Introduction to attachment Flashcards
Caregiver-infant interactions
Definition
meaningful social interactions with carers
Reciprocity
Definition
infant and mother respond to each other’s signals and elicit a response from each other
Reciprocity
People
└Feldman and Eieldman (2007)- mothers notice/ respond to infants alertness about 2/3 of the time
└Feldman (2007) interaction more frequent around 3 months
└Brazleton et al (1975)- described interaction as a dance
Interactional synchrony
Definition
mother and infant reflect actions and emotions of the other in a co-ordinated (synchronised) way
Interactional synchrony
People
└Feldman (2007)- ‘the temporal co-ordination of micro-level social behaviour’
└Meltzoff and Moore (1977)- observe as young as 2 weeks old –association between one of 3 distinctive gestures and response
└Isabella et al (1989)- assessed synchrony degree in 30 mothers via observation- assessed quality of mother-infant attachment
└higher mother-infant attachment= higher levels of synchrony
Caregiver-infant interactions
Strengths
Controlled observations
└mother and child filmed from many angles so can record and analyse finer details later
└babies don’t know they are being observed so no change in behaviour
└good validity
Caregiver-infant interactions
Limitations
Summary
Observations are difficult - Gratier (2003)
Don’t tell us the purpose of synchrony and reciprocity- Feldman (2012)
Socially sensitive research- working mothers - Isabella et al
Caregiver-infant interactions
Limitations
Observations are difficult
└Gratier (2003)- observation of interactions have shown same pattern
└cant tell from infants perspective- if deliberate and conscious?
Caregiver-infant interactions
Limitations
Don’t tell us the purpose of synchrony and reciprocity
└Feldman (2012)
└synchrony (+reciprocity) simply describe behaviours that happen at the same time
└good as can be easily observed
└not useful as doesn’t tell purpose
└however some evidence that they are helpful in development of mother-infant attachment
└helpful in stress responses, empathy language and moral development
Caregiver-infant interactions
Limitations
Socially sensitive research- working mothers
└suggests children may be disadvantaged by certain child rearing practices
└mothers that return to work shortly after a child is born- restrict opportunities of achieving interactional synchrony
└Isabella et al
└important in developing caregiver-infant attachment
└suggests mothers shouldn’t return to work too soon
Attachment
Definition
a close two way emotional bond between too individuals in which each individual sees the other as essential for their own emotional security
attachment behaviours
-proximity (stay physically close)
-separation distress (distress when an attachment figure leaves their presence)
secure-base behaviour (regularly return to attachment figure while playing-infants)
attachment behaviours
proximity
stay physically close
attachment behaviours
separation distress
distress when an attachment figure leaves their presence
attachment behaviours
secure-base behaviour
regularly return to attachment figure while playing-infants
Parent-infant attachment
Person
Schaffer and Emerson (1964)
Parent-infant attachment
└Schaffer and Emerson (1964)
└majority of babies attached to mother first (within 7 months) then formed secondary attachment with father (by 18 months- 75%)
Role of father
Person
Grossman (2002)
Role of father
└Grossman (2002)
└longitudinal study- look at mother/fathers behaviour and relationship to quality of attachment into teens
└quality of infant attachment with mothers not fathers was important= suggest mothers attachment more important
└fathers quality of play>quality of nurturing
Fathers as primary carers
Person
Field (1978)
Fathers as primary carers
└Field (1978)
└filmed 4 month old babies in face to face interaction with primary caregiver mothers/fathers and secondary caregiver fathers
└primary more time smiling imitating and holding infants
└=level of responsiveness important not gender
Attachment figures
Limitations
Summary
Inconsistent findings on fathers
Why aren’t children with no fathers different - MacCallum and Golombok (2004)
Why don’t fathers generally become primary attachments
Attachment figures
Limitations
Inconsistent findings on fathers
└psychologists study different questions so come out with different results
└as secondary attachment figure= distinct different role from mothers
└as primary attachment figure= take on ‘maternal’ role
Attachment figures
Limitations
Why aren’t children with no fathers different
└MacCallum and Golombok (2004)
└single/same sex families don’t develop differently to heterosexual families
