby monotropic theory

A
  • early attachment with parent , a child develops a cognitve frame work comprising mental representation for the understanding of the world , self and others
  • cognitve hypothesis - our childhood attachmnet style will continue into our adult life , and affect the way we attach to others when we are older
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

evolutionary

Bowlby monotropic theory

A
  • based on darwins theory
  • aspects of the brain structure , cognitve and behavioural are interpreted as adaptions to the physcial or social enviornment
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

dire consequences

Bowlby monotropic theory

A
  • extremely serious
  • children shoul recieve continous care from primary carrer for aprox two years
  • “maternal deprivation” - irreversible long term consequence
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q

supports Bowlby monotropic theory

Bowlby monotropic theory

A
  • bailey et al - studied 99 mothers with 1yr old , measures their own attachment witht heir mothers using interviews - found mothers with poor attachment with their babies had poor attachment to mothers - supports internal wokring model
  • buess et al - found attachment to mother at infancy was a good preditor of childs social behaviour at school agd 5 - supports montorphy attachment
  • brazelton - observed mothers and baies intercating , did still face expiremnet , when mother didnt react the baies were extremely distressed and curled up motionless - supports social realsiers
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q

contridictions of Bowlby monotropic theory

Bowlby monotropic theory

A
  • bailey - used self reprt techniqie , retorspective (old mems) , demand characteristica , gender bias
  • schaffer and emerson - found 18month old babies (13%) had attachment to one person , most had more contridicts monotrophy attchament
  • monotopy is socially sentive - pressure on mothers to be perfect - wouldnt be able to work - “fathers are useless”
  • temperment may be as important as attachment - some babies are anxious , othersd more socialbe
  • could explain behaviour better than attachment
  • correlation does not equal causation
  • tempermant = a childs genetically influenced personality
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
30
Q

attachment behaviours (maccoby) - infant

infant caregiver interactions

A
  • seeking proximity - watch , cry
  • distress on seperation - cry , distress
  • joy on reunion - stop crying , smile , giggle
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
31
Q

attachment behaviours (maccoby) - child (mobile)

infant caregiver interactions

A
  • seeking proximity - follow
  • distress on seperation - cry
  • joy on reunion - hug
  • secure base behaviour - take toys and show mum
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
32
Q

attachment behaviours (maccoby) - adult

infant caregiver interactions

A
  • seeking proximity - hug
  • distress on seperation - message
  • joy on reunion - hug
  • secure base behaviour - go to find friends and feel relived
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
33
Q

features of infant caregiver interactions

infant caregiver interactions

A
  • reciprocity - two way interaction , baby and caregiver respond to eachother in turn
  • alert phases - when the baby signals they are ready to interact the mother will respond 2/3 of the time
  • interactional synchrony - when behaviours are synchronised because they are moving in the same or a similar pattern . infants mirrowing a caregivers emotions and behaviours
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
34
Q

meltzoff and moore

infant caregiver interactions

A
  • observed and filmed babies aged up to 27 days old , exposed to three facial expression (tounge , mouth widening , lip pursing) and one gestire (waving finger)
  • findings - babies as young as 12 days old would try and imediate facial and physcial gestures
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
35
Q

isabella and belsky

infant caregiver interactions

A
  • babys that had secure attachment would display more synchronized behvaiours than those with insecure attachment
  • findings
  • secure - interacted in a well times resprical and rewarded manner
  • insecure avoidant - displayed material instructivness and overstimulated
  • incsecure resistant - poorly cooridnated , under involved and inconsisent
  • conc - different interactional behaviours predicted attachment quality
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
36
Q

brazelton

infant caregiver interactions

A
  • parents were intructed to ignore their babies social realisers
  • the babies responded very badly
  • suppoets the role of social realisers and reciporotcty is very important
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
37
Q

negatives of infant caregiver interactions

infant caregiver interactions

A
  • its hard to know what is happening when observing babies - babies cant talk and only express throught gestures and expression
  • meltzoff and moore - re did expiremnt and only tougne was reliably replicated (howveer are portraying something)
  • observations dont tell is the purpose of these features
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
38
Q

