Attachments

Question 1

Can you give examples of infant-caregiver interactions?

Answer 1

Reciprocity an interactional synchrony

Question 2

Can you identify 4 key behaviours that are associated with attachment?

Answer 2

• seeking proximity to PCG
• distress on separation
• pleasure when reunited
• general orientation of behaviour towards PCG

Question 3

Can you state what is meant by reciprocity?

Answer 3

How interactions between infant and mum are shown by responses to each others signals to each other and how these responses are drawn out

Question 4

Can you give examples of studies that demonstrate reciprocity?

Answer 4

1. Tronick et al:
   - Lab study
   - mum asked to stop interacting with her baby
   - found that babies wld get upset when mum failed to respond
   - demonstrates importance of interaction for baby’s happiness and that reciprocity essential to attachment formation
2. Papousek et al:
   - cross-cultural evidence
   - mothers tend to use rising tone to signal turn taking with baby
   - as occurs universally and in the same way (through turn taking) (across all human societies) suggest attachment = innate process

Question 5

Can you state what is meant by interactional synchrony?

Answer 5

Tendency for listener to move in time w speech of a speaker. There is some evidence that baby’s do this w mothers speech patterns.

Question 6

Can you give examples of studies that demonstrate interactional synchrony?

Answer 6

1. Condon and sander:
   - hypothesis that babies demonstrated interactional synchrony
   - supported by filming babies in cots while mum speaking
   - found w slow motion playback seen coordinating movements w mums speech
   - inference (therefore researcher bias as could not be observed by naked eye - comprises validity)
2. Conden and Ogston
   - finely synchronised features in adult convos
   - non-verbal cues that guided interactions
   - suggest rooted in early interactions particularly non-verbal aspects of communication

Question 7

Evaluate importance of reciprocity and interactional synchrony to attachment

Answer 7

• evidence synchrony does exist and more easily observed in slightly older infants who move in time to music as well
• maybe Conden and Sander to optimistic occurring so early
• Interactional synchrony provide foundation for effective reciprocal behaviour btw baby and mother
• through coordinating movements w mothers speech, baby learns mums habitual speech pattters
• enabled to predict when mum stops talking in anticipation fo a response
• forms effective turn taking (reciprocity)

Question 8

Can you describe the stages of attachment, as identified by Schaffer & Emerson?

Answer 8

(An Idiot Shot Me)

1. Asocial (0-6 weeks)
   - pre attachment
   - babies will respond to any stimulus in exact same way (no preference +equal enthusiasm)
2. Indiscriminate (6 weeks - 6months)
   - same but only humans
3. Specific (7-8 months)
   - preference expressed by behaviour (difference in response)
4. Multiple (9-10months)
   - relationships w variety of people within everyday encounters
   - does show preference for specific attachment figure

Question 9

Can you evaluate Schaffer & Emerson’s study?

Answer 9

AO1:
- 60 Glasgow babies - investigate formation of attachments until 18 months old
Observational and interview techniques to observe babies behaviour to stranger and interview about various situations e.g babysitting (0-3 ‘no protest shown’ - ‘ cries everytime’)
Found:
- most show separation anxiety around 6-8 months (indicating attachment formed)
- fear of strangers a month later
- after first attachment most developed multiple

People first attachment:
65% - mother
3% father
27% joint attachment
Almost 40% cases attachment figure not main carer

Therefore attachments loosely linked to age

AO3:

1. High eco validity as observed in homes under normal circumstances; presence of stranger not unusual due to visitors
2. High internal val - babies dont respond to demain characteristics so genuine behaviour; BUT l’audit carers may alter behaviour when observer present and use rating scale in relation to what think researchers want to see - compromising
3. Self-report measures - rating scale may provide confounding variable as subjective - some mothers may rate same experience differently to other

Question 10

Can you evaluate Schaffer & Emerson’s stages of attachment theory?

Answer 10

• multiple attachments doesn’t necessarily imply shallower feeling toward each one
• Carpenter show 2 awkward old belies look away in distress when mothers face and voice don’t match - suggest don’t respond equally (question asocial stage)
• Bushnell et al - 2 day old babies looked longer at mother face - suggest innate ability to recognise mothers face but don’t know why

Question 11

Can you outline the role of the father in the development of attachment?

