Attatchement Flashcards
what is attachment
- an emotional bond between 2 people, e.g child and primary caregiver
- the bond has to be a two way process that endures over time- lasts forever
define the term reciprocity
- responding to an action with another action ( response doesn’t have to be mirrored)
- e.g tickling- laughing
- ‘turn taking’ - respond to one another
define the term interactional synchrony
- when two people interact with each other they tend to mirror one another’s facial and body movements. This can include imitating emotions as well as behaviour
what experiment did Meltzoff + Moore propose (reciprocity)
- they wanted to investigate reciprocity between infants and their caregivers
- controlled observation
- used 6 babies (12-27 days)
- 12 babies (16-21 days)
- model displaced 1 of 3 expressions (tongue out, mouth open, pursed lips)
- dummy was removed and babies expression was filmed
- results found babies young as 2 weeks showed an association between the expression or gesture
what are the weaknesses of Meltzoff and Moore’s research into infant and caregiver interaction (interactional synchrony)
1) lacks internal validity, don’t know if infant activity is genuine or if it’s a random outburst of behaviour
counter point: research shows infants made little response with stimulating objects suggesting they have a specific social response to humans
2) development importance- observing behaviour doesn’t tell us its importance. Therefore unsure if reciprocity and synchrony are important for a child’s development
counter point: Isabella et al found achievement of interactional synchrony predicted development of good quality attachment
what is a strength of Meltzoff and Moore’s research into infant and caregiver interaction (interactional synchrony)
Filmed observations:
- usually filmed in a lab, other activity that may distract child can be controlled
- researchers are unlikely to miss key behaviours
- more than one researcher can observe, baby doesn’t know they are being observed
- reliability and validity are increased
what are the 4 stages of attachment proposed by Shaffer + Emerson
stage 1- asocial stage, baby doesn’t care who caregiver is, responds to all (0-3 months)
stage 2- indiscriminate attachment, learns to distinguish primary and secondary caregiver, prefer familiar ppl, still accepts care from anyone (2-7 months)
stage 3- specific attachment, looks to particular figures for security, shows stranger + separation anxiety, formation of attachment to specific caregiver (7-9 months)
stage 4- multiple attachments, baby is able to form several attachments and becomes independent, separation anxiety can occur when separated from secondary attachments (9months onwards)
what are the weaknesses of the stages of attachment by Shaffer + Emerson
1) unreliable: data is based on mothers reports, social desirability, want to be seen in a positive light, some mothers may have been more or less sensitive to child’s distress
- subjective observers
2) biased sample, only used families from working class in Glasgow (individualistic culture) so findings may not apply to other socioeconomic and cultural groups
3) lacks temporal validity, data was collected in 1960’s, parental care has changed since then
- fewer mothers stay at home, more ‘blended’ families, many children have wider, extended families to attach to
what are the strengths of the stages of attachment by Shaffer + Emerson
1) has external validity, observations were made during ordinary activities and reported to researchers
- means highly likely that the participants behaved naturally while being observed, babies weren’t distracted from unfamiliar researchers
2) real world application- applied to daycare settings, parents can use stages of attachment to help development of child
- avoid putting in daycare around 7 months due to likelihood of child being in specific attachment phase
what did Lorenz(1935) find in his Geese study
-through imprinting, the goslings followed Lorenz around, and the control group followed their real mother.
- sexual imprinting, choose to mate with same object they imprinted with
Whats a strength of Lorenz’s geese study
(strength with counterpoint)
- Guiton et al imprinted new-born chicken onto yellow rubber gloves, As theory predicts, they tried to mate with the gloves
- However, imprinting may not be permanent as Guiton found when the chickens socialised with other chickens they were able to engage in normal social behaviour, so imprinting is reversible.
