Learning Theory - Attachment Flashcards
Who made the link between learning theory and attachment?
John Dallard and Neal Miller (1950) proposed caregiver-infant attachment can be explained by learning theory.
What can the learning theory approach also be known as and why?
The ‘cupboard love’ approach, because it emphasises the importance of the attachment figure as a provider of food.
What is classical conditioning?
Learning through association.
How can classical conditioning explain attachments?
- food is an unconditioned stimulus that produces an unconditioned response (pleasure).
- caregiver starts as a neutral stimulus who produces no response.
- caregiver is continually paired with the unconditioned stimulus (food), and the infant associates them, until eventually the caregiver alone can produce pleasure.
- the caregiver is then a conditioned stimulus and the pleasure they bring is a conditioned response.
What is operant conditioning?
learning through reinforcement or punishment.
What is reinforcement in operant conditioning?
If a behaviour results in a pleasant consequence, that behaviour is more likely to happen again.
Eg if a baby cries and then gets fed, the baby will be more likely to cry in the future when its hungry.
What is punishment in operant conditioning?
If a behaviour results in an unpleasant consequence, that behaviour is less likely to be repeated.
Eg if crying leads to a punishment, the baby will likely cry less.
What are primary drives?
A basic, biological need that motivates behaviour, such as hunger, thirst, or the need for warmth. These don’t need to be learned; they are a built in part of being human, and are essential for survival.
What are secondary drives?
A learned motivation that develops as a result of satisfying a primary drive. They are learned through experiences.
Eg attachment is a secondary drive, and it is learned through experiences like the babys hunger being satisfied by the caregiver.
How could operant conditioning explain attachment?
Primary drives, like hunger, become linked to secondary drives, such as emotional closeness. Over time, the baby learns to associate the caregiver with comfort, care, and food, creating an attachment.
Could the learning theory still explain attachment even if food isn’t a main factor?
Conditioning could still be a part of attachment. While food may not be the main reason for attachemnt, a baby might associate warmth and comfort with a specific adult, leading to an attachment being formed.
Does the learning theory suggest that babies play an active or passive role in attachemnt?
It views babies as passive, reacting to rewards like comfort or food. Attachment forms through conditioning, where babies simply respond to their environment.
How does research counter the learning theorys view that babies roles are passive?
Research by Feldman and Eidelman shows that babies actively engage with caregivers through eye contact and gestures, influencing how caregivers respond. This active involvement isn’t explained by the learning theory, suggesting conditioning alone doesn’t explain all of attachment.
Why doesn’t Lorenz’s research support the learning theory?
Lorenz found that goslings imprinted on the first moving object they saw, regardless of whether it provided food.
Why doesn’t Harlow’s research support the learning theory?
Harlow’s research with rhesus monkeys showed that they preferred to stay with a soft, cloth mother, even though it didn’t provide food.