Explanation Of Attachment: Learning Theory

Question 1

Describe Dollard and Miller’s learning theory?

Answer 1

• importance of food: Dollard and Miller’s learning theory approach is often referred to as ‘cupboard love theory’ because it emphasises the importance of the caregiver as a provider of food. Put simply, they propose that children learn to love whoever feeds them
• classical conditioning involves learning to associate 2 stimuli together so that we being to respond to one in the same way as we respond to the other- food serves as an unconditioned stimulus (UCS) which creates a feeling of pleasure response which is not learned so it is an unconditioned response
• mother is a neutral stimulus and becomes a conditioned stimulus producing a conditioned response- when the same person provides the food, over time they become associated with unconditioned stimulus (food). The neutral stimulus (caregiver) then becomes a conditioned stimulus
• once conditioning has taken place, the sight of the caregiver produces a conditioned response of pleasure; according to a learning theorist, this is the basis of attachment

Question 2

Summarise Dollard and Miller’s learning theory as an explanation for attachment

Answer 2

Before conditioning:
Food (unconditioned stimulus) = pleasure response (unconditioned response)

During conditioning:
Mother (neutral stimulus) + food (unconditioned stimulus) = pleasure response (unconditioned response)

After conditioning:
Mother (conditioned stimulus) = pleasure response (conditioned response)

Question 3

Operant conditioning can explain

Answer 3

Why babies cry for comfort- an important building block for attachment. Crying leads to a response from the caregiver, for example feeding. As long as the caregiver provides the correct response, crying is positively reinforced because it produces a pleasurable consequence

Question 4

At the same time, as the baby is positively reinforced for crying, the caregiver receives

Answer 4

negative reinforcement, because the crying stops (escaping from something unpleasant is reinforcing)- ultimately, this interplay of positive reinforcement and negative reinforcement strengthens an attachment

Question 5

Dollard and Miller’s learning theory also draws on the concept of

Answer 5

Drive reduction (an animal is motivated to act in order to satisfy biological needs; once satisfied the result is drive reduction)- hunger can be thought as a primary drive: its an innate, biological motivator. We are motivated to eat in order to reduce the hunger drive

Question 6

Who suggested that as caregivers provide food, the primary drive of hunger becomes generalised to them; so attachment is thus a secondary drive learned by association between the caregiver and the satisfaction of a primary drive?

Answer 6

Sears et al

Question 7

What are the evaluation points for Dollard and Miller’s learning theory as an explanation for attachment?

Answer 7

❌ a range of animals studies have provided evidence against food as the basis of attachment- Lorenz’s goslings imprinted before they were fed and maintained these attachments regardless of who fed them. Also, Harlow’s monkeys attached to a soft surrogate mother in preference to a wire one that dispensed milk. In both these attachments it is clear to see that attachment doesn’t develop as a result of feeding- ultimately, learning theorists themselves believed that non-human animals and humans were equivalent, and so the findings must be the same for humans

❌ ignores other factors associated with forming attachments- research into early infant-caregiver interaction suggests that the quality of attachment is associated with factors like developing reciprocity and good levels of interactional synchrony e.g. Isabella et al (1989) observed 20 mothers and infants together and assessed the degree of synchrony and the quality of mother-infant attachment. They found that high levels of synchrony were associated with better quality mother-infant attachment e.g. the emotional intensity of the relationship

✅ on the other hand, some elements of conditioning may still be involved- the problem with the learning theory as an explanation is mostly the idea that feeding provides the unconditioned stimulus, reinforcement and primary drive. We do believe that many aspects of human development are affected by conditioning so it seems plausible that it could play a role in attachment, just not in relation to feeding. For example association (classical conditioning) between the primary caregiver and the provision of comfort and social interaction could be part of what builds the attachment

❌ a newer learning explanation based on social learning was developed- social learning theory is based on the idea that social behaviour is acquired largely as a result of modelling and imitation of behaviour. Social learning theorists suggest that parents teach children to love them by modelling attachment behaviour e.g. by hugging them and other family members and instructing and rewarding them with approval when they display attachment behaviour of their own e.g. “That’s a lovely smile/hug”. This account provides a better explanation of why studies suggest interaction and reciprocity are important factors in the development of attachment. In this version of learning theory, the babies have learned attachment behaviours as a result of their interactions