Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

PSYCHOLOGY V.2 > DEVELOPMENTAL - Attachment - Studies > Flashcards

DEVELOPMENTAL - Attachment - Studies Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
AP® Psychology flashcards Psychology 101 flashcards GRE® Psychology flashcards
1
Q

What study disproves the learning theory approach to attachment?

A

Harlow & Harlow

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

What were Harlow & Harlow looking into?

A

Whether baby monkeys would prefer a source of food or a source of comfort

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Harlow & Harlow: Method

A

Laboratory Experiment

  • Using baby monkeys raised in isolation
  • Baby monkeys were provided with two surrogate mothers. -One provided food the other comfort.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Harlow & Harlow: Results

A
  • Monkey spent most time with comfort mother. Only going to the other mother when hungry.
  • The comfort mother acted as a safe base when the monkey was in new situations.
  • When the monkeys grew up they showed signs of emotional and social disturbance and were unable to be good parents.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Harlow & Harlow: Conclusion

A
  • Infant monkeys created an attachment with the figure that provided comfort, not food.
  • Growing up isolated affected development.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Harlow & Harlow: Evaluation

A
  • Laboratory experiment, therefore high control of variables.
  • Cannot generalise results from monkeys to humans.
  • Low ecological validity
  • Cannot be replicated for ethical reasons.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Which study investigated separation anxiety & stranger distress?

A

Schaffer & Emerson

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Schaffer & Emerson: Method

A
  • Longitudinal study: studied 60 babies at monthly intervals for the first 18 months of life in their own home.
  • interactions with their carers were observed, and carers were interviewed.
  • attachment was noted through separation anxiety.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Schaffer & Emerson: Results

A

Up to 3 months - newborns are predisposed to attach to anyone. Most babies respond equally to any caregiver.
After 4 months - Preference for certain people. Infants they learn to distinguish primary and secondary caregivers but accept care from anyone.
After 7 months - Special preference for a single attachment figure. Shows stranger and separation anxiety.
After 9 months - Multiple attachments. The baby becomes increasingly independent and forms several attachments.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Schaffer & Emerson: Conclusion

A

attachments were most likely to form with those who responded accurately to the baby’s signals, not the person they spent most time with.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Schaffer & Emerson: Evaluation

A
  • Relies on report by parents which may not be accurate.

- Natural experiment therefore increased validity.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Hazan & Shaver: Method

A

Participants volunteered to take part in the study.
They completed 2 questionnaires, one looked at early relationships with parents, the second at their adult romantic attachments.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Hazan & Shaver: Results

A

Those who had worse relationships with parents had less secure adult relationships.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Hazan & Shaver: Conclusion

A

Early attachments do affect later, romantic attachments.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Hazan & Shaver: Evaluation

A
  • Self selecting sample: Not a cross section of the public.
  • Questionnaire: People may not answer truthfully in order to make themselves look good.
  • Retrospective: Based on recall which may not be accurate
  • Correlation does not prove causality.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Which theory supports Bowlby’s idea of an internal model?

A

Hazan & Shaver

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Which study disproves Bowlby’s ideas of monotropy?

A

Schaffer & Emerson

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Lorenz: Method

A

split goose eggs, got half to be hatched by their mother and the rest were hatched in an incubator and saw Lorenz when hatching.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Lorenz: Results

A

Those who hatched in an incubator became immediatly attached to Lorenz. Became distressed when separated.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Lorenz: Conclusion

A

There is a critical period for imprinting.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

Which study explored different types of attachment?

A

Ainsworth et al

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

Ainsworth et al: Method

A

Baby (12-18 months) and mother are placed in a room in which several scenarios are created. e.g. being left alone, approached by a stranger,mother returning.
The babies’ reactions were observed closely.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

Ainsworth et al: Results

A 
Type A (insecure-avoidant): 15%
Type B (secure): 70%
Type C (insecure-resistant): 15%
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

Ainsworth et al: Conclusion

A

Infants showing different reactions to the strange situation have different types of attachment.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

Ainsworth et al: Evaluation

A
  • Artificial environment, low ecological validity
  • Reliable as high control over variables
  • Mother aware of observation, may result in unnatural behavior of parent, perhaps effecting the child’s behavior.
  • Mother may not have been the child’s main attachment figure.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

Which study repeated ‘The Strange Situation’ cross-culturally

A

Ijzandoorn & Kroonemberg

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

Which trends emerged from Van Ijzendoorn & Kroonemberg?

