Explanations of attachment: Learning Theory and Bowlbys Monotropic theory Flashcards
Learning theory: explanation
-Attachments seen as developing through an infant learning to associate a caregiver with feeding,known as cupboard love theory, attachments formed with people who feed infants as they meet babies’ physiological needs.
-One type is through classical conditioning and another through operant conditioning
Learning theory: classical conditioning: explanaion
-when a repsonse produced naturally by a certain stimulus, becomes associated with another stimulus that is not normally associated with that particular response
-unconditioned stimulus which produces natural respose of pleasure as the unconditioned response with the caregiver as the neutral stimulus
- so infant learns to associate pleasure solely with the caregiver without any need for food
Learning theory: operant conditioning: explanation
-attachments occur through caregivers becoming associated with reducing unpleasant feelings of hunger(negative reinforcement) so the caregiver becomes a source reward (positive reinforcement) themself
Learning theory: evaluation: Strength 1
Offers valuable insights into attachment’s nature. It emphasizes the role of association and reinforcement in learning, implying that consistent responsiveness and sensitivity to a child’s needs from a caregiver can facilitate attachment.
Learning theory: evaluation: Strength 2
their ability to provide a clear and testable explanation for attachment and their emphasis on the role of environmental factors in shaping attachment.
Learning theory: evaluation: Limitation 1
Schaffer and Emerson found in 39% of cases, the mother was not the baby’s main attachment figure, suggesting feeding is not the primary explanation of attachment, as the mother is usually the source of food for an infant through breastfeeding.
-> this suggests we should also use other explanations of attachment to understand why attachments form such as Bowlby’s monotropic theory.
Learning theory: evaluation: Limitation 2
Theory is reductionist as they explain complex behaviours in the simplest of ways. In this case, attachments are said to be simply down to feeding and therefore internal cognitive processes or the emotional nature of attachments are not considered. So therfore, conditioning best explains the learning of only simple behaviours.
Bowlby’s monotropic theory: explanation
-heavily influenced by animal studies, Lorenz and Harlow rejecting learning theory
-attachment behaviours developed to increase chances of survival from infants to mothers
-through social releases, crying(attention),looking vocalising(maintain attention), following clinging (maintain closeness) that occur innately and automatically
-generally occuring between infants and biological mothers during citical period first 12 months
-sees primary attachment as template for future relationships known as secondary attachments, an attachment hierarchy known as the internal working model
What is monotropic theory?
Idea that infants have an innate tendency to make an initial attachment figure, usually the mother
Bowlby’s monotropic theory: Strength 1
Ainsworth (1967) observed the Ganda tribe of Uganda. Infants form one primary attachment even when reared by multiple carers, supporting Bowlbys theory of monotropy and the internal working model where one primary attachment acts as superior to the infants secondary attachments.
Bowlby’s monotropic theory: Strength 2
Bowlbys theory supported by animal studies such as Lorenz where imprinting studies suggested potential strength of attachment to a single caregiver which occured in a critical period after birth, around 13 hours, similair to Bowlby’s theory for humans being 12 months.
Bowlby’s monotropic theory: Limitation 1
However, alternate explanataions for attachment e.g learning theory from behaviourists believing it is the environment not biology that creates attachment. Syggests attachment as based on patternns of reinforcement and association of mother with food she provides.
Bowlby’s monotropic theory: Limitation 2
alpha bias, differences between role of father and mother exxaggerated as suggests fathers role is simply to provide resources to family and not form significant attachments to their children. SO lacks temporal validity as in modern society men expected to have equal part in care for children.