Answer 11

• increasing tendency for both parents to work and share childcare in West - interest to research if child attachment different from mother
• father usually the first joint attachment figure
• behavioural style of fathers:
  More likely to encourage risk taking
  Encourage children to be brave
  Structure talk around active play
• these suggest different factors involved that would accounts for differences in attachment type to mother and to father

Question 12

Can you evaluate the role of the father in the development of attachment?

Answer 12

1. Heerman et al:
   - less sensitive to infant cues
   (Frodi et al - physiological response same (anxiety) - observing behaviour may not provide accurate account of how parent feels)
   BUT Roopnarine:
   - found not true in all societies
   - cultural stereotypes that affect male behaviour
2. White and Wollet:
   - lack of sensitivity from father = positive as encourages to respond to challenges and allow to learn through trial and error, independently and in a safe environment
   - suggest why toddlers for more secure attachment to fathers
3. Verisimilitude et al:
   Quality of relationship w father more important in later popularity at school
   - suggest children learn more abt positive interactions from father

Question 13

Can you describe Lorenz’s imprinting study

Answer 13

• establish if imprinting innate or learned
• Greylag Goslings
• give half goose eggs to goose mother and half hatched in incubator - making sure Lorenz first moving object goslings encountered
  -imitated mother ducks quack sound
• to ensure imprinting occurred - put all goslings together in box (allowed to mix) when box removed, 2 groups separated half to goose and half to Lorenz
• imprinting cannot be reversed
• suggests critical period (36hrs) and if did not occur, survival was impossible

Question 14

Can you describe Harlow’s study on the theory of love (and privation)?

Answer 14

• reasons why babies form attachments
• orphaned rhesus monkeys, raised in cages by themselves
• soft surrogate mothers: always preferred compared to wire even if had food/ if fear object introduced (bear banging drum); clung onto harder and for longer to in abuse condition (jet of compressed air)
• if no soft surrogate, cower in corner
• heated pad (warmth) not factor in clinging behaviour
  Conclude:
• attachments for reasons other than physical survival
• formed because like contact comfort - find more reassurance when frightened
• abusing mothers provide more comfort though

Question 15

Can you evaluate Lorenz’s imprinting study and the outcomes of this?

Answer 15

1. Guitton:
   - fed chicks using yellow rubber gloves during critical period (which they imprinted on)
   - suggests imprint on any moving thing present during
   - chick later found trying to mate w glove
   - suggests long term consequences of sexual imprinting - provides guidance in rearing of endangered species of animals (not compromised and no negative impact of carrying on of species) - this can be achieved using costumes and puppets
   - imprinting is a survival mechanism
2. Hess
   - ducklings prefer male mallard to silent adult female
   - suggests imprinting mechanisms more complex than first suggested - involving sound and movement
   - visual not as important
3. Research conducted into imprinting on animals only yields insights into v basic mechanisms of human attachmetn formation
   - sexual imprinting as LT consequence lead to suggestion that attachment and experience of it of early childhood provides blueprint for future relationship development
   - BUT human experience involves far more complex influences than animal imprinting. Therefore invalidated as lack this. Phylogenetic scale

Question 16

Can you evaluate Harlow’s study on the theory of love and the outcomes of this?

Answer 16

1. Evolutionary continuity:
   - more insights into human attachments as further up phylogenic scale
   - more valuable than just imprinting
   - however still limited as behavioural preparedness (e.g monkeys do not understand language like human babies so that level of interaction cannot be studied)
2. Ethical issues:
   - so unethical that cannot be replicated
   - however positive impacts: e.g death rate reduced in hospitals and children’s homes as carers make sure children not only supplied with basics but also exposure to socialisation and opportunities to play e.g chat to premature children in incubators
3. Social sensitivity
   - although unethics - provided enough insights into effects of abuse
   - social workers - extra clinging as indicator of potential abuse rather than safe attachment for child

Question 17

Can you describe the process of classical conditioning?

