Disruption of attachment Flashcards
What is separation
This is where a child is away from a caregiver they’re attached to, for a relatively short period of time. This involves distress. Separation is a mild form of deprivation
What is deprivation
This occurs when an attachment has been formed and is then broken for a fairly long period of time
What is privation
This is the absence of attachment
Bowlby studied long term maternal deprivation. What did he believe
Bowlby thought that young children might suffer sever emotional effects as a result of short term separation
Robertson and Bowlby (1952)
- among the first to study effects of short term separation in detail
- studied young children separated from their mothers for some time
- observed 3 stages in the child’s response to separation which led to protest-depair-detachment model
Explain the protest-despair-detachment model
- stage 1:protest-very intesne, child cries most of the time, seems panic stricken, anger and fear present
- stage 2:despair-loss of hope, child is apathetic and shows little interest in surroundings, child engages in comforting behaviours
- stage 3:detachment-child behaves in a less distressed way. If the mother re-appears, child does not show great interest
Robertson and Robertson (1968) Little John procedure
- in a naturalistic observation, several children who experienced short separations from their carers were observed and filmed
- a boy called John aged around 18 months stayed in a residential nursery for 9 days, while his mother had another baby
Robertson and Robertson (1968) Little John findings
- for the first day, John protested at being separated from his mother. He started trying to get attention from the nurses but he gave up trying
- he then showed signs of detachment, he was more active and content then had been previously at the nursery
- when his mother came to collect him, he was reluctant to be affectionate
Robertson and Robertson (1968) Little John conclusion
- the short term separation had bad effects on John, including possible permanent damage to his attachment with his mother
- children should recieve good physical+emotional care when separated from their PCG
Robertson and Robertson (1968) Little John evaluation
- John’s reaction may not have been due to separation-maybe down to his new enviornment or that he was getting less attention than usual
- little control of variables
- difficult to replicate each individual situation
- study took placin a natural situation-results have ecological validity but will be less reliable
Bowlby’s maternal deprivation hypothesis (1953)
- deprivation from the main carer during the critical period will have harmful effects on a child’s emotional, social, intellectual and physical development
- long term effects of deprivation may include separation anxiety. This may lead to problem behaviour e.g. being clingy. Future relationships may be affected by this emotional insecurity
- consequences cannot be reversed
Bowlby (1944) 44 juvenile thieves aim
test maternal deprivation hypothesis
Bowlby (1944) 44 juvenile thieves procedure
- case studies were completed on the background of 44 adolescents who had been referred to the clinic where Bowlby worked because they had been stealing
- there was a control group of 44 ‘emotionally distrubed’ adolescents who didn’t steal
Bowlby (1944) 44 juvenile thieves findings
- 17 of the thieves had experienced frequent separations from their mothers before the age of 2, compared with only 2 in the control group
- 14 of the thieves were diagnosed as ‘affectionless psychopaths’. 12/14 of these had experience separation from their mothers
Bowlby (1944) 44 juvenile thieves conclusion
-deprivation from the main carer early in life can have harmful long term consequences
Bowlby (1944) 44 juvenile thieves evaluation
- results show a link between deprivation and criminal behaviour
- however it can’t be said that one causes the other
- there may be other factors (e.g. poverty), that caused the criminal behaviour
- case studies provide detailed information however the study relied on retrospective data-may be unreliable
Strengths of the maternal deprivation hypothesis
-evidence support-Goldfarb (1943) found that orphanage children who were socially and maternally deprived were later less intellectually and socially developed
Weaknesses of the maternal deprivation hypothesis
- Bowlby linked the thieves’ behaviour to maternal deprivation but other things were not conisdered e.g. poverty
- the children in Goldfarb’s study may have been most harmed by the social deprivation in the orphanage rather than the maternal deprivation
- Bowlby didn’t distinguish between privation and deprivation
- many of the effects of maternal deprivation are more reversible than was assumed by Bowlby e.g. Spitz and Wolf (1946)
Can the effects of disruption of attachment be reversed?
Even when deprivation has harmful effects, these may be reversed with appropriate, good quality care
Skeels and Dye (1939)
-found that children who had been socially deprived during their first 2 years of life quickly imporved their IQ scores if they were transferred to a school where they got one to one care
Koluchova (1976) The case of the Czech Twin boys
- mother died soon after boys were born
- father remained remarried and stepmother treated them cruelly-often locked in celler, no toys, beaten
- they were found when they were seven with rickets and very little social or intellectual development
- they were later adopted and made much progress
- by adulthood they had above average intelligence and normal social relationships
MDH- ACIDIC (helps remember different aspects of MDH)
A- affectionless psychopathy C- critical period I- IQ low- intellectual issues D- deprivation I- internal working model C- criminal behaviour-deliquency
