Elizabeth- Intro To Development Flashcards
What is development
Change in behaviour as a function of time or age. 4ps: profound (change outlook of the world), permanent (not easily reversed), progressive (bring about improvement), pervasive (affect all areas, can’t just look at one)
Why study development
Empirical reasons: comparative, understanding out relationship to other animals and role of early experience e.g. rousseau child as father to the man, we determine the adult we become. Philosophical reasons: what do humans bring to the world, what is it to be human, how can you get something from nothing like consciousness from inanimate. Practical reasons: advice to parents, interventions for DD, policy change
Early perspectives- nativism (Plato, Shakespeare, descartes,Rousseau
Plato: all ideas are innate-discovering what is already known. Shakespeare seven ages of man speech (progress but decline in old age. Descartes: nativism and mind body dualism is everything is innate. Rousseau: innately good child who develops in nature’s plan
Early perspectives- empiricism
Locke: mind is tabula rasa and development is due to experience. Earle: his soul is yet a white paper scribbled W observations of the word. James 4th did first experiment in developmental as separated twins on an island to see if lang was innate- inconclusive but some said they speak good Hebrew
Emergence of scientific discipline-Darwin
Origin of species- evolution by natural selection, also wrote a biological sketch of an infant where he did systematic observation of son doddy about lang and sense of self. Development as progressive adaptation to environment, systematic methods (not anecdotal), bio origins of human nature.
Consequences of Darwin
Gave rise to stage theories, recapitulationsim (early translation of his ideas). Haeckels maxim said ontogeny recalculated phylogeny: meaning individuals development replays the development of the species but led to misapplication e.g. halls evolutionary hierarchy said men-women-children-monkeys
5 issues in developmental psychology: 1-nature and nurture
Nativist is nature (descartes) and empiricist is nurture (Locke). Extreme empiricism: Watson said he could raise anyone to be an expert and little Albert. Extreme nativism: gesell child’s capacities a product of evolution. May have innate potential for development but for learning or learning to capacity. Modern position:plomin both are important, piaget and vygotsky are interactionist (both sides)
2- continuities and discontinuities
Discontinuous: Freud’s stages, piaget stages of cog development. Continuous: Bandura S learning theory (stepped progression vs a curve). Diff areas of development can be explained in diff ways
3- passive and active child
Are children passive ps in development moulded by experience or active by exploring and shaping themselves. Piaget says children are little scientific as make hyps and test them to change their ideas
4- longitudinal stability and influence
Do some developmental constructs remain stable over time and are some especially important in predicting next stages of development (to target) e.g. attachment
5- individual differences
What is shared by everyone and what varies
What are the causes of diffs
Shift from asking what age a task is passed to what accounts for indiv diffs if children are the same age
Methodological problems
Children aren’t reliable ps
Infants can’t talk- under 24mths
Development is noisy and influenced by a range of factors
Ethical considerations limits the kind of studies we can do to see cause and effect , longitudinal can help
The data problem
Naturalistic observation has been central to the developmental research e.g. is darwin, piaget. Problem: how to obtain valid measures while maintaining naturalism
Problem: naturalistic contexts differ- children acts diff in diff contexts
The developmental task
Instead of qual observation, researchers design tasks to measure spec abilities. E.g. unexpected transfer task wimmer and perner/sally Anne task to test ToM, uses control a e.g. where did they leave it to test memory. W: lack of EV, children not compliant or don’t understand, minor changes can alter children’s performance
Establishing cause
Central challenge: how to move from how the mind develops to what causes the changes. Correlational studies can see how one effects the other but not the cause e.g. false belief task correlated W verbal iq. But 1: can’t establish cause direction and 2: unseen affecting variables
The experimental method
Manip iv and measure dv while controlling confounding. Can be done in a lab, in natural environment to see cause. W: ps may not comply W training or intervention as busy, can’t generalise to all pops , over reliance on performance on spec tasks so can’t see if applies to other contexts, effects may not be maintained on time
Choosing the right age
Need to make sure that tasks are age appropriate, avoid floor and ceiling effects
If you want to have a range of ages, how do you make tasks suitable for diff age groups testing the same construct
Attachment definition and bonding
The relationship between caregiver and child, child’s behaviour toward caregiver, also abstract construct of a close relationship to any sig other. Bonding is maternal response to infant in first days and attachment not till 2nd half of first year
Bowlby
94 study of juvenile thieves-noted they had absent mothers, reported to who on issues due to maternal deprivation after ww2. Accepted friends ideas on infant mother relationship being template for other relationships. Caused controversy as used to believe attachment formed to those who provided physical needs- secondary drive/cupboard thoery, he said infants have innate drive to form a close relationship. Used ethnological studies as support (others evidence) and attachment behaviour (clinging, crying) from animals
Bowlby supporting evidence
Anna Freud and Dann: attachment between 6 3-4 year olds from conc camp (v anxious if separated) no physical needs so primary drive. Harlows monkeys preferred comfort over food.