Explain Harlow’s monkey study with findings
- observed rhesus monkeys
- suggested attachment is not based on a ‘feeding bond’ as predicted by the learning theory, rather formed through being comforted
- 2 monkeys, one wrapped in soft cloth, the other in plain wire with milk bottle
- saw how monkey’s reacted to being scared
- monkeys spent longer with soft cloth when scared regardless where milk bottle was
- therefore, monkeys don’t form attachments with figure who feeds them, but to the one offering contact comfort
- both groups developed abnormally, however ones with the ‘plain wire’ mother were most dysfunctional
- Harlow suggested a critical period, those who socialised with other monkeys before 3 months showed abnormal behaviours could be reversed, those who spent more than 6 months couldn’t recover
What are weaknesses of Harlow’s monkey study
1) confounding variables: head shape of monkey was different, soft cloth looked more realistic to a monkey. Decreases internal validity as no longer measuring what intended to measure, attached to head shape instead
2) can’t generalise to humans: can’t say for certain that humans will react in the same way, humans are more complex than monkeys so can’t extrapolate findings
3) ethical issues: research cause severe and everlasting damage to animals, found it difficult to form relationships with other monkeys
what did Shaffer and Emerson find on primary attachment with the role of the father
- only 3% of cases the father was the primary caregiver
- in 27% of the cases the father was joint first with the mother
- by 18 months of age, 75% of infants had formed an attachment to their father
What did Grossmann find in his longitudinal study (role of father in attachment)
- looked into both parent’s behaviour and its relationship with to the child’s quality of attachment into their teens
- quality of a baby’s attachment with mothers but not fathers was related to attachments in adolescence
- suggests that attachment to fathers is less important than attachments to mothers
- therefore fathers may be less important for long-term emotional development
- however he also found that he quality of fathers’ play with the baby was related to quality of attachment, suggesting that fathers have a different role from mothers, one is more to do with play and stimulation rather than emotional development
why aren’t fathers said to be suitable to be primary caregivers
1) not psychologically equipped, less oestrogen in men which plays a role in interpersonal skills
2) biological- men are less receptive and sensitive to the needs of an infant, hormonal differences e.g women have more oestrogen than males meaning they are naturally more sensitive to the needs of an infant
3) fathers are ‘playmates’ not caregivers
what is research support for the idea that fathers are not caregivers they are ‘playmates’ (Geiger)
- Geiger found that a fathers play interactions were more exciting in comparison to a mothers
- the mothers were more affectionate and nurturing
what is research support for the idea that fathers are not psychologically/biologically/socially equipped for nurturing attachment
- Hrdy found that fathers were less able to detect levels of infant distress compared to mothers
- fathers aren’t capable of showing sensitive responses so aren’t equipped
- also less oestrogen
What are the assumptions of the Learning Theory in attachment
- children are born as ‘blank slates’, experience is key to learning
- children attach to caregiver bc caregiver is provider of food
-we learn to form an attachment through classical and operant conditioning based on food. - the baby forms an association between mother (NS) and pleasure of being fed (UCR)
- results happiness when mother is present
what is the role of operant conditioning in the Learning theory of attachment
- if behaviour produced pleasant consequence, behaviour will be repeated
- e.g baby is fed and feels pleasure (reward)
- behaviour that led baby being fed is likely to be repeated by the behaviour e.g crying
- food reinforces behaviour
- attachment to caregiver occurs because baby is seeking the reward
what does the drive reduction theory suggest in the Learning Theory
- hunger is a primary drive, an innate biological motivator. We are motivated to eat to reduce the hunger drive
what is are weaknesses of the Learning Theory
1) counter evidence-Shaffer + Emerson found that infants were more attached to adults who were more responsive to them.
- the infants didn’t attach to those that fed them or spent the most time with them, but those who were most responsive.
2) Fox (1977), studied 122 children and raised them in a nursing home, allowing them to see their parents 1hr per day, the nurses were responsible for feeding them. Found that children were strongly attached to their parents and had a weaker attachment with the nurses. Suggests attachment isn’t because of feeding and has more of an innate explanation
what are the stages of Bowlby’s monotropic theory (ASCMI)
-adaptive: attachment is an innate system that gives us a survival advantage
- social releasers: ‘unlocking’ innate tendency of adults to care for them. Physical : baby face, cooing
- critical period: have to form an attachment within first 2 and a half years
- monotropy: infants form a special attachment with their mother or mother substitute
-internal working model: mental schema for relationships based attachment in childhood, secure relationships, stronger relationships
what are the strengths and weaknesses of Bowlby’s theory of attachment
1) weakness of monotropy: Shaffer + Emerson study of 60 Glaswegian infants which showed that 1 third of children formed multiple attachments rather than specific ones
2) strength of IWM: Hazan and Shaver: found adults romantic attachments were closely linked to infant attachments, secure= secure romantic attachments
- strength of IWM: Baily et al observed 99 mothers and their child’s attachment type using strange situation. Those with insecure attachments matched the attachment of the mothers with their own parents
Explain the steps of the strange situation
- The caregiver enters a room, places the child on the floor and sits on a chair. The caregiver does not interact with the child unless the infant seeks attention.
