Cupboard Love Theories.

Question 1

Explain the behaviourist ‘classical conditioning’ cause of attachment.

Answer 1

Food (UCS) produces pleasure (UCR).

The person who feeds the infant becomes associated with the food.

Eventually, they themselves create an conditioned response of elicit pleasure, becoming a conditioned stimulus.

Question 2

Explain the behaviourist ‘operant conditioning’ cause of attachment.

Answer 2

Dollard and Miller (1950).

Hungry infant feels uncomfortable.
A drive to reduce discomfort occurs.

When fed, the drive is reduced.
This creates pleasure (a reward).
This is an example of negative reinforcement.

Food becomes a primary reinforcer, as it helps avoid discomfort.
The person who supplies the food becomes a secondary reinforcer. (a reward).
This reward association is attachment.

Question 3

Explain the psychodynamic explanation for attachment.

Answer 3

Freuds theory of psychosexual development.

During oral stage - mouth is especially sensitive to physical stimulation. The persons ‘libido’ (psychic energy) is attached to the mouth.

The pleasure principle - innate drive to seek pleasure is at work.

Freud suggests that one ‘structure of personality’ (the ID) is motivated by the pleasure principle.
ID = primitive, instinctive part of the personality that demands immediate satisfaction.

The ID demands oral satisfaction during the oral stage, the person providing this satisfaction becomes the love object, forming an attachment.

Question 4

Explain, briefly, what cupboard love theory is.

Answer 4

Cupboard Love theory is two theories explaining attachment. The behaviourist and psychoanalytic theories state that attachement is formed due to being fed and attachement is formed to who feds the person.

Question 5

Evaluate cupboard love theories.

Try to think of at least 2 strengths and 2 weaknesses.

Answer 5

Strengths:

Weaknesses:

> it is a difficult theory to test emperically.
In fact, there are many examples of studies that refute this theory - Harlow’s Rhesus Monkey Experiment.

> theory is not internally consistent, behaviourism and psychoanalytic approaches disagree.