Explanations of attachments: Bowlby's monotropic theory

Question 1

What did Bowlby believe babies are born with?

Answer 1

That babies are born with a biological instinct to form attachments, this is an example of evolutionary theory of the innate drive to survive.

Question 2

What does Bowlby believe about attachments?

Answer 2

He believes that there is one attachment an infant has which is stronger and more important than all others (monotropy=one) which is the attachment with the mother. He stated that ‘mother love in infancy is just as important for a child’s metal health as vitamins and minerals are for physical health’

Question 3

What did Bowlby believe about the innate drive to form an attachment?

Answer 3

He believed that it’s only temporary so must be formed in the critical/sensitive period and if a child does not form an attachment in this critical period (2.5 years) an attachment will not occur. He later proposed a sensitive period of 5 years.

Question 4

What is this attachment facilitated by?

Answer 4

It’s facilitated by the infant using social releases. These are innate behaviours that will make the baby be noticed by the caregiver e.g. smiling and cooing to initiate interactions (which the mother is hardwired to respond to), so the infant receives what they need for survival

Question 5

What did Bowlby argue was an important function of the attachment bond?

Answer 5

To develop an internal working model, whereby the bond provides the child with a template of how a relationship should function in terms of, from example, trust and security, which they then use as a template for their attachments with their own children in later life. Later relationships in life will then mirror this attachment with the caregiver which is also referred to as the continuity hypothesis (if a child has a secure attachment to its mother in infancy it will have a better relationship in adulthood).

Question 6

What are the limitations of Bowlby’s explanation of attachment?

Answer 6

1. Many have criticised the concept of monotropy- researchers have found that it’s the norm for infants to have multiple attachments e.g. Schaffer and Emerson (1964)- by 18 months, 29% had at least 5 attachments- Crittenden and Marlowe (2008)- studied a tribe in Tanzania- this tribe share the childcare among one another, so as one person is not always looking after the child, monotropy is unlikely to develop.
2. It ignores the importance of the role of the father- this theory is clear that the mother is the primary attachment figure which minimises the importance of the father- but we know that the role of the father can be just as important so any evidence from the role of the father contradicts this theory.

Question 7

What are the strengths of Bowlby’s explanation of attachment?

Answer 7

1. Supported by research- Hazan and Shaver (1987) published a ‘love quiz’ in a local newspaper which asked questions aimed to gauge the participant’s attachment type in infancy and their attachment type in later adulthood and found a correlation-provides support for the idea that your attachment style provides you with a blueprint for later relationships so follows you throughout life.
2. Further research to support- the concept of the internal working model is from McCarthy (1999)- a study on women who had already had their attachment styles recorded in infancy- found a clear link between attachment type in infancy and later relationships- those securely attached in infancy had healthy adult relationships and friendships-those classed as insecure struggled with adult relationships and friendships- supported the idea of a template for later relationships.