Explanations of Attachment: Learning theory Flashcards
Learning theory and attachment
Dollard and Miller proposed that caregiver-infant attachment can be explained by learning theory. Their approach is sometimes called a ‘cupboard love’s approach because it emphasises the importance of the caregiver as a provider of food.
Explains classical conditioning in terms of dollard and Millers learning theory
Involves learning to associate two stimuli together so that we begin to respond to one in the same way as we already respond to the other
In the case of attachment food acts as an UCS. Being fed gives us pleasure which is an UCR. A caregiver starts as a NS. When the same person provides the food over time they become associated with ‘food’- when the baby sees this person theres en immediate expectation of food. The NS has become a CS. Once conditioning had taken place the sight of the caregiver produces a CR of pleasure.
Explain operant conditioning in terms of the learning theory
Involves learning to repeat a behaviour, or not, depending on its consequences. If w behaviour produced a pleasant consequence it is more likely to be repeated again The behaviour has been reinforced. If it produced an unpleasant consequence it’s less likely to be repeated. Operant conditioning cak explain why babies cry for comfort. Crying leads to a response from the caregiver e.g feeding. Qs long we the caregiver produces the correct response, crying is reinforced. The baby then directd crying for comfort towards the caregiver. This reinforcement is a two-way process. At the same time the baby is reinforced for crying the caregiver receives negative reinforcement because the crying stops-escaping from something unpleasant.this interplay of mutual reinforcement strengthen ls an attachment.
Explain attachment as a secondary drive
Hunger can be thought of as a primary drive- it’s an innate biological motivator. We are motivated to eat in order to reduce the hunger drive. Sears et al. Suggested that, as a caregiver provides food, the primary drive of hunger becomes generalised to them. Attachment is thus a secondary drive learned by an association between the caregiver and the satisfaction of a primary drive.
AO3- counter-evidence from animal research
A range of animal studies shoe that actually young animals dont necessarily attach to those who feed them. For example, Lorenz’s geese imprinted before they were fed and maintained these attachments regardless of who fed them. Also harlows monkeys attached w soft surrogate in preference to a wire one that dispensed milk.
AO3-counter evidence from human infants
Research with human infants also show thay feeding doesnt appear to be am important factor in humans. For example, in Schaffer and emerson’s study many of the babies developed a primary attachment to their biokogical mother even though other carers did most of the feeding. This shows that feeding isnt the key element to attachment and so theres no UCS or primary drive involved.
AO3- learning theory ignores other factors associated with forming attachments
Research into ear infant-caregiver interaction suggests that the quality of attachment is associated with factors like developing reciprocity and good levels of intersectional synchrony. In addition, studies have shown thay the best quality attachments are with sensitive carers that pick up infant signals and respond appropriately. It is very hard to reconcile these findings with the idea of cupboard love.
