Attachment - Why We Form Attachments Flashcards
What are the key points of Dollard and Miller’s learning theory of attachment?
- Importance of food
- Role of classical conditioning
- Baby learns that mother produces a sense of pleasure
- Role of operant conditioning
- Negative reinforcement
- Drive reduction
What is the importance of food?
This is sometimes called the ‘cupboard love’ explanation because it emphasises the importance of food in attachment formation. Children learn to love whoever feeds them.
What is the role of classical conditioning?
Classical conditioning involves learning to associate two stimuli. In attachment:
UCS (food) leads to UCR (a feeling of pleasure). This response is not learned so it is an unconditioned response.
How does a baby learn that their mother produces a sense of pleasure?
A caregiver (e.g. mother) starts as a NS, i.e. a thing that produces a neutral response.
This person providing food over time becomes associated with ‘food’. So the neutral stimulus becomes a CS.
Once conditioning has taken place, the sight of the caregiver produces a CR of pleasure. According to a learning theorist, this is the basis of attachment love.
What is the role of operant conditioning?
Operant conditioning explains why babies cry for comfort (an important building block for attachment).
Crying leads to a response from the caregiver (e.g. feeding). As long as the caregiver provides the correct response, crying is reinforced because it produces a pleasurable consequence.
How is negative reinforcement applied to attachment?
At the same time as the baby is reinforced for crying the caregiver receives negative reinforcement because the crying stops (negative reinforcement is escaping something unpleasant, which is reinforcing).
This interplay of positive/negative reinforcement strengthens an attachment.
What is drive reduction?
Hunger is a primary drive, an innate biological motivator. We are motivated to eat to reduce the hunger drive.
Attachment is a secondary drive learned by an association between the caregiver and the satisfaction of a primary drive. Sears et al. (1957) suggested that, as caregivers provide food, the primary drive of hunger becomes generalised to them.
What are the strengths of learning theory as explanations of attachment?
- some elements of conditioning could be involved
- a newer learning explanation based on social learning theory has come about
- support from Dollard and Miller (babies get fed over 2000 times in a year by caregivers, giving them plenty of opportunity to form an association between food and their caregiver)
What are the weaknesses of learning theory as explanations of attachment?
- animal studies provide evidence against food as the basis of attachment
- human research shows that feeding is not an important factor
- metapelets (Israel, fed in communal areas to allow mothers to work)
- the learning theory ignores other factors linked with attachment
Why is some elements of conditioning being involved a strength?
The main problem with learning theory is the idea that feeding provides the unconditioned stimulus, reinforcement or primary drive.
However, many aspects of human development are affected by conditioning so it seems plausible that it could still play a role in attachment (but not in relation to feeding).
For example, associations (classical conditioning) between the primary caregiver and provision of comfort and social interaction could be part of what builds attachment.
Why is there being new learning explanations based on social learning theory a strength?
Hay and Vespo (1988) suggest that parents teach children to love them by modelling attachment behaviours (e.g. hugging them and other family members).
And also by rewarding them with approval when they display their own attachment behaviours (‘that’s a lovely smile’, etc.).
In this version, babies have learned attachment behaviours as a result of their interactions, which fits with research on the importance of interactional synchrony and reciprocity.
This can be seen as a strength because the theory has been developed on and this is an alternative view, but also a weakness because the theory doesn’t stand as an explanation on its own. If SLT is one explanation, the capacity for imitation seems inborn so there is also likely to be an evolutionary/biological explanation. It is a combination of all these explanations that provide the most satisfactory explanation.
Why is animal studies providing evidence against food as the basis of attachment a weakness?
Lorenz’s imprinted geese maintained attachments regardless of who fed them. Harlow’s monkeys attached to a soft surrogate in preference to a wire one with milk.
In both these animal studies, attachment did not develop as a result of feeding.
The same must be true for humans (that food does not create the attachment bond). After all, learning theorists believe that non-human animals and humans are equivalent.
Why is human research showing that feeding is not an important factor a weakness?
Schaffer and Emerson (1964) showed that for many babies, a primary attachment was not to the person who fed them.
This shows that feeding is not key element to attachment and so there is no unconditioned stimulus or primary drive involved.
The evidence suggests that other factors are more important than food in the formation of attachment.
Why is the learning theory ignoring other factors linked with attachment a weakness?
Research shows that quality of attachment is associated with developing reciprocity and good levels of interactional synchrony.
Studies also show that the best quality attachments are with sensitive carers who pick up infant signals and respond appropriately.
It is very hard to reconcile these findings with the idea that attachment develops primarily through feeding.
Describe Dozier et al.’s study on attachment training.
Dozier et al. (2009) studies attachment training for foster carers. They suggest that when young children have had bad experiences of early relationships they may not seek reassurance from foster carers in the same way as children do from biological parents. Neither do foster carers necessarily offer reassurance like biological parents do. This means that there can be a failure of reciprocity in interactions, meaning that it can be hard for children and foster parents to form attachment. One way to tackle this problem is by attachment training.
Attachment training is an intervention that aims to help adult carers respond to child needs in such a way as to develop attachment. The idea is that because adult interactions may not be reinforced by children’s responses as they would be under different circumstances, they are often not repeated. Attachment training involves providing instruction and reinforcement in the form of praise and encouragement for the kind of adult interactions - such as comforting behaviour - that help build attachment. This often takes place with a trainer watching the carer interacting with the child through a two-way mirror and speaking to them via an ear-piece. Dozier et al. compared attachment training for foster carers with a standard education programme and found that after three days the attachment training group had better quality interactions with their foster children.