positves of infant caregiver interactions

infant caregiver interactions

A
  • good reliability bc of controlled observation
  • controlled process
  • independant observers
  • many cameras - good anaylsis
  • no dmeand characteristcs - babies doesnt know its being observed
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
39
Q

schaffer and emersons theory

schaffer and emersons theory

A
  1. PHASE 1 - asocial stage
  2. PHASE 2 - indiscriminate attachment
  3. PHASE 3 - specifc attachment
  4. PHASE 4 - **multiple attachments **
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
40
Q

phase 1 - asocial stage

schaffer and emersons theory

A
  • 0-2 months
  • behaviour towards non human objects and humans are quite similar
  • show limited prefernce to familar adults
  • babies are still slightly happier in the presence of other humans
  • EXAMPLE - simling at a human who interacts with them
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
41
Q

phase 2 - indiscriminate attachment

schaffer and emersons theory

A
  • 2-7 months
  • preference over people rather than objects
  • increasing ability to recognise familar faces
  • will accept comfort from any adult , no stranger anxiety
  • EXAMPLE - smiling (slightly) more around people than when alone , looking more at faces
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
42
Q

phase 3 - specifc attachment

schaffer and emersons theory

A
  • 7 months
  • show distress on seperation from primary care giver ( found its the person who offers the most interactions and responds best to their needs)
  • show joy at reunion with that person and are most comforted by them
  • show stranger anxiety
  • EXAMPLE - stop crying when pocked up by primary care giver , crying when they leave the room
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
43
Q

pase 4 - multiple attachments

schaffer and emersons theory

A
  • 8 months
  • show attachment to toher people , not just primary care giver
  • the number of attachments formed depends on how consitent relationships the infant has
  • there is a ddebate to wether these are equally as intense or if there is still some special attachment (monotrpy)
  • EXAMPLE - seekings proxmity to famialr adults (grandparents)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
44
Q

negatives of these stages

schaffer and emersons theory

A
  • problems studying the asocial stage - babies have poor coordination and are generally imobile , difficult to make judgements and evidence cant be reliaded on
  • conflicting evidence on multiple attachments - some research suggest not all babies form one primary attachment before they form others
  • collectivist cultures - some have lots of carers drom the output
  • measuring multiple attachments - babies can have playmates as well as attachment figures , no way to distuguish behaviours , just bc someone leaves the crying might not be about them
45
Q

supporting evidence - the study

schaffer and emersons theory

A
  • aim - investigate the age at which infants become attached , who they become attached and if more than one
  • procedure - longitunal study , 60 glaswegen babies , visted monthly at their own houses , interviwed about kids behvaiour (self report) , shown in 7 everyday seperations
  • result - 6-8months old , 50% of babies showed seperation for a specific person
  • 8-10months , 80% specfic attachamnet , 30% had multiple
  • within 1 month of first attachment ,29% of infants had multiple attachments
  • within 6 months of the first attachment 78% had multiple attachments
46
Q

conclusion of the study

schaffer and emersons theory

A
  • indicated that attachments were most likely to form with those who responded to the babys signals not the person they spent the most time with
  • called it sensitve responsivness
  • who plays with you and communicates and responds to their emotion
47
Q

evaluations of schaffer and emersons study

schaffer and emersons theory

A
  • **benefits of the observation being completed in own homes and by parents **
  • good ecological validity
  • babies are behaving in a normal environmant
  • however
  • no control over what happens , parents could lie for social desirability
  • benefits of a longitunal study
  • removes particapnant variables , parents dont tend to change
  • gets rid of anomilies
  • quality of sample
  • same place , not reprosentive
  • small sample size
48
Q
  1. fathers role is different to mothers - this is due to biological and psychologcial difference between men and women

multiple attachments and role of the father

A
  • HORMONES - oestrogen underlines caring behaviour , this makes women more biologcally suited to forming attachments
  • SOCIO-CULTURAL FACTORS - child rearing could be seen by some as a sterotypically femine - this could put men off even wanting to get involved
49
Q

supporting evidence - 1. fathers role is different to mothers - this is due to biological and psychologcial difference between men and women

multiple attachments and role of the father

A
  • hrdy
  • found that fathers were less likely to detect infant distress than mothers
  • this supports bilogical difference
  • would suggest the fathers role is biologically determined
50
Q

