Attachment Types

Question 1

Developmental psychology and attachment

Answer 1

Branch concerning progressive behavioural changes over a lifespan
Emotional bond between 2 people - 2 way process enduring over time

Question 2

Reciprocity

Answer 2

2 way interaction aka turn taking - responding and eliciting responses to each others signals to sustain communication

Question 3

Interactional synchrony

Answer 3

Simultaneous/ coordinated sequence of actions/ emotions
Meltzoff and Moore found at 2-3 weeks + - adult model displaced one of 3 face/ hand expressions and dummy given to infant to prevent response - after dummy removed then infant expression/ behaviour associated w model

Question 4

Caregiver infant interactions eval

Answer 4

+ Murray and Trevarthen (1985) had mothers interact with babies over video monitor then tape played where mother didnt respond - babies tried to attract attention but gave up after - want reciprocation
+ Abravamal and Deyong (1991) found infants didnt respond to puppets opening and closing mouth so interactional synchrony can be a specific social response to humans
- Difficult to determine infant intention as cant use language to communicate such must infer if they want to communicate with caregiver

Question 5

Difficulties researching infants

Answer 5

• Attachment behaviour stronger in lab than at home so studies should take place in a natural setting
• Observer bias of interpretations which can be countered by more observers - interrater reliability
• Practical issues as short and unpredictable waking/ feeding periods
• Ethics to not affect child or parents

Question 6

Schaffer et al (1964) stages of attachment

Answer 6

Longitudinal study following 60 infants and mothers for 2 years - decided 4 stages in development of attachment

Question 7

4 stages of attachments

Answer 7

Pre attachment (0-3 months) from 6 weeks infants start to enjoy humans more than e.g objects - smiling
Indiscriminate attachment (4-7 months) - smiling more at known people but still allow strangers to handle - can discriminate by familiarity
Discriminate attachment - (7 months +) specific attachment to primary attachment figure (usually mum) showing separation protest and stranger anxiety etc - quality of relationship more important than - quantity when forming attachments
Multiple attachments - (7 months+) - very soon after first attachment, strong emotional ties with other care givers - secondary attachments while primary attachment still strongest - fear of strangers weaken

Question 8

Stages of attachment eval

Answer 8

• Unreliable as based on mothers reports so be biased to seem like good mother or misjudge behaviour
• Lacks sample validity as only working class infants so might not apply to other social groups e.g with nannies
  -Cultural bias as only individualist cultures - collectivist cultures could form attachments differently - more people, style variation etc
• Lacks temporal validity since 1960s parental care has changed e.g more career facing women
• Stage theory so inflexible and ignores individual differences - some may eg start with multiple attachments first
  + Widely used, accepted, understandable e.t.c

Question 9

Multiple attachments

Answer 9

Schaffer et al (1964) found around 7 months onwards is secondary attachments including father - 75% had attachment with father by 18 months

Question 10

Role of the father

Answer 10

Less likely to be primary attachment - less tome and less psychologically equipped or biologically e.g less oxytocin so less interpersonal. Also social norms such as being feminine to be sensitive to others needs
Some believe fathers have a different role to play and stimulate to complement mothers emotional care - just as crucial

Question 11

Role of father eval

Answer 11

• Research shows negligible effects of growing up in a single mother or same sex parent family
• Seems father less important as Grossman (2002) found early attachment to mother is a better prediction of teen relationships - but if father actively played with child both teen relationships strengthened
• Flexible role e.g single dads can be the primary attachment figure and do maternal tasks
• Field (1978) compared primary mothers and primary/ secondary fathers - fathers generally more playful but primary fathers especially do more maternal actions like smiling, grimacing, mimicing - flexible role

Question 12

Strange situation

Answer 12

Controlled observation in a room with some toys - observed infant in 3 minute episodes e.g mother and baby, stranger enters, mother leaves, etc
Recorded levels of proximity seeking, exploration, stranger anxiety, separation protest and reunion joy

Question 13

Insecure avoidant characteristics

Answer 13

All low but exploration high
treats caregiver and stranger similarly
i.e dont really care
20% rate

Question 14

Secure attachment characteristics

Answer 14

All medium but high reunion joy
Normal relationship - healthy
70% rate

Question 15

Insecure resistant attachment characteristics

Answer 15

High PS, SA, SP and low RJ and E
Very fussy and cry more
10% rate

Question 16

Strange situation eval

Answer 16

+ Standardised and controlled procedures so easily replicable
- Cultural bias on USA - eg in Germany children encouraged to be independent and not awarded for crying when mothers leave - less separation anxiety which incorrectly classes as insecure avoidant
+ Though multiple criteria reduces chances of that happening
- Validity questionable as subjective criteria - proximity seeking could suggest insecurity
- Gender biased as only mothers - attachment styles can differ with parent as found by Main and Weston (1981) so not accurate to overall attachment style
- Artificial so lacks ecological validity - behaviours much stronger in a lab environment than at home

Question 17

Van Ijzendoorn et al (1988)

Answer 17

meta-analysis of 32 strange situation studies across 8 countries

Question 18

SS meta analysis findings

Answer 18

Secure most common in all 8 - lowest China 50% highest GBR 75%
Collectivist cultures e.g Japan Israel had higher insecure resistant - Japan 27%
West Germany had high 35% insecure avoidant
Within country variations were 1.5x higher than between countries

Question 19

Cultural variations eval

Answer 19

+ Meta analysis so large sample valid
- Cultural bias as based on American ideals - e.g exploration may not be as positive in other cultures
- Israel infants lived in closed community - Kibbutz so would be more distressed with strangers hence classed as insecure resistant
- Japan mothers would take children everywhere with them so separation much more frightening - hence insecure resistant
- Sub cultural variations much higher but less accounted for e.g Tokyo findings similar to USA but rural Japan was much more insecure resistant
- All studies with mothers - not overall attachment but just to one individual - Main and Weston (1981) found attachment can be different depending on parent