Criticism of bowlby
Had big controversy in general. Justified: generalised from clinical samples (said all separation was traumatic), used as propaganda to get women back in the home). Concerned W making and braking of attachment (ignore ind diffs). Single attachment to mother/monotropy, need own mother (says other relationships don’t matter)
Mary ainsworth
Wanted empirical evidence of bowlby. Interested in how ind diffs in behaviour were due to infant mother interaction. Ganda group in Uganda (had group caregivers). Found infants formed attachments to many providing care- challenged monotropy
Schaffer and Emerson
Multiple attachments observed in a sample of inner city scottish children
Infants attached to both parents, grandparents, siblings
Challenged mototropy but supported abandoning secondary drive (as people were not feeding them..)
James Robertson
Films of children staying hospital-originally parents weren’t allowed to see children. Separation causes distress but prolonged separation broke attachment as became despair then detachment. Supports abandonment of secondary drive but saw dynamic nature of attachment (needs but no attach,ECT, diff on diff days)
Bowlbys revision
Healthy children could have more than one attachment figure, focused on dynamics. Wrote thoery of attachment where said goal corrected system rather than innate response. Mother most interesting cue so proximity becomes goal. Depends on environmental conditions activating innate systems. Attachment as a lofe long process
Strengths of bowlby
Courage of convictions, willing to use empirical data to improve his theory
Theory that is powerful and widely used
Framework for understanding ind diffs, although misused
Ainsworth S empirical work
Infants id diffs. Used the strange situation procedure for 12-24months. Found secure attachments 70%, insecure avoidant (don’t care about mother 20%) and insecure resistance (can’t be calmed) 10% called organised patterns of attachment
Category vs dimension
Infants assigned to an overall category but eac has sub categories
From a spectrum from marked avoidance to marked resistance (a1 and c1 most extreme)
Main and Solomon
Established another category- type D for insecure disorganised. Anxious, disorganised and disoriented. No strangers for contact and conflicting behaviours. It is orthogonal (must also have forced choice). Linked to low income, maternal drug use, depression but only 48% and still 15% of normal middle class
Ainsworth contributions
Focuses on the security of the attachment relationship
Move away from making/braking and viewing as attached or not
Influential of early ind diffs
But don’t think that insecure is abnormal or that disorganised is a marker of neglect
Beyond infancy
Measures can be behavioural or representational. Preschool! Strange situation, have longer separation, attachment q sort (observe at home and arrange card into order). Representational: separaion anxiety test, story stem tasks (shown photos of separation and asked how child will feel)
School age
Harder as likely to be left alone. Child attachment interviews used for 8plus, self report measures for older- all represent atonal
Adolescents
Child attachment interview
Self report measures lke parental bonding instrument parker 79
Attachment history questionnaire pottharst 1990
Inventory of parent and peer attachment- armsden and greenberg
Adults
Bowlby- early experiences shape later relationships, create internal working models based on this. Iwm of attachment relationships (am I worthy of love), iwm of self. Initial plasticity but fixed at 4-5 but can be changed if sustained change e.g. good home but bullied
Adult attaché,not interview
By Mary main-asses iwm-experience not important but how you talk about it. Dismissive d- lack of recall and devalue or idealise attach,net figures, preoccupied E: topic is overwhelming anger or passivity, autonomous F: open, coherent and believable , unresolved U- incoherent about loss or abuse
Across time
Not much long term effects from strange situation even over 6montjd as 46% stability. 2 found longitudinal stability from infancy to adulthood but 2 found none - say life events predict adult attach,net from teen years . Ones that found effect credited more. La force study huge sample found no stability from strange situation to aqs and interview
Misuse
Politicians interested but don’t get it- andrea leads on says bonding essential, secure grow jobs to be secure . Insecure not more anxious or delinquents. Lawful discontinuity (change in environment make changes in attach,net )
From reading
Attachment in phases: 0-2m pre attachment no diff response to unfamiliar vs familiar, 2-7 recognise caregiver. After 7 otnhs have stranger anxiety. At 2 years relies on representations of internal wokring models
Mind mindedness: caregivers ability to interpret what child is thinking- predicts attachment