biological determinism

multiple attachments and role of the father

A

refers to the idea that all humans behaviour is innate and determined by genes

51
Q

issues with biological determinism

multiple attachments and role of the father

A
  • some fathers are able to form close attachments - could worry these people that its not real
  • when they are “baby sitting” they are capable of doing the job
  • even become secure base
52
Q

soft determinism

multiple attachments and role of the father

A
  • refers to the idea that human behaviour is constrained by the enviornment or biological make up but only to a certain extent
53
Q
  1. fathers play a different role; not caregiver but are important playmates

multiple attachments and role of the father

A
  • more playful , phsyically active and better at providing challenging situations
  • “boys will be boys”
  • men are more care free in soceity
  • lack of sensitvity may lead to better problem solving
  • men teach about their erxpirences (problem solving)
  • verismmo - found the quality of the relationship between father and child significantly correlated with the number of friends at nursey
54
Q
  1. fathers can demonstrate sensitive responsivness

multiple attachments and role of the father

A
  • secure bonds are possible if fathers are in an intimate (close marrage)
  • belsky - males report higher levels of marital intimacy also displayed a secure father infant attachment (and oppsite)
  • this suggests children can form secure relationships with their fathers however depends on the father-mother relationship
55
Q

issues with research into fathers

multiple attachments and role of the father

A
  • research has left unawnsered questions - if fathers have distinct role then why arent children without fathers different?
  • studies have found that children growing up in signle or same sex families do not devlop any differenlt drin those in a two parents relationship
  • research is confusing - different researchers are looking into different areas
  • difficult bc psycholgosts cant easily awsner the questions
56
Q

research which shows fathers less important

multiple attachments and role of the father

A
  • schaffer and emerson found majority of babies attach to mother first
  • argued that fathers dont have enough eostrogen to form nuturing attachment
  • grossman suggests that the quality of attacment with mother and not father had an affect on attachment in adolescence
57
Q

reasearch that shows fathers are just as important

multiple attachments and role of the father

A
  • macCallum and golombok have found children grwoing up in single or same sex marrage do not devolp any differently
  • grossman suggests that fathers have a greater role in other parts of attachment
  • feild found that fathers can be nuturing attachment figures if the mother is less availabe
58
Q

strange situation - mary ainsworth

strange situation

A
  • a technique that places infants in a different situation allowing observation of key attachment behaviours in order to research quality of attachment
  • it shows rather than attachment being all or nothing (bowlby) there are individual differences in attachment qualty
  • aim - to rearch the quailty/type of attachment to the caregiver , it places the infant in different situations
  • method - controlled obsrervation
  • sample - 100 white middle class american mothers
  • 7 episodes lasting 3 mins
  • behaviours measure ; secure base behaviour , seperation anxiety , stranger anxiety , reunin behaviour
59
Q

stages of strange situation

strange situation

A
  1. mother and baby are alone -exploration and secure base behaviour
  2. a stranger enters and treis to interact with baby - stranger anxiety
  3. the mother leaves the room and baby is alone with stranger - stranger anxiety and seperation anxiety
  4. mother returns and starnger leaves - reunin behaviour and secure base
  5. mother leaves and baby is alone - seperation anxiety
  6. stranger returns - starnger anxiety
  7. mother re enters and stranger leaves - reunion behaviour
60
Q

type of attachments

strange situation

A
  • unsecure avoidant
  • secure
  • insecure resistant
61
Q

insecure avoidant - types of attachment

strange situation

A
  • mother ignores baby when needing comfort
  • no secure base
  • low seperation anxiety
  • low stranger anxiety
  • does not seek proximity and comfort on reunion
62
Q

secure - attachment type

strange situation

A
  • mother is sentivie to babies needs
  • yes secure base
  • mild seperation anxiety
  • mild stranger anxiety
  • seeks proximity and easily comforted on reunion
63
Q

insecure resistant - attachment type

strange situation

A
  • mother is inconsistent with babys needs
  • no secure base just proximity
  • high sepration anxiety
  • hig stranger anxiety
  • seeks promxity but not easily comforted on reuinon q
64
Q

caregiver sensitivity hypothesis

strange situation

A

the way the caregivers behaves towards an infant directly causes the infant atatchment type

