developmental Flashcards
study into individual differences in attachment
strange situation: mary ainsworth
method: controlled observation
design: repeated measures
IV: 8 different episodes of strange situation
DV: babies’ responses - separation anxiety, stranger anxiety, reunion behaviour, seeking proximity
episodes:
1. child encouraged to explore
2. stranger comes in and interacts with child
3. caregiver leaves
4. caregiver returns, stranger leaves
5. caregiver leaves, child alone
6. stranger returns
7. caregiver returns
findings of study into individual differences in attachment
identified 3 main types of attachment:
- secure attachment: 70-75%
- insecure avoidant attachment: 20-25%
- insecure resistant attachment: 3%
- erickson et al: observed 4-5 years olds in school settings and found securely attached children were less dependent and more confident in class
evaluation of study into individual differences in attachment
- test may be culture bound: cultural differences in childhood may mean children are likely to respond differently to stranger situation. caregivers from different cultures behave differently in strange situation. e.g takahashi noted test doesn’t work in japan as mothers are rarely seperated from babies so there will be high levels of seperation anxiety. also found that upon reunion, mother would quickly pick up child, so wouldn’t be able to analyse baby’s reaction upon mother’s return
- validity as it can explain future outcomes. secure = good friendships
- reliability: controlled conditions. bick et al - looked at inter-rater reliability in a team of trained strange situation observers and agreed on attachment types of 94% of tested babies
cross cultural variations in attachment studies
van ijzendoorn and kroonenberg:
- located 32 studies of where strange situation had been used to investigate attachment
- 8 different countries
simonella et al 2014:
- italian study
- to see whether proportions of babies of different attachment types still matches those found in previous studies
- assessed 76 12 month olds using strange situation
cross cultural variations in attachment studies findings
van ijzendoorn and kroonenberg:
- west germany: 57%, 35%, 8%
- israel: 64%, 8%, 29%
- US: 65%, 21%, 14%
simonella et al:
- 50% secure, 36% avoidant
- lower rate of secure than in other studies. maybe because of mothers of young children working long shifts and use professional childcare
cross cultural variations in attachment studies evaluation
- large sample, combining results from other countries e.g van izjendoorn: nearly 2000 babies
-> increases internal validity - reduces impact of anomalies
-> samples unrepresentative of cultures
-> particular cultural characteristics of the sample need to be specified
effects of institutionalisation
- IQ/developmental delays/damage to intellectual development: institutionalised kids showed signs of neurological divergence. not as pronounced if adopted before 6 months
- disinhibited attachment: child is equally friendly towards strangers and people they know well
- damage to physical development: deprivation dwarfism
study into deprivation dwarfism
gardner 1972 - lack of emotion care could affect growth hormones studied 8 month who gets fed through a tube, mom wouldn’t cuddle them out of fear that she would move the tube. 8 months old: physically stunted and admitted to hospital. hospital staff gave attention: thrived and returned to normal
studies into effects of institutionalisation
rutter et al 2007:
aim: study to investigate if good quality care can make up for poor institutional experiences
method: studied 111 romanian orphans adopted by british families before 2 years old. natural experiment
naturally occurring iv: age of adoption
results: high levels disinhibited attachment (attention seeking) behaviour if adopted after 6 months old (and IQ of 86). before 6 months rarely display this attachment and developed normally.
conclusion: the earlier adoption occurs, the less severe long-term effects of institutionalisation and deprivation, as children have the opportunity to form attachments.
chugani et al 2001:
- administered pet scans to a sample of 10 adopted from romanian orphanage, compared them with 17 normal adults and groups of 7 children
- romanian orphans showed significantly decreased activity in the orbital frontal gyrus, parts of the prefrontal cortex/hippocampus, amygdala and brain stem
conclusion: dysfunction in these brain regions may have resulted from stress of early deprivation and may be linked to long term cognitive and behavioural deficits
evaluation of rutter et al
- longitudinal study: lots of detailed info over a long period of time
- natural experiment: may have been other variables
- adopted group may have been more socially skilled making them easier to place in adoptive families
- sample was all romanian kids so its not generalisable
- research on negative effects changed policies around adoption and care in orphanages and other institutional settings, key workers in instiutions ensured high levels of care
infant caregiver interaction
- reciprocity
- interactional synchrony
reciprocity
- how 2 people interact
fieldman 2007: after 3+ months, interaction tends to be more frequent
brazelton et al 1975: interaction = dance
interactional synchrony
- mother and infant reflect both actions and emotions of the other in a co-ordinated way
meltzoff and moore 1977: adults displayed and facial expressions. child’s response filmed and copied
stages of attachment
schaffer 1996:
- pre attachment phases (0-3 months): infants demonstrate preference for human faces
- indiscriminate attachment (3-7/8 months): begin to distinguish between familiar and unfamiliar people
- discriminate attachment (7-8 months onwards): develops specific attachments and becomes distressed when separated
- multiple attachments (9 months onwards): emotional ties to more than one caregiver
evaluation of stages of attachment study
high ecological validity:
- research done in own homes, high mundane realism, behaviour of children similar to real life. good external validity e.g applying findings outside of study
lacks generalisability:
- 60 babies. most working/middle class background, all from glasgow
- not representative of entire population. practices may differ from one culture/social class
- gender specific, dads also play a part
longitudinal research:
- same children followed up regularly, better than cross sectional, comparing 2 groups of kids
- better internal validity = same ptps so ptp variable isn’t confounding
positive research on the role of the father
field 1978:
- filmed 4 month old babies’ reactions and face to face interactions
- primary caregivers, whether mother or father, spent more time interacting with the child than secondary caregiver fathers.
- research suggests fathers can be primary caregivers in the same way mothers can, thus fathers are an essaential role as attachment figures
degree of sensitivity: more secure attachment of father is more sensitive to a child’s needs type. single fathers tend to form similar attachments to those they had with their parent
marital intimacy: being with a partner affects father - child attachment types
supportive co-parenting: amount of support given to partner affects type of attachment
negative research on the role of the father
- bowlby suggested the only primary caregiver was the mother, fathers were more of a playmate
grossman 2002:
-conducted a longitudinal study on 44 families looking at how the quality of relationships between parents and children changed from infancy to the teenage years
- found that the early attachment to the mother was a better predictor of what the teenage relationship was like
- seems the father is less important to later development than the mother in terms of nurture
- however, grossman found that if the father had engaged in active play with the child when they were young, the adolescent relationship with BOTH parents is strengthened
- supports Geiger’s work ( dad = playmate and mother assosicated with nurturing and caring for the child)