- A stranger enters the room, talks to the caregiver and then approaches the child with a
toy. - The caregiver exits the room. If the infant plays the stranger observes without interruption.
If the child is passive, the stranger attempts to interest them in the toy. If they show
distress the stranger attempts to comfort them. - The caregiver returns while the stranger then leaves.
- Once the infant begins to play again, the caregiver may
leave the room, leaving the child alone briefly. - The stranger enters the room again and repeats behaviour mentioned in step 3
(observing, engaging, comforting as needed) - The stranger leaves and the caregiver returns.
The “strange situation” places the child in a mildly
stressful situation in order to observe 4 different
types of behaviour which are separation anxiety,
stranger anxiety, willingness to explore and reunion behaviour with the caregiver.
what 3 attachment types did Ainsworth identify after the Strange Situation
- secure attachment (70%)
- insecure avoidant (15%)
- insecure resistant (15%)
describe a secure attachment type in the stages of the strange situation
mother present- uses mother as secure base to explore
mother leaves- distressed
stranger enters- avoidant, but friendly when mother present
mother returns- happy and content
describe insecure avoidant in the stages of the strange situation
mother present- child is comforted with mother and also stranger
mother leaves- no distress
stranger enters- infant is okay, plays normally
mother returns- infant shows little interest
describe insecure resistant in the stages of the strange situation
mother present- cries more and explores less
mother leaves- intense distress
stranger enters- avoids stranger
mother returns- resists contact with mother
what are the strengths of the strange situation
- predictive validity- attachment predicts later development in relationships, therefore can predict what will happen in the future
- very good inter-rater reliability- different observers watching same children generally agree on attachment type. Bick at al (2012) found 94% agreement in one team. May be as Strange situation is under controlled conditions so behavioural categories are easy to observe, confidence that attachment types aren’t subjective
what are weaknesses of the strange situation
- may be cultural-bound- may not have same meaning in countries outside Europe and USA. Cultural differences in children’s experiences mean they respond differently. E.g Japanese babies may show anxiety because they are not used to being left by caregiver (Takahashi 1986). Isn’t applicable to other countries, lacks generalisability, culture bias
- Lacks ecological validity- infants placed in a strange and artificial environment
- episodes taken place are unlikely to happen irl, some infants may be wrongly classified reducing validity of findings
define inter-cultural differences and intra-cultural differences
- inter-cultural: differences between different countries and cultures
- intra-cultural: differences within the same countries and cultures
Explain Van Ijzendoorn + Kroonenberg’s study on cultural variations in attachment
- conducted a meta-analysis of 32 strange situation studies from 8 countries (UK, US, Sweden, Japan, China, Holland, Germany and Israel), interested in how cultural variations effect the development of a child and their behaviour
Findings: secure attachment, most common
-Germany, highest insecure avoidant, individualistic culture
-Japan + Israel, highest insecure resistant, collectivist culture
-intra-cultural variations within cultures were 1.5 times greater than between inter-cultural - support idea that secure attachment is required for healthy social and emotional development, and that attachment is an innate process
what is a strength of Van Ijzgendoorn + Kroonenberg’s study
- High reliability- studies used the Strange Situation as a way of classifying attachment
- comparisons made using a standardised procedure
- high reliability to findings
- also large sample size increases reliability
what are the weaknesses of Van Ijzgendoorn + Kroonenberg’s study
- using a test designed in one culture (an imposed etic), may be biased towards British/American culture, based on british theory so may not be applicable to other cultures. May be meaningless to compare attachment behaviours across countries
However, supports Bowlby’s evolutionary theory as the reason for similar patterns is because attachment is innate. - Alternative explanation for similarities in cultures- cross cultural similarities may be due to the mass media. Books, TV programmes are broadcasted across the world and may create parenting norms and therefore similarities in child caring norms have become more common due to media as opposed to innate attachment
what did Grossman + Grossman find (cultural variations in attachment)
-German infants tended to be classified as insecurely rather than securely attached
-German culture involves keeping same interpersonal distance between parent + child, so infant does not engage in proximity seeking behaviours, in strange situation this was deemed as insecurely attached
what are Takahash’s findings when studying 60 Japanese infants (cultural variations in attachment)
- found secure attachment but no insecure avoidant
