Bowlby's theory of maternal deprivation Flashcards
What’s Bowlby’s theory of Maternal deprivation?
Bowlby proposed that continuous care from a mother is essential for normal psychological development, and that prolonged separation from this adult causes serious damage to emotional and intellectual development.
Compare separation Vs deprivation
Separation means the child not being in the presence of the primary attachment figure. This only becomes an issue for development if the child is deprived - extended separations can lead to deprivation which by definition causes harm.
Bowlbys definition of the critical period
Saw the first 30 months of life as a critical period for psychological development. If the child is deprived of a mothers emotional care for an extended period during this time then psychological damage was inevitable.
Bowlby’s 44 thieves study aim
examined the link between affectionless psychopathy and maternal deprivation
what are the two effects maternal deprivation has on development
intellectual development- e.g Goldfarb found lower IQ in children who had remained in institutions as opposed to those who were fostered and thus had a higher standard of emotional care.
Emotional development- Bowlby identified affectionless psychopathy as the inability to feel guilt or strong emotions for others. This prevents the person from developing normal relationships and is associated with criminality
Bowlby’s 44 thieves study procedure
44 criminal teenagers accused of stealing. All ‘thieves’ were interviewed for signs of affectionless psychopathy: characterised as a lack of affection, guilt and empathy. Their families were also interviewed in order to establish whether the ‘thieves’ had prolonged early separation from their mothers. A control group of non-criminals but emotionally disturbed young people was set up to see how often maternal deprivation occurred in the children who were not thieves.
Bowlby’s 44 thieves study findings
14/44 thieves could be described as affectionless psychopathy . Of this 14, 12 had experienced prolonged separation from their mothers in the first 2 years of their lives. IN contrast, only 5 out of the remaining 30 thieves had experienced separations. Of the control group only 2/44 had experienced long separations. It was concluded that prolonged early separation caused affectionless psychopathy.
AO3- counter evidence
Not all research has supported Bowlby’s findings. Hilda Lewis partially replicated the 44 thieves study on a larger scale, looking at 500 young people. In her sample a history of early prolonged separation from the mother didn’t predict criminality or difficulty forming close relationships. This is a problem for the theory of maternal deprivation bc it suggests that other factors may affect the outcomes of early maternal deprivation.
AO3- Animal studies show effects of maternal deprivation
Although most psychologists are very critical of the maternal deprivation theory, an interesting line of research has provided some support for the idea that maternal deprivation can have long term effects. Levy et al. showed that separating baby rats from their mother as little as a day had a permanent effect on their social development tough not other aspects of development.
AO3- failure to distinguish between deprivation and privation
Rutter claimed that when Bowlby talked of ‘deprivation’ he mixed 2 concepts together. Rutter drew a distinction between deprivation, which really means the loss of the primary attachment figure after attachment has developed whereas privation means failure to form any attachment in the first place. Rutter claimed the severe long term damage Bowlby associated with deprivation is actually more likely to be a result of privation.