65
Q

percentage of infants in the study

strange situation

A
  • type a - 22%
  • type b - 65%
  • type c -12%
66
Q

postives of strange situation

strange situation

A
  • good reliabilty - main et al did the test and found it was reliable , was consistent and had good external reliablity
  • good inter-rater - bick found that 94% observes agreed
  • accepted around the world - paradigm
  • high validiy
  • predict later relationshop
67
Q

negatives with strange situation

strange situation

A
  • ethnocentrism - social norms in parenting change for each culture and the catagories may not work for all
  • only looks into mother - could have different attachment to father or grandparents , different levels of responsivness - lacks internal validity
  • other attachment styles - main and soloman found disorganised attachment - descries a child who doesnt fit in any of the 3
  • reductionist - simplyfing complex phenomen into simple type , says a few simple behaviours can identify you as a type
  • ethical issues - putting s child under stress delibarty , protection of harm , no informed consent
  • sample bias - 100 middle class white women
  • lacks ecolgocial validity
68
Q

culture

strange situation - cultural differences

A
  • rules , customs , morals and ways of interacting that bind together people of society
  • learn the rules and customs of our culture through life (socialtionsion)
69
Q

subculture

strange situation - cultural differences

A
  • groups within a culture that share many of the dominant characteristcs of that culture but have some different characteristics and customs of its own
70
Q

attachment difference between culture

strange situation - cultural differences

A
  • bowlby suggested attachment is innate , should mean culture should not effect a gentic tendacy to form attachment
  • some studies have found significant difference across cultures , however could have been due to a research error
71
Q

key study - van Ijzendoorn and krooenberg

strange situation - cultural differences

A
  • conducted a meta analysis using a variety of data bases of strange situation study
  • sample - 32 different studies conducted in 8 countries
  • 18 studies were from the usa
    1. usa
    1. uk
    1. china
    1. japan
    1. sweden
    1. germany
    1. israel
    1. netherlands
  • findings - most general was secure , least common was insecure resistant
72
Q

specifc findings

strange situation - cultural differences

A
  • uk - highest secure 75%
  • china - lowest secure 50%
  • germany - highest insecure avoidant 35%
  • israel - highest insecure resitant 27%
  • japan - highest insecure resitant 25%
  • variation of study results within the same country were 150% greater than those between countries
  • parenting styles are not the same within a country
73
Q

meta-analysis

strange situation - cultural differences

A

a statistical analysis of the data from many studies focused on the same phenomenon , which aims to generate a general conclusion

74
Q

collectivist culture

strange situation - cultural differences

A
  • a society where social and individuals ties are strong , with epople being part of a strong cohesive groups
75
Q

individualstic culture

strange situation - cultural differences

A
  • prioritization or emphasis of the individual over the entire group , people are motivated by their own preference and viewpoints
76
Q

germany

strange situation - cultural differences

A
  • individulstic culture
  • parents encourage indepence
  • not much distress on seperation
  • not much jot on reuinon
  • not much stranger anxiety
  • avoidant
77
Q

israel

strange situation - cultural differences

A
  • collectivist culture
  • babies have multiple carrers
  • self sufficent farming community
  • excessive stranger anxiety
  • **resistant **
78
Q

japan

strange situation - cultural differences

A
  • parenting is protective
  • emotional dependance is encouraged
  • never spend time away from parents
  • excessive stress on seperation
  • excessive stranger anxiety
  • resistant
79
Q

evaluations of research strange situation - cultural differences

strange situation - cultural differences

A
  • biased sample - only 5 of the studies were carried out in collectivist cultures
  • imposed etic - was made for by an american for america , not the same as america
  • problem with meta anyalsis - the difference was 150% greater in countries , meta anyalsis concluded that eveyrone in the same culture they had the same parenting ect
80
Q

seperation

deprivation

A

when attachment bond is formed but the child is temporaly not in the presence of the attachment figure

81
Q

deprivation

deprivation

A

when an attachment bond is formed but then broken due to prolonged seperation

82
Q

privation

deprivation

A

when a child doesnt form any attachment with a significant person (lack of love)