- Japanese infants were extremely distressed at being left alone, 90% of the studies were stopped at this point
- in Japan infants rarely experience separation from their mothers, thus showed high levels of distress in the Strange situation and were deemed as insecurely attached
what is maternal deprivation in Bowlby’s theory of maternal deprivation
- separation between a caregiver and a child
- consequences can be emotional and intellectual
- there are long term effects of prolonged separation from primary caregiver
what does Bowlby mean by critical period under maternal deprivation
- first two years of a child’s life are a critical period in emotional and psychological development
-a young child may become emotionally disturbed if they are denied emotional care because of frequent or prolonged separations if within the critical period of 2 and a half years and if there is no substitute mother figure - long term damage can be avoided if there is a mother sub, separation need not result in deprivation
what may be consequences of maternal deprivation
- inability to form attachments in the future (IWM)
- affectionless psychopathy (unable to feel remorse)
- delinquency (behavioural problems in child’s teenage years)
- problems with cognitive (brain) development
explain the 44 Thieves study by Bowlby on the effects of maternal deprivation
- Bowlby studied 88 children who were emotionally maladjusted
- 44 were accused of stealing, 44 made up the control group
- all thieves were interviewed for signs of being affectionless psychopaths, families were also interviewed to see whether the thieves had prolonged periods of seperation
- found that 14 of the 44 thieves were affectionless psychopaths, of these, 12 (87%) had experienced prolonged periods of separation in first 2 years of lives
- 40% of thieves group had experienced early separation
- in control group only two had experienced prolonged separation
What is the difference between separation and deprivation
- separation is when the child is not in the presence of their primary attachment figure
- deprivation refers to a lack of emotional care (can happen when caregiver is present)
- separation doesn’t have a significant effect on child as long as infant has a substitute caregiver who can offer emotional care
- extended separations can lead to deprivation which can cause emotional and developmental harm
what are the weaknesses of maternal deprivation
- Researcher bias, sources of evidence are flawed, in 44 thieves study Bowlby himself assessed derivation and psychopathy knowing what he hoped to find. Therefore no evidence to base his theory off
- Bowlby confused deprivation and privation. Rutter (1981) contended that some boys were moved so much in infancy that they never really had the chance to form an attachment so the issue is privation rather than maternal deprivation
- critical period is more of a sensitive period- Czech twins were isolated from 18 months (locked in cupboard), later they were found and were looked after by loving adults and by age of 14 showed normal social and intellectual functioning and could form attachments
what are the effects of institutionalisation
- Physical underdevelopment-deprivation dwarfism
- Delayed intellectual development (low IQ)
- disinhibited attachment- attention seeking and overfriendliness to anyone
- lack of internal working model- don’t know how to form an attachment, poor parenting in the future
- Lack of emotional development
explain Rutter’s study - Romanian orphan study, institutionalisation
- 165 Romanian orphans (4,6,11,15) assessed at regular intervals
- results compared to 50 adopted British children (control group)
Findings: - majority of orphans had delayed IQ levels compared to British, they were smaller, weighed less and classified as mentally retarded - adopted before 6 months- IQ 102
- adopted after 2 years - IQ 77 and disinhibited attachment
- by age of 4, some orphans caught up to the British, only true if adopted before 6 months
explain Zeanah’s study on the strange situation and Romanian orphans
- studied 95 Romanian children who spent 90% of their lives in institutions, control group 50 Romanian children never been in an institution
Findings:
secure attachment - control group= 74%,
institutionalised= 19%
disinhibited attachment - control group= 20%
institutionalised= 44%
what are the strengths on Romanian orphan research
- real world application- apply understanding to improve lives of children placed in care, points out the importance of early adoption
- longitudinal studies- without we would have concluded that there are major effects on infants due to institutionalisation , but we now they they have the ability to recover if adopted before 6 months
However, a problem was the attrition rate, 20% of orphans used their right to withdraw from study meaning we can’t be completely conclusive
what are the weaknesses on Romanian orphan research
- confounding variables- due to quality of care being so poor, it makes it hard to separate effects of institutional care from those of poor institutional care. E.g multiple children slept in one cot, rat infestation and no access to medicine, lack of physical care
- Data wasn’t followed into adulthood, raises qs about long term impacts of institutionalisation