A
  • Percentages of secure & insecure attachments were similar across all of the tested countries.
  • Secure attachments were the most common.
  • In Western cultures the most dominant type of insecure attachment was avoidant. In non Western countries it was resistant.
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q

What was the aim of Bowlby’s 44 Juvenile Thieves study?

A

To look at how maternal deprivation affected children.

29
Q

Bowlby’s 44 Juvenile Thieves: Method

A

2 groups of 44 adolecents. 1 was thieves the other were ‘emotionally disturbed’.
Case studies were completed on their backgrounds.

30
Q

Bowlby’s 44 Juvenile Thieves: Results

A

17/44 thieves had experienced maternal deprivation before 2 years old.
2/44 ‘emotionally disturbed’ had experienced maternal deprivation before 2 years old.
14/44 thieves were diagnosed by Bowlby as ‘affectionless psychopaths’
12/14 ‘affectionless psychopaths’ had experienced maternal deprivation.

31
Q

Bowlby’s 44 Juvenile Thieves: Conclusion

A

Maternal deprivation can have very harmful long term effects.

32
Q

Bowlby’s 44 Juvenile Thieves: Evaluation

A
  • Data was retrospective
  • Boys were not randomly allocated to being maternally deprived or not.
  • Cannot identify cause and effect
33
Q

Which study acts as evidence for the PDD model?

A

Robertson & Robertson

34
Q

Robertson & Robertson: Method

A

Naturalistic observation of children who were temporarily separated from their mothers.
-Example: John was in a residential nursery for 9 days.

35
Q

Robertson & Robertson: Results

A

First day or two: John exhibited protest.
After he showed despair e.g. trying to get attention from nurses.
When his mother returned he was reluctant to be affectionate showing detachment.

36
Q

Robertson & Robertson: Conclusion

A

Short term separation has negative effects on attachment.

37
Q

Robertson & Robertson: Evaluation

A
  • Reaction may not have been to separation but to the strange environment.
  • There was little control over variables.
  • High ecological validity as it took place in a natural setting.
38
Q

Klaus & Kennel: Method

A
  • Independent groups design: Group 1 new born babies allowed contact with mother during feeding in the first 3 days. Group 2 allowed extended contact with mother lasting several hours a day
  • 1 month later returned to hospital and observed the mother/infant relationships
39
Q

Klaus & Kennel: Results

A

Group 2 were found to cuddle their babies more and make greater eye contact. The effects were still noticeable a year later.

40
Q

Klaus & Kennel: Conclusion

A

greater contact led to stronger and closer bond formation between mother and child

41
Q

Klaus & Kennel: Evaluation

A
  • Natural experiment
  • Mothers may not have acted natural under observation
  • Ethically this is poor as it may damage future relationships
42
Q

Which theory does Klaus & Kennel support?

A

Bowlby’s theory of attachment

-the sensitive period

43
Q

Hodges & Tizzard: Method

A

Longitudinal study of children placed in a residential nursery before 4 months old. They hadnt had a chance to form a close attachment with any caregivers. At 4 years old some children had returned to their birth mothers, some adopted and the other remained at the nursery.
They were observed again at 16.

44
Q

Hodges & Tizzard: Results

A

At 16 the adopted group had strong family relationships, but weaker peer relationships compared to children from ‘normal’ homes.
Those who stayed in the nursery or returned to their mothers showed poorer peer and family relationships with the family and peers than the adopted group.

45
Q

Hodges & Tizzard: Conclusion

A

Children are able to recover from early maternal privation if they receive quality care in a loving environment.
However, social development is not as good.

