Bowlby's Theory of Monotropy

Question 1

How is attachment adaptive?

Answer 1

• Bowlby argued that there is evolutionary value in forming attachments, thus attachment is adaptive
• Attachment behaviour evolved over time and therefore serves an important survival function for infants - an infant who isn’t attached to a caregiver is not well protected and unlikely to survive
• Forming an attachment and ensuring survival of offspring is the only way for parents to ensure that their genes are passed on to the next generation

Question 2

What is the critical period?

Answer 2

• Due to the survival value of attachment, Bowlby argued infants have an innate drive to form an attachment. This has a special time period for its development known as the critical period
• In humans this is roughly the first 2 years of an infant’s life
• Children who are unable to form an attachment during the critical period have a difficulty forming attachments later on

Question 3

What are social releasers?

Answer 3

• During the critical period, attachment is determined by parental sensitivity to social releasers
• Social releasers are behaviours such as smiling, crying, and cooing - all in which aim to elicit a caregiving response from the carer
• This tendency of demonstrating social releasers is innate and helps the child capture the attention of the carer

Question 4

What is monotropy?

Answer 4

• The innate tendency of an infant to form ONE special emotional bond during the critical period, based on who was most sensitive to their social releasers
• This monotropic attachment is known as the primary attachment - often to the mother but not always

Question 5

What is an internal working model?

Answer 5

• The first monotropic attachment provides a template for future relationships
• This template informs the infant of what to expect out of future intimate relationships
• Led to the development of continuity hypothesis - infants who form secure attachments form a positive template and so continue to be socially and emotionally competent and have secure relationships in the future
• Whereas those who experienced difficulties in relationships during infancy (negative template) are likely to have the same difficulties in adult relationships

Question 6

How do Sroufe et al support the theory?

clue: ME.LI.MP

Answer 6

• A strength of Bowlby’s theory is that there is supporting evidence for the concept of continuity hypothesis
• In the Minnesota parent-child study Sroufe et al followed PPs from infancy to late adolescence and found continuity between the quality of early attachment and later emotional/social behaviour. that the person engaged in
• Individuals who were classed as securely attached in infancy were highest rated for social competence later in childhood - were less isolated, more popular, more empathetic
• This is a strength because it is consistent with continuity hypothesis as those with a strong attachment in infancy went on to be more socially and emotionally competent compared to those who lacked a strong attachment in infancy
• Thus validating the theory

Question 7

How are practical applications a strength?

Answer 7

• Another strength is that it has practical applications for the care of adopted children
• Bowlby’s view that children need to form an attachment during the critical period of 0-2 years after birth has led to adoptive agencies making it a priority to get their youngest children who are still in the critical period adopted first
• This is a strength because it should give them the best chance to build a good internal working model and form strong attachments with their new caregiver based on Bowlby’s theory and therefore go on to have healthy attachments in the future as the theory states
• Therefore, Bowlby theory attachment helps the lives of adopted children and thus increases in utility

Question 8

How do Schaffer and Emerson weaken Bowlby’s theory?

Answer 8

• A weakness is that there is refuting evidence for the concept of monotropy
• Schaffer and Emerson found that it was normal for babies to form multiple attachments. Around the age of 11 months, 30% of the babies had multiple attachments
• Also, Bowlby implied that the main attachment is likely to be with the mother but Schaffer and Emerson found that 1/3 of the babies were strongly attached to their fathers instead of their mothers
• Therefore, Bowlby underestimated the potential for children to form attachments with their father as the study contradicts his claim that children only form one special attachment during development that is almost always the mother
• Thus the theory decreases in validity