Explanations of attachments - learning theory Flashcards
Learning Theory
aka behavioural theory proposes all behaviour is learned and not inborn. when babies are born they are blank slates
Behaviourists
all behaviour (inc attachments) is learned through classical or operant conditioning
Cupboard love theory
The belief that attachments are formed with people who feed infants (learning theory explanation)
classical conditioning
based on learning through association. Pavlov’s experiments
UCS
unconditioned stimulus
UCR
unconditioned response
NS
neutral stimulus
CS
conditioned stimulus
CR
conditioned response
Pavlov’s experiment
Food (UCS) = Salivation (UCR)
Bell (NS)
Food (UCS) + Bell (NS) = Salivation (UCR)
Bell (CS) = Salivation
Pavlov’s experiment explanation
through repetition, an association is created between the bell and food and classical conditioning has occurred as the sound of the bell elicits salivation.
operant conditioning
Based on learning through rewards (reinforcement, +ve or -ve) and punishments (+ve or -ve)
Skinner
rats could learn to press a lever to gain a reward
What happens when behaviours are rewarded
They are repeated. it is reinforced
what are the two types of reinforcement?
positive reinforcement (gaining pleasure) and negative reinforcement (removal and discomfort)
What happens when behaviours are punished?
less likely to be repeated
What is a primary drive?
An innate, biological motivator e.g. hunger
What is a secondary drive?
A drive towards something that helps us satisfy a primary drive
drive reduction
theory that claims that behavior is driven by a desire to lessen drives resulting from needs that disrupt homeostasis
What are the weaknesses of learning theory as an explanation of attachments ?
- Based on learning theory which is complex
- Attachment is not based on food, like lorenz, harlow and Schaffer and emerson’s studies show
- ignores other factors associated with forming attachments, such as interactional synchrony and reciprocity
Why is the complexity of learning theory a disadvantage in explaining attachments?
attachments are argued to be complex behaviour that cannot be explained by conditioning and are inborn and necessary for survival
What are the strengths of learning theory as an explanation of attachments?
- Some elements of conditioning could still be involved in forming attachments so learning theory is plausible
- May be a newer learning theory explanation of attachments like social learning theory from Bandura. Dale Hay and Jo Vespo (1988)
Dale Hay and Jo Vespo (1988)
suggested modelling could explain attachment behaviours
