Explanations Of Attachment: Bowlby's Theory Of Monotropy, Critical Period And Internal Working Model Flashcards
What is monotropy?
An infant will form one particular attachment which is different in quality to all other attachments and is of central importance to the development of the child.
What is an internal working model?
The mental representations we all carry with us of our attachment to our primary caregiver. They are important in affecting our future relationships because they carry our perception of what all other relationships should be like.
What is the critical period?
The time frame in which an attachment must form if it is to form at all. Lorenz and Harlow noted that geese and monkeys had a critical period. Bowlby extended this to humans proposing that they had a sensitive period after which it will be much more difficult to develop attachments.
What did Bowlby believe about attachment?
He believed that attachment is innate and adaptive (NATURE) and he believed attachment evolved because it ensures young animals stay close to their caregivers and this protects them from hazards.
This is an evolutionary explanation as attachment is seen as having adaptive value in that it promotes survival. Similarly, the mother inherits a genetic blueprint that predisposes her to loving and protective behaviour towards the infant.
Why is Bowlby’s theory described as monotropic?
Because of the emphasis on the child’s attachment to one caregiver (usually the mother). This attachment is different from others and more important.
Bowlby believed that the more time a baby spent with its primary attachment figure/mother-figure the better. Give the two main reasons why?
•law of continuity - the more constant a child’s care, the better the quality of attachment.
•law of accumulated separation - the effects of every separation add up and can harm the child psychologically in the long term.
‘The safest dose is therefore zero dose’
When does Bowlby believe that a baby can form multiple attachments?
It is only after this one special attachment has been established that a child is able to form multiple attachments.
(Same as Schaffer and Emerson)
How is evidence for monotropy mixed?
Schaffer and Emerson’s study contradicts the idea of monotropy because, whilst babies often form an attachment to a primary caregiver first, a significant minority formed multiple attachments at the same time, showing that it is not the case that a child HAS to form a monotropic attachment first.
It is unclear whether the first attachment is unique and different in quality than all other attachments. Some studies seem to suggest that the primary attachment is just stronger than other attachments but no different in quality.
On the other hand, Suess found that the attachment bond to the mother is more important in predicting future behaviour than the attachment bond with the father but this may be because the mother is the primary attachment, and not because of differences in the quality of the attachment.
How is monotropy socially sensitive?
Monotropy is socially sensitive because of implications for mothers’ lifestyle.
The law of accumulated separation states that having substantial time apart from a primary caregiver risks a poor quality attachment that will disadvantage the child in a range of ways. Feminists argue mothers that this social pressure pushes mothers into making lifestyle choices such as not returning to work when a child is born.
However - in defence of Bowlby - this was not his intention. He saw himself as boosting the status of mothers by emphasising the importance of their role.
What are social releasers?
Social releasers are a set of innate ‘cute’ behaviours that babies are born with that encourage attention from adults and ‘draw them in’.
What is the purpose of social releasers?
The purpose of these social releasers is to activate the adult attachment system (I.e. Make an adult feel love towards the baby). In this way Bowlby recognised that attachment is a reciprocal system.
What is a strength of social releasers?
There is evidence to show that social releasers are intended to initiate social interaction.
Brazleton found that when primary attachment figures were asked to ignore their babies’ signal (social releasers), the babies showed initial distress but when they continued to ignore them they responded by curling up and lying motionless. This strong response indicates the importance of infant social behaviour in eliciting care-giving.
What did Bowlby propose about the critical period?
He proposed that there is a critical period from birth up to around two years when the infant attachment system is most active. A child is maximally sensitive up to the age of two and is biologically ‘ready’ to form a monotropic attachment within this time period.
What is difference between Bowlby and Lorenz’s view of the critical period?
Bowlby viewed the critical period as more of a sensitive period, in the sense that it is not ‘all or nothing’ and attachments can still be formed outside of this initial time frame, albeit much harder to do so. Whereas Lorenz proposed that if an attachment isn’t formed in the critical period than one will never be formed.
Bowlby also proposes that the critical period is from birth up to around 2 years, whereas Lorenz sees it as only a couple of hours after birth.
The key point though is the quality of these attachments may be poorer, and they may take longer to form outside of the critical/sensitive period.
What study refutes Bowlby’s theory of the critical period? Explain why
Hodges and Tizard showed how children adopted as late as 7 years of age could establish strong relationships with adopted parents. At the age of 16 years, the adopted children were found to have relationships that were as good as those who had been raised continuously in their own families.
This refutes the theory because it’s shows that the quality of attachment in a child who formed an attachment outside of the critical period is as strong as one who did, so shows that the 2 year critical period isn’t an important factor in establishing a quality attachment.