46
Q

Hodges & Tizzard: Evaluation

A
  • Natural experiment therefore high ecological validity.

- Small sample lowering representatives and making the results hard to generalise.

47
Q

Which study supports Hodges & Tizzard’s findings that children can recover from deprivation?

A

Rutter et al

48
Q

Rutter et al: Method

A

Compared the development of 111 Romanian orphans who were adopted into British families (before 2 years old) with the development of a group of British children.

49
Q

Rutter et al: Results

A

The romanian children’s development was initiall below normal development but by four years olf their development had caught up.

50
Q

Rutter et al: Conclusion

A

Children can recover from the effects of deprivation as long as the care they recieve is good.

51
Q

Rutter et al: Evalutation

A
  • Could not randomly allocate children to groups. There may be individual differences concerning sociability.
  • Cannot determine a causal relationship
  • As the research was longitudinal participants may drop out or no longer be available. It is possible a certain type of individual may drop out. This leaves a biased sample.
52
Q

Quinton et al: Method

A

Compared 50 women who had experienced institutional care with 50 who hadn’t

53
Q

Quinton et al: Results

A

The women who had been raised instirutionally had problems parenting later in life.

54
Q

Quinton et al: Conclusion

A

This suggests that there is a cycle of privation.

55
Q

Clarke-Stewart et al: Method

A
  • A series of seperate observations to examine the effects of day care.
  • One looked at the peer relations of 150 2-3 year olds who came from different social backgrounds.
  • Strength of attachment in a group of 18 month olds was studied in children who experienced 30 or more house of care a week. The strange situation was used. This was compared with attachments of children in less that 10 hours day care a week.
56
Q

Clarke-Stewart et al: Results

A

2-3 year old had good negotiating skills and were good socially.
18 month olds who had more hours in care were just as distressed when separated from their mothers as those who had less hours in day care

57
Q

Clarke-Stewart et al: Conclusion

A

Day care can have a positive effect on social development.

Attachment in 18 month olds is not affected by temporary separation.

58
Q

Clarke-Stewart et al: Evaluation

A
  • Observation was controlled meaning the study can be easily replicated.
  • The situation is artificial therefore it lacks ecological validity. The results cannot be generalised to other children.
59
Q

Shea: Method

A

Children aged 3-4 were taped in the playground in the first 10 weeks on nursery.
Their behaviour was assesed in terms of rough and tumble play, aggression, frequency or peer interaction, distance from teacher and distance from nearest child.

60
Q

Shea: Results

A

Over 10 weeks peer interaction increased.
Distance from teacher decreased.
Agression decreased.
Rough and tumble play increased.
More sociability noticed in the children who attended 5 days a week than 2 days a week.

61
Q

Shea: Conclusion

A

Day care causes children to be less aggressive and more sociable.

62
Q

Shea: Evaluation

A
  • Naturalistic observation therefore high ecological validity.
  • The results may have been affected by extraneous variables.
  • Behavior was open to interpretation so findings may be biased.
63
Q

Belsky & Rovine: Method

A

Infants placed in the strange situation to asses their attachments with their mothers.
One group experienced day care for at least 20 hours a week before their first birthday the other had not experienced day care.

64
Q

Belsky & Rovine: Results

A

Infant who had experienced daycare were more likely to have insecure attachments.
Those who hadn’t experienced daycare were more likely to be securely attached.

65
Q

Belsky & Rovine: Conclusion

A

Daycare has a negative effect on an infant’s social development.

66
Q

Belsky & Rovine: Evaluation

A
  • Controlled observation therefore there was control over the variables.
  • This study was in an artificial setting therefore it lacks ecological validity.
67
Q

What did Grossman et al find when using the strange situation in Germany?

A

More avoidant infants may be a result if the German value of independence
Avoidance is perceived as good by them

68
Q

What did Takashi find when using the strange situation in Japan?

A

Similar rates of secure attachments as the US

Almost no evidence of insecure avoidant, all insecure attachments were resistant

PSYCHOLOGY V.2 (12 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions