Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM


Top Flashcards (Certified)
All Flashcards

AS AQA Psychology > Attachment Studies > Flashcards

Attachment Studies Flashcards

1
Q

Evans and Porter Aim

A

Investigate whether interactional synchrony and reciprocity affect attachment quality in infants and caregivers

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

Evans and Porter Setting and Sample

A

Lab, 101 infants and their mothers- 53 female, 48 male, American suburb

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

Evans and Porter Procedure

A

Mother and babies invited into laboratory 3 times, at 6,9 and 12 months old
Play with toys for 15 mins- videoed, and communication was assessed. At 12 months the attachment was assessed with strange situation

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

Evans and Porter Findings

A

Secure attachment linked to most reciprocal and interactional synchrony interactions in earlier months

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

Evans and Porter Conclusion

A

Attachment affected by amount of communication

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Evans and Porter Evaluation

A

Controlled, no extraneous variables, increases internal validity
Demand characteristics, social desirability and evaluation apprehension, decreases internal validity
Volunteer bias, decreases population validity

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Isabella et al Aim

A

Does interactional synchrony affect attachment

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Isabella et al Procedure

A

Observed 30 mothers and infants together and assessed degree of synchrony, and quality of attachment

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Isabella et al Findings

A

High levels of synchrony= better attachments

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Isabella et al Conclusion

A

Interactional synchrony is important for development

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Isabella et al Evalution

A

Demand characteristics, decreases internal validity

Controlled, increases internal validity

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Geiger Aim

A

Role of father

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Geiger Conclusion

A

Father’s play is more exciting, mothers more nurturing

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Lamb Aim

A

Role of father

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

Lamb Conclusion

A

Fathers can be maternal, sensitive responsiveness isn’t a biological ability

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Hardy Aim

A

Role of father

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Hardy Conclusion

A

Males are less suitable as primary caregivers as are less able to detect distress

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

Lucassen Aim

A

Role of father

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Lucassen Findings and Conclusion

A

Meta-analysis of strange situation showed high levels of sensitivity associated with good father- infant attachments

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Schaffer and Emerson Aim

A

Role of father

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

Schaffer and Emerson Findings and Conclusion

A

Longitudinal, in 1964 1/3 primary attachment was father, 50 years later, stronger attachment formed earlier

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

Evaluation of Father’s role

A

Fatherless families and single dads- trauma could affect, decreases internal validity
Social desirability, decreases internal validity
Evaluation apprehension, decreases internal validity
Natural environment, more extraneous variables, decreases internal validity
Longitudinal studies, increases reliability

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

Schaffer and Emerson Aim

A

Assess patterns of attachment – make stages of attachment

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

Schaffer and Emerson Setting and Sample

A

Field, 60 babies, 31 male, 29 female, and mothers. All from Glasgow & working class

