Explanations of Attachment - Learning Theory Flashcards
what does the learning theory state about attachment
Attachment is learnt
The learning theory suggests that attachment is learned through:
Classical Conditioning: learning through association
– this serves to create the attachment
Operant Conditioning: learning through consequence
– this serves to strengthen the attachment
what is the cupboard love theory
As caregivers meet babies’ physiological needs, learning theory is also known as a ‘cupboard love theory’ (as the cupboard contains food!).
It assumes that FOOD drives the formation of the attachment bond.
what is Time contiguity
– an association develops between the UCS and NS if they are experienced close together in time.
what is drive reduction
A ‘drive’ is something that motivates behaviour; when an animal is uncomfortable, this creates a drive to reduce that discomfort.
what id drive reduction in hungry infants
In the case of a hungry infant there is a drive to reduce the accompanying discomfort.
what is the positive and negative reinforcement when infants fed
When the infant is fed, the drive is reduced (negative reinforcement) producing a feeling of pleasure this acts as a reward (positive reinforcement).
what are the primary and secondary reinforcers
Food is the primary reinforcer because it supplies the reward.
The person who supplies the food (caregiver) is the secondary reinforcer, as they are associated with reducing the unpleasant feeling of hunger (negative reinforcement) and are a source of reward in their own right (positive reinforcement).
Attachment occurs because the child seeks the person who can supply the reward.
At the same time, the caregiver receives negative reinforcement because the crying stops.
:( Harlow’s (1959) research undermines the learning theory…
Learning theory suggests that food is key in the formation of attachment.
However, Harlow (1959) showed that infant rhesus monkeys were most ‘attached’ and showed a clear preference for the wire mother that provided ‘contact comfort’ as opposed to food: the monkeys clung to the cloth-covered surrogate monkey for 18+ hours a day and sought comfort from this surrogate when scared; they also showed a greater degree of exploration when this surrogate was present.
This suggests that emotional security is more important than food in the formation of attachment.
On the other hand, Harlow’s research could be criticised in that there are problems extrapolating the findings to attachment in human infants.
What applies to monkeys may not also apply to human infants in the same way. Arguably, there are differences in the nature and complexity of attachment bonds in different species. Humans differ in important ways to monkeys and it might be the case that food plays a more important role in the formation of attachment in humans
:( Schaffer & Emerson’s (1964) findings also provide evidence against the learning theory of attachment
In 39% of cases, the mother (usually the main carer, who fed the infant) was not the baby’s main attachment figure, suggesting that feeding is not the primary explanation of attachment.
:)Dollard and Miller (1950) support the idea that attachments are learned through operant conditioning…
In their first year, babies are fed 2000 times, generally by their main carer, which creates ample opportunity for the carer to become associated with the removal of the unpleasant feeling of hunger, a form of negative reinforcement.
Behaviourist explanations are reductionist, which means they reduce complex behaviours (such as attachment) down to their smallest components e.g. stimulus-response units.
When explaining attachments as simply down to feeding, behaviourism does not consider internal cognitive (mental) processes, or the emotional or evolutionary nature of attachments.