Answer 17

• bond formation based of ASSOCIATION of satisfaction with a stimulus as children born w reflex reactions of hunger, thirst and desire to be fed - link to provider

Stage 1. UCS -> UCR response)
Stage 2. NS (neutral) + UCS -> UCR
Stage 3. CS -> CR (stop crying)

BUT over simplified:
- association can not be with food e.g cuddles, familiar w mums voice (womb)
- feeding produced good feeling so also involves element of reward

Question 18

Can you describe the process of operant conditioning?

Answer 18

• learning through consequences of own behaviour

Positive reinforcement: performing of behaviour results in reward e.g baby cried for attention/ food, mum does this, baby learns to cry for this

Negative reinforcement: performing of behaviour results in removal of unpleasant state e.g baby cries as has sore tummy as it is hungry, mum feeds, baby will cry to stop sore tummy

Punishment: behaviour results in unpleasant outcome/ no change e.g baby cries, ignored so doesn’t cry again (explains why babies where famine usually passive even though dying)

Question 19

Can you link operant conditioning to the drive reduction theory?

Answer 19

Dollard and Miller:
- biological need for food
- satisfaction of drive produces reward
- accompanied w mum - secondary drive through association w drive reduction.
- this links both to explain development of attachments

Question 20

Can you describe social learning theory?

Answer 20

Behaviour seen to be rewarded copied whereas behaviour seen to be punished not

Direct instruction: reinforcement when child behaves in required way (e.g give mummy a kiss)

Modelling: child imitate affectionate behaviour shown by parent (e.g giving child hug)

Social facilitation: parents watch behaviour then correct/ change (e.g if hits then explain why should not do it)

Question 21

Can you evaluate ‘Learning Theory’ as an explanation of why attachments form?

Answer 21

1. cupboard love (physical survival) and Harlow’s research
   - research suggests cannot be used to explain all attachments
   - monkeys only went to wire ‘food’ surrogate for food and then returned to soft
   - can forms for reasons other than cupboard love
   - contact comfort suggests of their sources of reinforcement for infants of more complex species
2. Reductionism:
   - Reduce sources of behaviour to stimulus response = work well as response for basic
   - fail when applied to learning of complex behaviours and feeling e.g those that come w attachment btw baby and mum
   - only works for children w level of cognitive processing that v tiny babies do not have
3. Nature/ Nurture debate
   - reject any innate influences as sources of behaviour
   - attachments formation like behaviours - learned through environmental influences and processes associated w classical, opperant and social learning.
   - goes agains Bowlby’s theory (suggested innate process)

Question 22

Can you describe Bowlby’s monotropic attachment theory (why & how attachments form, the consequences of attachment)?

Answer 22

Why and how:
Innate social releasers: innate mechanisms babies capable of performing and adults instinctively respond by providing care e.g big eyes, cooing, crying

Consequences:
Monotropic: attachment to single person (mother)

Internal working model: quality of first bond w PGC results in formation of this. Blueprint which all relationships based . Good relationship w mum results in healthy strong friendships and romantic relationship

Question 23

Can you evaluate ‘Monotropic Attachment Theory’ as an explanation of why attachments form?

Answer 23

1. Innate social releasers:
   Brazleton et al (reciprocity research):
   - supports because found even newborns could participate in reciprocal communications w adult caregiver
   - unlikely any time to learn behaviours as so young
   BUT, Conden and Sanders (Learning Theory):
   - found babies demonstrate interactional synchrony w mums speech patterns (womb)
   - suggest some influence of learning before birth
2. Monotropy:
   Bowlby:
   - 44 thieves study
   - found children who had PCG attachment disrupted before 5 years old
   - more likely develop serious mental disorder and end up breaking law than not been separated
   - highlight importance of attachment to mum
   BUT: shaffer and Emerson
   - found babies formed multiple attachments by age 11 months
   However… babies also seemed to have one preferred attachment figure SO not monotropic but one particular attachment preferred
3. Hasan, shaver, black, schutte:
   - found early attachment positively correlated to romantic love style
   BUT: Erickson (appendix 2)
   - concept too deterministic
   - human relationships too complex and flexible than suggested
   - bad can be modified by good experiences later e.g adopted child w poor relationship w PCG can recover if adoptive parents provide warm, caring environment

Question 24

Can you describe the stages of Ainsworth’s ‘Strange Situation’?