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Schaffer and Emerson Procedure
Longitudinal study, interviews. Separation protest measured- left alone. And stranger anxiety- assessed by researcher
26
Schaffer and Emerson Findings
Asocial stage, indiscriminate attachment, specific attachments, multiple attachments Fear of strangers starts after 21 weeks
27
Schaffer and Emerson Conclusion
Pattern of attachments
28
Schaffer and Emerson Evaluation
Evaluation apprehension and social desirability, decreases internal validity Naturalistic environment, decreases internal validity/ increases ecological validity Longitudinal study, increases reliability
29
Evaluation of Schaffer's Stages
Asocial stage babies have low mobility anyway, decreases internal validity
30
Lorenz Aim
Investigate imprinting on young geese
31
Lorenz Procedure
Goose eggs- incubator or naturally with mother Made sure he was the first thing the incubator group saw after birth Marked geese to distinguish Placed in box to see who they would return to- all muddled
32
Lorenz Findings
Ones with Lorenz, followed him and returned to him always Critical period of 4-25 hours for imprinting Matured adult birds who imprinted on him tried to mate with humans
33
Lorenz Conclusion
Close contact kept with first moving object encountered, sexual imprinting
34
Lorenz Evaluation
Counter-evidence, Guiton et all 1966- no permanent effect of imprinting-chicks imprinted on gloves but learned to mate with chicks, reliability Can’t generalise to humans (atricial and emotional), decreases population validity
35
Harlow Aim
Investigate learning theory
36
Harlow Procedure
Wire mother monkey and cloth monkey. Baby monkeys taken away from mother Wire mother produced milk, cloth mother didn’t Frightened with loud noise to test which attachment
37
Harlow Findings
Preferred contact with cloth mother, regardless of milk production Diarrhoea, stress Clung to cloth mother and reached over to feed Dysfunctional mature behaviour- aggressive, antisocial, less skilled and mating and rejected their own children
38
Harlow Conclusion
Critical period of 90 days Comfort over food Long term consequences
39
Harlow Evaluation
Ethical issues, decreases reliability
40
Learning theory- Dollard and Miller Evaluation
Lorenz geese (doesn't take time), decreases reliability Harlow’s monkeys- comfort over food, increases reliability Schaffer and Emerson (nanny fed baby but mother provided emotional care), decreases reliability Behavioural explanations are reductionist, decreases internal validity Face validity true Little albert- babies can learn phobias through classical conditioning, increases reliability
41
Evolutionary theory- Bowlby Evaluation
Doesn’t explain why some children recover better, individual differences, decreases validity No importance to father, decreases internal validity Can’t test evolution of behaviours, decreases internal validity Context when developed- mothers seeking work, increases internal validity
42
Evolutionary theory- Bowlby Supporting/ Counter evidence
Hazan and Shaver’s love quiz- secure attachment as infants had happy relationships when older, increases reliability of internal working model Koluchova (1976)- twin boys isolated in cupboard from age of 18 months to 7 years- adopted and fully recovered- decreases reliability of critical period Schaffer and Emerson (1964), singe attachments around 7 months old, increases reliability of monotropy Brazleton et al (1975)- ignore social releasers- babies curled up and lying motionless, increases reliability of social releasers
43
Ainsworth Aim
Identify and classify attachment and how common they were
44
Ainsworth Setting and Sample
Controlled laboratory observation, 100 middle-class American infants and mothers
45
Ainsworth Procedure
Infant behaviour observed- two-way mirror in play room Caregiver left infant, returns, stranger with infant Judge attachment, stranger anxiety, separation anxiety and response to reunion
46
Ainsworth Findings
66% securely attached- moderate upset when mother leaves/ stranger, easily comforted 22% insecure- avoidant- weren't bothered by mother leaving or stranger, didn’t seem to care when mother returned 12% insecure- resistant- extremely upset when mother left, and stranger came, hard to comfort, seemed cross with mother on return
47
Ainsworth Conclusion
Individual differences, linked to sensitivity, mostly secure
48
Ainsworth Evaluation
Social desirability and evaluation apprehension, decreases internal validity High inter-rater reliability Ethnocentric tool, decreases population validity
49
Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg Aim
Proportions of attachment qualities across countries and cultures
50
Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg Procedure
Meta-analysis of studies
51
Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg Findings
Highest % securely attached in every country Highest secure %= Britain/ Sweden with 75% Highest insecure-resistant %= Israel with 29% Highest insecure-avoidant %= Germany with 35%
52
Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg Conclusion
Greater variation within countries than between countries, highest attachment was secure
53
Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg Evaluation
Different subcultures within countries- not representative, decreases ecological validity Strange situation used as a ethnocentric tool, decreases internal validity
54
Takashaki Aim
Comparisons between American and Japanese attachment and determine whether the strange situation is a valid procedure for other countries
55
Takashaki Sample
60 middle-class, Japanese infants aged 1 ½. Boys and Girls. Raised at home
56
Takashaki Procedure
Observed in the Strange Situation
57
Takashaki Findings
68% securely attached 0% avoidant-insecure 32% resistant-insecure Japanese infants most disturbed being alone, this was stopped for 90% of participants due to stress on infant= needed an alternative classification
58
Takashaki Conclusion
Strange situation does not have same meaning for Japan as America- cross-cultural variation was seen – not a valid assessment
59
Takashaki Evaluation
Psychological harm, decreases reliability
60
Bowlby 44 Thieves Aim
Test effects of separation on a child’s wellbeing
61
Bowlby 44 Thieves Sample
88 clients from the child guidance clinic where he worked, 44 of the children had been referred for stealing
62
Bowlby 44 Thieves Procedure
Interviewed children and parents
63
Bowlby 44 Thieves Findings
Children who had experienced maternal deprivation were emotionally maladjusted Out of 44 thieves, 32% were found to have affectionless psychopathic personalities, and pf these, 86% had experienced maternal deprivation before the age of 5 68% that weren’t affectionless psychopaths only 17% had experienced maternal deprivation
64
Bowlby 44 Thieves Conclusion
Prolonged early separation can cause affectionless psychopathy and emotional maladjustment
65
Bowlby 44 Thieves Evaluation
Evaluation apprehension and social desirability, decreases internal validity Bowlby carried out assessments himself and he knew what he was looking for decreases internal validity
66
Bowlby's Theory of Maternal Deprivation
Supporting evidence in Bowlby’s 44 thieves study, increases reliability Counter evidence from Hilda Lewis 1954- replicated 44 thieves on a larger scale with 500 young people. Found a history of prolonged separation from mother didn’t predict criminality or relationship issues, decreases reliability Research focuses on children who were put in temporary foster care due to family issues or illness- trauma could have been the factor causing affectionless psychopathy, not maternal deprivation, decreases internal validity.
67
Rutter et al Aim
Investigate to what extent good care makes up for poor early experiences in institutions
68
Rutter et al Sample
165 Romanian orphans were adopted to Britain. Group of British children adopted at same time
69
Rutter et al Procedure
Physical, cognitive and emotional development assessed at ages of 4, 6, 11 and 15 years
70
Rutter et al Findings
Adopted before 6 months, IQ= 102, adopted 6 months-2 years, IQ= 86, adopted after 2 years, IQ= 77 Adopted after 6 months= disinhibited attachment, adopted before 6 months= rarely show disinhibited attachment
71
Rutter et al Conclusion
Internalisation affects IQ levels and attachment
72
Rutter et al Evaluation
Not random allocation, so less individual differences, increases internal validity
73
Bucharest Early Intervention Project
Zeanah et al
74
Zeanah et al Aim
Differences in development and attachment between children in high quality care, and those left in institutions
75
Zeanah et al Sample
136 children. 95 in institutions, 50 community control
76
Zeanah et al Procedure
Randomly allocated those in the institution to high quality care or to remain in institution Strange situation assessment and carers asked about social behaviour. Assessed at 30, 42 and 54 months and at 8 years old. Development of foster care group compared to institutions and community control
77
Zeanah et al Findings
Community= 74% secure, 20% disinhibited and institutionalised= 19% secure, 65% disorganised and 44% disinhibited Foster care was broadly effective in enhancing development and attachment
78
Zeanah et al Conclusion
Institutionalisation often causes disinhibited attachment, mental retardation. The earlier placed in foster care, the better the recovery
79
Zeanah et al Evaluation
Random allocation causes major ethical issues- deliberately disadvantage one group of institutionalised children, decreases reliability.

AS AQA Psychology (10 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2025 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions