Influence of childhood Flashcards
What did Shaver propose?
Shaver proposed that our experiences of love in adulthood is an integration of three behavioral systems acquired in early infancy and childhood: attachment, caregiving and sexuality systems. The attachment system is related to the concept of the internal working model proposed by Bowlby.
What did Bowlby suggest?
Bowlby theorised that later relationships are likely to be a continuation of early attachment styles (secure or insecure) as the primary attachment figure promotes an internal working model of relationships which will set the standard for later relationships. The caregiving system is the knowledge about how one cares for others which is learned through the modeling behaviour of the primary attachment figure. The sexuality system is also learn’t through early attachment e.g. those who suffered from an avoidant attachment may then see sex without love is pleasurable.
What did Qualter et al. find?
Qualter et al have shown how children also learn from other children and interactions with peers. The way a child thinks about himself is determined by specific experiences that become internalised and as a result develops a sense of their own value which then determines how they approach adult relationships.
What did Nangle propose?
Nangle et al proposed that children’s friendships are in fact a training ground for important adult relationships. Through this close friendships could play a significant role in developing social skills as they are characterised by affection, a sense of alliance and intimacy, These are all important qualities in later adult relationships.
What did Freley et al find and what are the implications of his study?
Fraley et al conducted a meta-analysis of studies finding positive correlations between early attachment type and later relationships supporting the the theory. The possible implication here is greater support is likely needed in the childhood stage to encourage social interaction (playgroups, placing in nursery more often) as this could affect the child’s life significantly later on into adulthood with difficulties in adult relationships.
Criticism of Freley et al’s study?
The problem with this however is many studies in this area have been conducted with US participants and the results from such samples may not adequately represent other areas or cultures due to cultural bias. Therefore the theory may be limited to US children and adults for the most part.
What did Schneider et al find and what are the implications of his study?
Schneider et al found that girls have more intimate friendships while boys tend to be more competitive. This could affect how both genders develop in their ability to interact with peers in later life too and sexual selection theories “intra-sexual competition” amongst males may offer a reason for this gender difference. Therefore this theory may be flawed in its assumption that it is early attachment styles alone shaping later relationships but differences in gender also due to socialisation (nurture) or “nature” due to males competitive streak to attract females.
What did Erwin et al find?
Erwin et al claimed any gender differences are overemphasized and many similarities are actually overlooked also.
Explain Simpson’s study.
Simpson et al conducted a longitudinal study spanning more than 25 years involving 78 participants at 4 key points: Infancy, early childhood, adolescence and adulthood. The findings of this study supported the claim that expressions of emotions in adult romantic relationships could be related back to a persons early attachment experience. This is useful as it allows researchers to observe changes in behaviour first hand as opposed to asking people to rely on memory which may be biased or affected.
Weakness of Simpson’s study?
The weakness here is that other unknown variables can still be affecting the participants later adult relationships such as cultural or social factors.
What did Belsky et al. find?
Belsky et al cited studies showing that secure women experienced less conflict with their husbands than insecure women. Secure women were also found to be more likely to manage conflict in a mutually focused way which may explain why they experience less conflict in the first place and this applied to both dating and married couples. Secure indviduals were also seen to be more committed to relationships and feel greater love for their partners. Such findings are consistent with Shaver et als theory that early attachment styles may translate later into adult relationships.
What did Hamilton find?
Hamilton et al however found in other studies that securely attached children became insecure later on as a result of negative life events.
What did Rutter et al. find?
Rutter et al also found that insecure attachments in childhood did not always translate into poor quality adult relationships either as many went on to form secure stable adult relationships. This suggests a bigger role for “nurture” and the environment shaping ones behaviour possibly far more than that of early attachment styles.
Further criticisms of the theories?
Such theories that propose our early childhood experiences and attachment styles shape our later relationships are reductionist as they do not factor in other complex cultural or social influences in later life that may lead us to adapt and improve on any deficiencies from childhood. This theory states our early experiences set in stone our later relationships and this is clearly not the case. Adult relationships are far more complex and shaped by more than simply early attachment styles and experiences. This is because we have free will which allows us to break away from early experiences through conscious thought and self-awareness thus allowing us to address problem areas. Due to this such theories like this are deterministic as they assume our fate is sealed from early childhood experiences but in truth we are constantly learning and adapting our behaviour and our attachment styles may change over time.