83
Q

distruption of attachment

deprivation

A
  • belived in monotropic attachment
  • every seperation adds up and eventually come maternal deprivation
  • become the law accumulated seperation
  • if you expirence seperation enough times they will add up to deprivation consequences
84
Q

what happened bc of that study?

deprivation

A
  • unlimited parenting visting hours in hospitals
  • encouraged parents to stay with their children at all times
85
Q

short term seperation

deprivation

A
  • james roberson
  • procedure - observed children in a hospitial
  • john - left in nursery for 9 days , never got visted by mother/father , wanted attention from nurses , they never gave it to him
  • extremly distressed , cried pitifully , refused food , wouldnt sleep , sobs of despair
  • ignored is father , didnt want to know his father , emotionally attached
  • findings - children will be less attached when going back home
86
Q

bowlbys maternal deprivation hypothesis

deprivation

A
  • if you are constantly serperated from your primary caregiver at a young ages
  • you will gorw up thinking you are unworthy of love and will affect later relationships
  • and think growing up without a safe and loving environment is normal
  • will not have a good undertsanding of right and wrongso will feel less guilty when doing bad things
  • bowbly called tjos affectionless psychopathy
  • may also lack intelligence and have a low iq - called mental retardation
  • this will happen in the critical period (2.5yrs)
87
Q

effects of maternal deprivation

deprivation

A
  • intellectual - abnormal low iq
  • emotional - affaectionless psycopathy , the inability to expirence guilt or strong emotions
88
Q

key study - the 44 juvenile theives

deprivation - supporting evidence

A
  • aim - investigate the effect of deprivation
  • procedure - 44 adolestents wh had been refered to the clini for stealing , compared to a control gorup of 44
  • did an iq test and interviewed families ect
  • findings - 17 of those thieves had expirecnes deprivation compared to 2 in the control group
  • 14 of the thieves had affectionless psycopathy
  • conc - supports maternal deprivation hypthosesis but
  • not all affectionless psychopaths expirences deprivation , so not the sole cause
89
Q

negatives of the 44 theives study

deprivation

A
  • self reporting - social desirability bias , why would you lie about leaving your child
  • lots had moved in childhood - they may have never formed an attachment , were suffering from privation not deprivation which rutter suggested was far more deleterious
  • retrospective mems - memories may not have be accuarte
  • not reprosentive sample - more boys than girls in the study , beta bias , gender bias
90
Q

research deprivation

deprivation

A
  • supproting - goldfard followed up on orphanes testing their iq through ages and the ones who never got fostered were in the retarded range
  • controdicting - koluchova did a case on twins who were locked away for 7yrs and when they were fostered they seemed to fully recover , may be a sensitve period not critical
91
Q

privation

privation

A
  • use case studies
  • where there has been no attachment fromed
92
Q

genie (curtis)

privation

A
  • age - 13yr
  • condtions - dark room , chained to bed and potty , visted just for food
  • phsycial - extremelet malnurhsied , looked 5
  • cognitve - menatal age of 2.5 , couldnt feed herslef
  • post discovery - made progress - mental age of 8
  • but couldmt learn grammer
93
Q

mary and louise (skuse)

privation

A
  • two sisters found at 2.5 and 3.5
  • mother kept them in isolation
  • tied to bed by a dog lead
  • no pseech and showed little play
  • louise led a normal life and recovered
  • mary did not and grew up in an austic unit
  • louise could have had an attachment beofre her sister was born
94
Q

evaluations of case studies

privation

A
  • good
  • can reserach naturally occuring events that you would not be able to do in real life
  • retrospective data
  • old data , not present in time and self report/mems could be wrong
  • ethics
  • particapnt harm
  • no informed consent
  • not genersalble
  • **lack of control means its hard to asses what caused it ** - was it attachmnet of abuse
95
Q

institutionalisation

privation

A
  • the effect of living in an instrutional setting e.g hospital , orphanage and the behaviour is due to living that way
96
Q

key study - rutter
the english romanian adoption study

privation

A
  • longitunal study that started in 1998
  • aim - ivestigate wether good quality care after adoption could make up for early instutionalisation
  • procdure - 165 romanian orphanswere adopted into british families
  • their physcial, cognitve and emotional development was asses , 4 , 6 , 11 and 15 yrs old
  • three groups and control
    1. adopted before the age of 6 months
    1. adopted between 6 moths and 2 years
    1. adopted after 2 years
    1. 52 british children who adopted
97
Q