Answer 24

• categorise children’s behaviour with their caregiver

Strange situation: 7 episodes lasted 3 mins each
- mother and infant enter room
- stranger enters room
- mother leaves
- mother returns, stranger leaves
- mother leaves
- stranger returns
- mother returns, stranger leaves

• measured child’s response when mother left room, response to stranger, reaction when mother returns

Question 25

Can you describe what differences would be observed during the Strange Situation in infants with each of the three types of attachment?

Answer 25

A (insecure C (insecure
avoidant) B (secure) resistant)
Separation Little/no Moderate Huge
behaviour: reaction distress Distress

Reunion Little effort to Require + Resist
behaviour: make contact accept comfort
(Don’t require comfort
comfort)

Stranger Little Moderate Huge
anxiety:

Exploration: freely Happily Less
Doesnt seek Proximity + Seek
proximity Secure base greater
Behaviour proximity

Question 26

Can you describe results, including the identification of three ‘attachment types’?

Answer 26

• type of attachment depends of sensitivity of caregiver

Insecure avoidant - ignores mother, not upset when leaves, avoid contact, mother and stranger similar (15% of American children)

Secure - child plays happily, distressed when leaves, comforted by return, happy contact but treat different (70% American infants)

Insecure resistant - not content in company, distressed when leaves, difficult comfort in return, resist contact w mum and stranger (15% American children)

Question 27

Can you evaluate the method of Ainsworth’s Strange Situation as a study?

Answer 27

1. Ecological val
   Low, lab experiment, not in og home environment
   BUT babies encounter strangers
2. Ethnocentricity:
   Based on expectations on mother and child behaviour in US and UK - provide pejorative view from other countries that may differ
3. Reliability
   Controlled environment, Good inter-rater reliability as behavioural categories easy to observe and general agreement btw researchers on what to classify
   However, Main and Solomon did find type D which incorporates elements of type a and c

Question 28

Can you evaluate the outcomes of the Strange Situation?

Answer 28

1. Temperament:
   Thomas and Chess - ‘difficult’ and ‘slow to warm up’ babies harder to cope with - suggest not one way process - e.g some prefer cuddling, others don’t. Also factor that determines type of attachment formed.
2. Emotional availability:
   Quality of emotional interactions and how well mum understands emotional needs and respond
   - enhancement however, if mum does this, may be variations in how converts feelings and may also influence quality of attachment
3. Cultural and societal differences in attachment types
   S’agit-il, van Ijzendoorn and Korean-Karie found:
   Israel, USA, japan and Germany different societal expectations and culture so as based on USA provide pejorative view.

Question 29

Can you identify why attachment might vary across different cultures? (Can you describe the Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg study, including the results?)

Answer 29

USA: 71% secure, 12% resistant

Israel: 62% secure, 5% avoidant - children brought up in communes where looked after by adults not related to

Japan:

Germany:

Question 30

Can you describe the Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg study, including the results?

Question 31

Can you describe similarities and differences in attachment type between different cultures, and explain these differences?

Question 32

Can you evaluate the importance of cultural variations in attachment?

Question 33

Can you explain the difference between separation, deprivation and privation?

Question 34

Can you outline Bowlby’s ‘Maternal Deprivation Theory’ and the critical period that has been proposed?

Question 35

Can you describe Bowlby’s 44 Thieves study, and the outcomes of this?

Question 36

Can you evaluate Bowlby’s 44 thieves study?

Question 37

Can you evaluate Maternal Deprivation as a theory?

Question 38

Can you describe the effects of institutionalisation on a child’s development?

Question 39

Can you outline Rutter & Sonuga-Barke’s ERA study, and state the findings so far?

Question 40

Can you give examples of the findings of other studies that investigate the effects of institutionalisation?

Question 41

Can you evaluate the effects of institutionalisation?