Caregiver Infant Interactions Flashcards
What is reciprocity?
• Reciprocal is a two-way (mutual) interaction. The infant and caregiver are both active contributors in the interaction and are responding to each other, almost as if they are turn taking, as people do when they have a conversation.
• Reciprocity involves close attention to each other’s verbal signals and facial expressions. The regularity of an infant’s signals allows a caregiver to anticipate the infant’s behaviour and respond appropriately. This sensitivity to infant behaviour lays the foundation for later attachment between the caregiver and infant. Smiling (a social releaser) is an example of reciprocity – when an infant smiles, it in turn triggers a smile in the caregiver and vice versa.
What is the study into reciprocity ?
• Procedure: Murray and Trevarthen (1985) studied two-month-old infants who:
o interacted via a video monitor with their mother in real time.
o Then watched a video monitor playing a taped recording of the mother so that the image on screen was not responding to the infant’s facial and bodily gestures.
What did they find in the study of reciprocity ?
• Findings: The results were one of acute distress by the infant. The infants tried to attract the mother’s interest but after gaining no response, they turned away.
• Conclusion: This shows that the infant is actively eliciting a response from their caregiver illustrating the importance of reciprocity in the development of attachment.
What is interactional synchrony?
• Interactional synchrony takes place when the infant and caregiver interact in such a way that their behaviour and emotions are mirroring each other’s. Two people are said to be synchronised when they carry out the same action simultaneously.
• Interactional synchrony has been studied in infants as young as three days old, suggesting that it is innate rather than a learned behaviour (Meltzoff and Moore, 1983). High levels of interactional synchrony are associated with the formation of better-quality caregiver-infant attachments (e.g. the emotional intensity of the relationship).
Research study into interactional synchrony
• Procedure: Meltzoff and Moore (1977) used a controlled observation to study the beginnings of interactional synchrony in infants as young as 2 weeks old. An adult displayed one of three facial expressions (e.g. mouth opening) or one of three distinctive gestures (e.g. opening the hand). The child’s responses were filmed and identified by independent observers.
What were the findings of research into interactional synchrony ?
• Findings: They found that there was an association between the infant behaviour and that of the adult role model.
• Conclusion: This research supports the idea that a baby’s ability to mirror their caregiver is innate and aids the formation of attachments.
Why is the methodology used in caregiver interactions a strength?
Observations of caregiver-infant interactions are generally well-controlled procedures, with both caregiver and infant being filmed, often from multiple angles. This ensures that very fine details of behaviour can be recorded and later analysed. Furthermore, babies don’t know or care that they are being observed so their behaviour does not change in response to controlled observation (unlike adults), which is sometimes a problem for observational research. This suggests that research into infant caregiver interactions has good internal validity.
What was the problem with testing infant behaviour ?
difficult to reliably testing infant behaviour, infants’ mouths are in fairly constant motions (e.g. tongue sticking out, yawning, smiling) and the expressions that are tested occur frequently. This makes it difficult to distinguish between general activity and specific imitated behaviour. In order to overcome these problems Meltzoff & Moore measured infant responses by filming infants and then asking an independent observer to judge the infants’ behaviour from the video. The person doing the judging had no idea what behaviour was being imitated, which increased the internal validity of the data. This is a strength because Meltzoff & Moore removed the general problem of observer bias which can be a problem when testing infant behaviour.
Practical application of caregiver interactions
role of interactional synchrony in the formation of high quality attachment could have practical application that benefits society. Crotwell et al. (2013) found that a 10-minute Parent-Child Interaction Therapy (PCIT) which included teaching mothers five skills, improved interactional synchrony in 20 low-income mothers and their pre-school infants compared to a control group. The mothers also used more child-directed techniques and their children were coded as offering their mothers toys more frequently. This suggest that research into interactional synchrony could lead to valuable methods for improving and developing mother-infant attachments (particularly in at-risk groups).
Cultural differences of interactional synchrony
Interactional synchrony is not found in all cultures which contradicts the idea that the baby’s ability to imitate their caregiver is innate and aids the formation of attachments. If this is innate then it should be universal. Cross-cultural research, such as Le Vine (1994) found that Kenyan mothers do respond promptly to their infant’s distress signals, but they ignore other vocalisations such as babbling. They rarely look at their infants or speak to them, even while breastfeeding.
However, they do have a high proportion of secure attachments. These observations have been taken as a sign that interactional synchrony and sensitivity is a Western construct that is not applicable to rural non-Western communities. These observational studies highlight that sensitive caregiving does not inherently require verbal or face-to-face interaction. This weakens support for the idea that caregiver-infant interactions are necessary for healthy attachment formation.