explain Hazan and Shaver’s study on the influence of early attachment on childhood and adult relationships (love quiz)
- designed a ‘love quiz’ asking questions about current attachment to identify attachment type
- analysed 620 responses, 205 from men, 415 from women
- secure responders (56%) relationships were reported as positive and enduring (10 years +), were happy and trusting experiences
- avoidant responders- tended to be jealous and fear intimacy
- supports concept that the internal working model has a lifelong effect on attachment and relationships
what are the weaknesses of Hazan and Shaver’s love quiz study on attachment
- Lacks validity- using a questionnaire could introduce social desirability as ppl may lie to protect their carers and hide what they believe, so aren’t truly measuring IWM
- Association does not mean causation- third influencing factor could be parenting style or innate personality, can’t be entirely sure it is infant attachment and not another factor
- deterministic- Clarke + Clarke describe the influence of infant attachment on later relationships as deterministic. Ppl aren’t always doomed to have bad relationships because they had attachment problems. They just have greater chance of encountering problems. Unreliable and can be damaging to individuals
how does the internal working model affect adulthood as a parent
- affects ability to parent their own children in the future
- base their own parenting style from IWM so attachment type tends to be passed from one generation to the next
explain Bailey’s study as a strength of early attachment- relationships in adulthood as a parent
- studied the attachment of 99 mothers to their babies and to their own mothers
- mother & baby attachment was assessed using the strange situation, mother & mother was assessed in an interview
- the majority of mothers had the same attachment with their mothers and their babies
- supports idea of continuity, IWM that we develop in response to our first attachment contain our perceptions of what a normal relationship looks like
A01
Explain research carried out by Shaffer and Emerson on the development of attachments
- 60 Glaswegian babies
- analysed interactions between infants and carers, mother kept a diary to track the infants behaviours based
- interviewed caregivers
- assessed separation and stranger anxiety
- longitudinal study and naturalistic observation
- found that those carers who had ‘sensitive responsiveness’ to babies needs were more likely to have formed an attachment
- 87% formed an attachment with at least 2 adult figures, supporting multiple attachment
A03
What is a strength of Schaffer and Emerson’s study on the development of attachment
1) high ecological validity- study was a naturalistic observation
A03
What is a weakness of Schaffer and Emerson’s study on the development of attachments
1) results may have been prone to social desirability bias, as carers were interviewed, may not have wanted to seem like bad parents with a lack of secure attachment with their child
A01
Explain Lorenz’s geese study
- randomly split goose eggs into two groups, one left in natural habitat with mother (control group)
- one placed in incubator (experimental group)
- for the incubator eggs, first thing they saw moving was Lorenz
- found that the control group followed their natural mother and experimental group followed Lorenz as they had imprinted on him
- Lorenz identified a critical period of 13 to 16 hours
A03
What is a weakness of Lorenz’s geese study
1) cannot be generalised to humans, attachment in humans is different to birds
- attachment in humans is a two way process ( formed by reciprocity and interactional synchrony)
- however birds can imprint onto inanimate objects meaning it’s a one way relationship
A01
Explain the role of classical conditioning as part of the learning theory of attachment
- developed through association of stimuli
- UCS (food), UCR (salivation) don’t have to learn to feel hunger or salivate, it’s a reflex action
- known as ‘cupboard love’ theory
- caregiver starts as NS, food is UCS, baby’s response e.g crying, smiling, banging chair is the UCR
- caregiver provides food overtime they become associated with the food
- the NS is paired with the UCS
- baby expects food when they see their caregiver, emits their usual response (crying)
- NS has become CS met by the babies CR
A01
Explain the influence of early attachment on childhood relationships (as well as adult relationships)
- securely attached infants tend to form healthy anf functional friendships during childhood
- also more popular and empathetic children, meaning higher development of emotional/social skills
- securely attached children are unlikely to be involved in incidences of bullying, either victims or bullies
- insecure avoidant- likely to be victims of bullying
- insecure resistant- more likely to be bullies
A01
How can mental health also be affected by a persons internal working model
- lack of attachment during child’s infancy and their critical period may lead to a poor internal working model
- can lead to a mental health condition called attachment disorder characterised by
- lack of a preferred attachment figure
- inability to interact functionally with others
- experiences of severe neglect
- frequent change of caregivers (e.g in foster care)
