Introduction to Attachment Flashcards
Key terms:
Primary attachment figure = The person who has formed the closest bond with a child, demonstrated by intensity of the relationship. This is usually the child’s biological mother but other people can fulfil the role.
Secondary attachment figure = The closest emotional bond is with a primary attachment figure; additional support is available from secondary attachment figures who provide an emotional safety net.
Caregiver-infant interactions
Reciprocity = A description of how 2 people interact. Mother-infant interaction is reciprocal in that both infant and mother respond to each other’s signals and each elicits a response from the other.
From birth, babies and their mothers (or other carers) spend a lot of time in intense and pleasurable interaction. Babies have periodic ‘alert phases’ and signal that they are ready for interaction - mothers typically pick up on/respond to infant alertness around 2-thirds of the time (Feldmand & Eidelman 2007). This interaction tends to be increasingly frequent from 3 months old and involves close attention to each other’s verbal signals and facial expressions (Feldman 2007). A key elelment of this interaction is reciprocity.
Brazleton et al. (1975) described this interaction as a ‘dance’ because it is just like a couple’s dance where each partner responds to each other’s moves.
Interactional synchrony = Mother and infant reflect both the actions and emotions of the other, and do this in a co-ordinated (synchronised) way.
Interactional synchrony can be defined as ‘the temporal coordination of micro-level social behaviour’ (Feldman 2007). It takes place when mother and infant interact in such a way that their actions/emotions mirror the other.
Meltzoff & Moore (1977) observed the beginnings of interactional synchrony in infants as young as 2 weeks old, by having an adult display one of 3 facial expressions or distinctive gestures. The child’s response was filmed and identified by independent observers, who found an association between the expression/gesture the adult had displayed and the actions of the babies.
It’s believed that interactional synchrony is important for the development of mother-infant attachment. Isabella et al. (1989) observed 30 mothers and infants together and assessed the degree of synchrony. The researchers also assessed the quality of mother-infant attachment. They found that high levels of synchrony were associated with better quality mother-infant attachment (e.g. the emotional intensity of the relationship).
Evaluation of caregiver-infant interactions
- Many studies involving observation of interactions between mothers and infants have shown the same patterns of interaction (Gratier 2003). However, what is being observed is merely hand movements or changes in expression. It is extremely difficult to be certain, based on these observations, what is taking place from the infants perspective. Is, for example the infant’s imitation of adult signals conscious and deliberate? This means that we cannot really know for certain that behaviour is seen in mother-infant interaction have a special meaning.
+ Observations of mother-infant interactions are generally well-controlled procedures, with both mother and infant being filmed, often from multiple angles. This ensures that very fine details of behaviour can be recorded and later analysed. Furthermore babies don’t know or care that they are being observed so their behaviour does not change in response to controlled observation – meaning the research has good validity.
- Feldman (2012) points out that synchrony (and by implication reciprocity) simply describe behaviours that occur at the same time. These are robust phenomena in the sense that they can be reliably observed, but this may not be particularly 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 - as well as being helpful in stress responses, empathy, language and moral development.
Attachment figures
Parent-infant attachment
Schaffer & Emerson (1964) found that the majority of babies become attached to their mother first (at around 7 months) and within a few weeks/months formed secondary attachments to other family members (including the father). In 75% of the infants studied, an attachment was formed with the father by the age of 18 months - determined by infants protesting when their father walked away.
The role of the father
Grossman (2002) carried out a longitudinal study looking at both parents’ behaviour and its relationship to the quality of children’s attachments into their teens. Quality of infant attachment with mothers but not fathers was related to children’s attachments in adolescence, suggesting that father attachment was less important.
However, the quality of fathers’ play with infants was related to the quality of adolescent attachments. This suggests that fathers have a different role in attachment - more to do with play/stimulation, less to do with nurturing.
Fathers as primary carers
Field (1978) filmed 4-month-old babies in face-to-face interaction with primary caregiver mothers, secondary caregiver fathers and primary caregiver fathers. Primary caregiver fathers, like mothers, spent more time smiling, imitating and holding infants than secondary caregiver fathers. This behaviour appears to be important in building an attachment with the infant. So it seems fathers can be more nurturing attachment figures.
Evaluation of attachment figures
- Research into the role of fathers in attachment is confusing because different researchers are interested in different research questionS, and focus on different areas of father attachment. On one hand, some psychologists are interested in understanding the role fathers have a secondary attachment figures where as others are more concerned with the father as primary attachment figure. The format have tended to see father is behaving differently from others and having a distinct role. The latter have tended to find that fathers can take on a ’maternal’ role.
- The study by Grossman found that fathers as secondary attachment figures had an important role in the children’s development. However, other studies (e.g. McCallum and Golenbock 2004) have found that children growing up in single or same-sex parent families do not develop any differently from those in 2-parent heterosexual families. This would seem to suggest that the father’s role as a secondary attachment figure is not important.
The fact that fathers tend not to become the primary care attachment figure could simply be the result of traditional gender roles, in which women are expected to be more caring and nurturing than men. Therefore father simply do not feel they should act like that. On the other hand, it could be that female hormones create higher levels of nurturing and therefore women are biologically predisposed to be the primary attachment figure.
Research into mother-infant interaction is socially sensitive because it suggests that children might be disadvantaged by particular child room practices. In particular, mother to return to work shortly after a child is born restrict the opportunities for achieving interactional synchrony, which Isabella et al. showed to be important in the developing infant-caregiver attachment. This suggests that mother should not return to work so soon and has socially sensitive implications.