results of key study - rutter
the english romanian adoption study

privation

A
  • at the age of 11 they did an iq test
  • g1 - 102 , g2- 86 , g3 - 77
  • these remained until 16
  • found a new attachment style in the children in mostly g3disinhibted attachment - “a pettern of attention seeking behaviours with a realtive lack of selectivity in social relationship”
98
Q

key study - zeanah
the bucharest early intervention projet

privation

A
  • same aim as rutter
  • 95 children 13-31 months old
  • same procedure as rutter
  • results - 74% had secure attachment in control group , only 19% in other
  • 65% of the intustiinalisation group were disorganised attatchment
  • part 2
  • randomly alloacted kids to foster or staying in orphanges
  • showed foster helped
  • the placemnt before 2 is key
99
Q

hodges and tizzard

privation

A
  • investigate insitutaional upbrinign on later relationships
  • 65 kids aged 4 months with no attachment
  • 24 were adopted , 15 returned home , 26 still in instutuion
  • did interviews and questionares at later ages
  • maternal deprivation was over come by adopted kids
  • all 3 groups still struggled with making attachments to friends ect
100
Q

evaluations of romian studies

privation

A
  • natural - rutter did a natural study with no manipuation
  • zeanah - manipulated where kids went, not ethical at all
  • application- real life application as hospitals and nuserys help with the foster systm ect
  • romanian - is it generliasble as the uk is very different to romanaina
101
Q

hazen and shaver - love quiz

later relationships

A
  • extended bowlbys ideas that later love should be predictable from knowledge of their early attachment style
  • aim - wanted to see if there was a correlation between infants attachment to their future realtionships
  • procedure - love quiz - two compondents , measure of attachment type and indivudlas beliefs ect now
  • 620 replies ages from 14-82
  • results - strikly high correlation between infant attachment and adult romantic style
  • conc - evidence support concept of iwm , did concede that not eveybody stayed the same attachment style and people changed
102
Q

negatives of love quiz

later relationships

A
  • self report - social desirablity bias, could lie so nobody judges them , or could put awnser they know they are going to get secure
  • correlation - correlation does not mean causation
  • volenterr sample - could be all extroverted, cant generalise , certain type of person
103
Q

study supporting childhood friendships

later relationships

A
  • kerns - secure had best quality friendships
  • insecure struggled
  • myron-wilson and smith - 196 ages 7-11 from london , secure - no bullying, avoidant- victums, resitant- bully
104
Q

supporting study of attachment types on romatic relationhips

later relationships

A
  • hazan and shaver - love quiz
  • mccarthy - 40 adult women assed as children and people with secure attachment had best reltionships later
105
Q

supporting study for parenting style

later relationships

A
  • bailey - 99 mothers looking at their relationships with their mothers and their babies
  • found they had similar attachment type with their babies as they did when they were oyunger with their mother
106
Q

basic evalutions for attachment type later

later relationships

A
  • mixed evidence - zimmerman found there was very little relationship between quality of infant and adolesent attachment
  • retrospective - all the studies look back at olf memories
107
Q

secure childhood attachment

later relationships

A
  • later childhood relationships - not invloved in bullying , good quality friendships
  • romantic relationships - long lasting good qaulity, belive love is common and easy to find
  • relationship with child as a parent - tend to be sentive to childs needs
108
Q

insecure avoidant childhood attachment

later relationships

A
  • later childhood relationships - likly to be victum to bullying, struggled with friendships
  • romatic relationships - relationships involved jealousy and fear of intamcy , feel uncomftable deoending on others and dont need love to be happy
  • relationship with child as a parent - tend to be insentive to their childs needs
109
Q

insecure resitance childhood attachment

later relationships

A
  • later childhood realtionships - likelt to be bully and struggle with friendships
  • romantic relationships - are obsesive and have emotional highs and lows , desire intense intimacy wich can scare people away
  • realtionship with their child as a parent - tend to be inconsictent with childs needs

Psychology (6 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions