Learning Theory Flashcards
What is the main idea of learning theory?
The idea that children learn to become attached to their caregiver because they give them food / the importance of food in the formation of attachments is emphasised
Classical conditioning is learning through association
Operant conditioning is learning through reinforcement
Outline classical conditioning
The caregiver who feeds the infant (NS) becomes associated with the pleasure of food (UCS)
Through classical conditioning, the caregiver alone becomes a conditioned stimulus which produces the conditioned response of pleasure (even when there is no feeding)
Therefore, the association between the individual and a sense of pleasure creates the attachment bond
Outline operant conditioning using ideas of drive reduction
Dollard and Miller
Hunger is a primary drive and when an infant is fed this drive is reduced which produces pleasure. Therefore, food is a primary reinforcer as it directly reduces the discomfort meaning the infants behaviour is likely to be repeated.
Attachment is a secondary drive so the person who provides the food that reduces the drive becomes a secondary reinforcer. Therefore the infant seeks the secondary reinforcer because they become a source of reward on their own
Outline operant conditioning using an an example of a baby crying
When babies cry their crying is usually positively reinforced by their caregiver (as they are fed)
The caregiver receives negative reinforcement because the crying stops. As this behaviour removes something negative, it is likely to be repeated.
This interplay of mutual reinforcement strengthens the attachment bond
Evaluate learning theory using evidence of learning through association and reinforcement
Strength is theory is scientific and plausible as it’s based on established theory
Lots of research shows we learn behaviours through association and reinforcement
So it seems attachments would be the same
Problems w learning theory is idea feeding provides UCS, primary drive and reinforcement
Could be association between caregiver and provision of comfort and social interaction that helps build attachment
Eg Harlow found contact comfort more important than food in attachment between monkeys
Also Lorenz found Geese imprinted before they were fed and maintained attachments regardless of who fed them
Suggests diff element of conditioning should be considered when explaining attachment
Evaluate learning theory using research into caregiver infant interactions as a limitation
Criticism is learning theory doesn’t take into account quality of infant caregiver interactions
Research suggests quality of attachments associated with developing reciprocity and good levels of interactional synchrony
Bets quality attachments associated w sensitive carers that pick up signals and respond appropriately
Therefore, if attachment purely result of feeding, be no purpose for these complex interactions
This limits LTH of attachment
Evaluate learning theory using the idea it is reductionist
The behaviourist approach is criticised as its reductionist, simplifying the complex behaviour of attachment to purely a stimulus response or through reinforcement
Learning theory focuses on nurture ignoring nature and view attachments are innate
In variation of Harlow research, infant monkeys continued to demonstrate attachment to highly abusive mothers who blasted them w cold air at regular intervals (attachment occurred in the absence of rewards)
Showing instinctive nature of this process
These are significant omissions needed to gain a holistic understanding of why attachment occurs
Evaluate learning theory using an alternative explanation
Hay and Vespo (1988) proposed newer explanation for attachment based on social learning theory whereby attachment is acquired through modelling and imitation of attachment behaviour by parents
Parents teach children to love them by modelling attachment behaviour eg hugging them and other family and rewarding them when they display their own attachment behaviour (that’s a lovely hug)
Attachment learned indirectly rather than direct approach (proposed by traditional theories of attachment)
