Introduction To Attachment

Question 1

What is an attachment?

Answer 1

An attachment is a long-enduring emotionally meaningful tie to a particular individual. It is a two way process (reciprocal).

Question 2

What are the three signs of attachment?

Answer 2

Proximity seeking, stranger anxiety, separation anxiety.

Question 3

What is proximity seeking?

Answer 3

Wanting to be close to the attachment figure.

Question 4

What is stranger anxiety?

Answer 4

Distress when in the company of unknown people.

Question 5

What is separation anxiety?

Answer 5

Distress when apart from the attachment figure.

Question 6

What is reciprocity?

Answer 6

A description of how two people interact. Mother-infant interaction is reciprocal in that both infant and mother respond to each other’s signals and elicit a response from each other. Reciprocity occurs when the infant and adult respond to each other’s actions with a similar action.

Question 7

What is interactional synchrony?

Answer 7

Mother and infant reflect the actions and emotions of the other and do so in a coordinated way. The mother and infant tend to mirror what the other is doing in terms of facial and body movements. This includes imitating the emotions as well as behaviours.

Question 8

What have traditional views of childhood seen the baby’s role as?

Answer 8

Traditional views of childhood have seen the baby in a passive role, receiving care from an adult. More recent research however has suggested that the baby plays a much more active role - particularly in terms of interaction with its parent/caregiver.

Question 9

What does interaction between a caregiver and an infant serve to do?

Answer 9

Interaction between a caregiver and an infant serves to develop and maintain an attachment bond between them.

Question 10

What is one feature of reciprocity?

Answer 10

Turn-taking, for instance the adult will provide verbal communication and the baby will respond accordingly, say, by gurgling.

Question 11

What study provided evidence for reciprocity in infant-caregiver interaction?

Answer 11

Murray and Trevarthan

Question 12

Describe Murray and Trevarthan’s study

Answer 12

The study demonstrates how the infant takes an active role in these interactions by deliberately interfering with the interactional turn taking.

The mother verbally communicates and interacts with the infant ‘turn-taking’ and then stops the interaction by adopting a frozen face.

The baby became extremely upset and tried to draw the mother back into the conversation.

This suggests that a child does take an active role in interaction by deliberately trying to engage in the turn taking.

Question 13

Give another feature of reciprocity

Answer 13

Imitation

Question 14

What study provides evidence for imitation in infant-caregiver interaction?

Answer 14

Melzoff and Moore

Question 15

Describe Melzoff and Moore’s study

Answer 15

Infants were presented with one of three facial expressions and one of three distinctive gestures, such as a hand movement. A dummy was placed in the infant’s mouth to prevent any movement before and during the presentation by the adult model. After presentation of the behaviour by the adult, the dummy was removed and the child’s immediate response was recorded and the child’s immediate response was recorded on a close-up video. Independent judges that rated the infant’s response for likeness to any of the four target behaviours (they were not told which expression/movement the child had just seen)

There was a significant association between the model’s expression or gesture and the action produced by the baby. The babies were able to closely imitate specific facial expressions or hand movements.

The study shows that very young children will imitate facial expressions and hand movements showing that they are innately social media. They play an active role in interaction through reciprocity and imitation.

Question 16

Describe Isabella et al’s interactional synchrony study

Answer 16

Isabella et al observed 30 mothers with their infants and assessed the degree of interactional synchrony. They also assessed the quality of the mother-infant attachment. They found that high levels of interactional synchrony were associated with better quality of attachment (e.g. The emotional intensity of the relationship)

Question 17

Why do adults modify their language when conversing with young children/babies?

Answer 17

It is a way of drawing the child into the interaction.

Question 18

What is this modified language called and how does it differ from normal linguistic styles?

Answer 18

It is called motherese and is more high pitched and slower than normal talk.

Question 19

What did Papousek find about motherese?

Answer 19

Papousek et al found that Chinese, German and American mothers tended to use a rising tone to signal to the baby that it was their ‘turn’ in the interaction.
‘Motherese’ can therefore be seen as contributing towards the effectiveness of interactional synchrony.

However some research has suggested that there is no clear evidence that ‘motherese’ leads to a more secure attachment and its main role is to enhance communication.

Question 20

OVERALL EVALUATION OF THE ROLE OF CAREGIVER-INFANT INTERACTIONS IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF ATTACHMENT

How are controlled observations a strength of research into caregiver-infant interactions?

Answer 20

Observations of mother-infant interactions are generally well-controlled procedures, with both mother and infest being filmed, often from multiple angles. This ensures that very fine details of behaviour can be recorded and later analysed.

Furthermore, babies are unaware of don’t care they they are being observed so their behaviour does not change in response to the controlled observation (this is generally a problem for observational research). This means that the research has good validity.

Question 21

What are the four limitations of research into caregiver-infant interactions?

Answer 21

• it is hard to know what is happening when observing infants
• observations don’t tell us the purpose of synchrony and reciprocity
• research into mother-infant interaction is socially sensitive
• failure to replicate

Question 22

How is it hard to know what is happening when observing infants?

Answer 22

Many studies involving interactions between mothers and their infants have shown the same pattern of interaction. However, what is being shown is merely hand movements or changes in expression. It is very difficult to be certain what is taking place from the infant’s perspective. For example we do not know if the infant’s imitative behaviours are deliberate and conscious and if it represents genuine social understanding or not.

This means that we cannot know for certain that behaviours seen in mother-infant interaction have a special meaning.

Question 23

Observations don’t tell us the purpose of synchrony and reciprocity. How is this a limitation?

Answer 23

Feldman points out that synchrony (and by implication reciprocity) simple describe behaviours that occur at the same time. These behaviours can be reliably observed, but this may not be useful as it does not tell us their purpose.

However, there is some evidence that reciprocal interaction and synchrony are helpful in the development of mother-infant attachment (Isabella), as well as helpful in stress responses, empathy, language and moral development.

Question 24

How is research into mother-infant interaction socially sensitive?

Answer 24

Research in this area is socially sensitive because it suggests that children may be disadvantaged by particular child rearing practices. In particular, mothers who return to work shortly after a child is born will restrict the opportunities for achieving interactional synchrony.

For this reason, the findings of such research may have implications for particular social groups I.e. Working mother.

Question 25

How is failure to replicate a limitation of research into caregiver-infant interaction in the development of attachment?

Answer 25

Other studies have failed to replicate the findings of early studies of infant-caregiver interaction. For example, a study by Koeple et al failed to find support for Melzoff and Moore’s findings. Marian et al replicated the ‘frozen face’ study and found that infants could not distinguish live from videotaped interactions with their mothers.

This suggests that the infants were not acutely responding to the adult.