caregiver-infant interactions Flashcards
define attachment
close two-way emotional bond between 2 individuals (other is essential for emotional security) & it takes a few months to develop
2 types of caregiver-infant interactions
- reciprocity
- interactional synchrony
describe reciprocity
- babies have ‘alert phases’ & signal when they are ready for interaction
- how 2 people interact (eg. mother/infant = respond to each other’s signals/actions & elicits a response from the other)
what’s reciprocity also known as
‘turn-taking’
dance - brazelton et. al 1975 (responding to others moves)
research for reciprocity
- feldman & eldelman (2007) mothers typically respond to alertness 2/3 of the time
- finegood et al. (2016) varies according to skills of mother/external factors eg. stress
- feldman (2007) from 3+ months, interaction becomes more frequent & involves close attention to each other’s verbal signals/facial expressions
describe interactional synchrony
- mother/infant reflect both actions/emotions of the other
- coordinated/synchronised
what’s interactional synchrony also known as
mirroring
research for interactional synchrony
condon & sander = as early as day 1, the human neonate (new-born baby) moves in precise/sustained segments of movements synchronous with the caregivers voice
aim of meltzoff & moore (1977)
examine interactional synchrony in infants
method of meltzoff & moore (1977)
- child had dummy placed in their mouth to prevent facial response
- using a controlled observation, an adult model displayed 1 of 3 facial expressions or a hand gesture
- after the display from the adult model, the dummy was removed & the child expression’s were filmed
results of meltzoff & moore (1977)
clear association between infant’s behaviour & the adult model
conclusion of meltzoff & moore (1977)
suggest interactional synchrony is innate (born with) & reduces strength of any claim that imitative behaviour is learned
AO3 +) research on caregiver-infant interactions have high level of control
E:
- research is usually filmed in a laboratory setting (usually observations)
- level of control minimizes distractions
- observations can be recorded/analysed later which makes it unlikely that researchers will miss key behaviour
- multiple observers can also record data to ensure inter-rater reliability & decrease observer bias (seen in study by meltzoff & moore)
- babies are unaware they’re being observed so behaviour remains unaffected, limiting concern over demand characteristics
T: methodology ensures high internal validity & reliable data collection
AO3 -) babies often display behaviour which is difficult to accurately interpret
E:
- infants have limited coordination and mobility, so often show subtle movements or minor changes in their expression
- means it’s difficult to determine what is happening from infants perspective (eg. whether they’re smiling or passing wind)
- also, differentiating between random movements and those prompted by the caregiver remains uncertain
T: researchers cannot be certain the behaviours observed in caregiver-infant interactions have special meanings
AO3 -) observing behaviours, such as synchrony, merely labels observable caregiver and infant interactions without explaining their developmental significance, as highlighted by feldman (2012)
+) evidence suggests significance of early interactions
E:
- patterns may be reliably observed, but may not offer insights into purposes for child development
T: implies uncertainty about importance of reciprocity and interactional synchrony solely from observational research
HOWEVER: evidence suggests significance of early interactions
- isabella et al. (1989) found achieving interactional synchrony predicted development of high-quality attachment
- demonstrates how caregiver-infant interactions are likely important in development
