Learning Theory of Attachment Flashcards
What is learning theory?
-This argues that attachments are learned and based on the ideas of operant and classical conditioning
-First attachments are formed with those people who feed them, who changes them and who cuddles them
What is classical conditioning?
what is operant conditioning?
-Classical Conditioning = Baby associates mother with food as she is the one who feds
-Operant Conditioning = baby is rewarded for crying or smiling with food or attention. mother provides this reward
What is cupboard love?
-The idea attachments are formed with people who feed infants and that infants only show affection to seek a reward (food)
What happens before conditioning?
Unconditioned Stimulus (UCS)
Produces
Unconditioned Response (UCR)
Milk = (UCS)
Produces
Happy Baby (UCR)
Neutral Stimulus (NS)
Produces
No Response (NR)
Mother = (NS)
Produces
Baby no different (NR)
What happens during conditioning?
Neutral Stimulus (NS/Mother)
Paired with
Unconditioned Stimulus (UCS/Milk)
Produces
Unconditioned Response (UCR/Happy baby)
Mother = (NS)
Produces
Milk (UCS)
Produces
Happy Baby (UCR)
What are the results after conditioning?
Conditioned Stimulus (CS)
Produces
Conditioned Response (CR)
Mother = (CS)
Produces
Happy Baby (CR)
*Baby is now happy w/o milk just the mother
How do we use classical conditioning ?
-Baby has reflex responses meaning milk/food (UCS) automatically makes the baby happy (UCR)
-Mother (NS) initially elicits no response with the baby (NR)
-Overtime baby associates mother (NS) with food (UCS) which makes the baby happy (UCR)
-Baby links the mother (NS) and the feeling of pleasure (UCR) and this becomes a (CR)
-Mother now can make baby happy with or without food
What is Operant Conditioning? (explained)
-First devised by Skinner
-Based on consequences from behaviour
-Behaviour that produces reward will be repeated
-Behaviour that stops something unpleasant happening will be repeated
-Behaviour that results in consequence will not be repeated
How do we use Operant Conditioning?
-It is suggested that the baby, when hungry/uncomfortable, will enter the Drive State
-The Drive State motivates the baby to find a way to stop the discomfort/hunger so they cry (social releaser)
-Caregiver will attempt to console the baby by feeding them which results in Drive Reduction
-This rewards the baby and also makes food is a reward and the Primary Reinforcer
-The person feeding the baby is the Secondary Reinforcer
-Baby will look to seek comfort from only the Secondary Reinforcer as they are related to the Primary Reinforcer of food and thus become Attached
What are 4 weaknesses?
Contradictory evidence from Schaffer and Emerson
-both condition types emphasise the idea of feeding being the most important part of the process
-However S+E found this was not always true, 60 Scottish babies, 39% had primary attachment to the person who did not carry out feeding or changing
This claim challenges the idea that attachment is based off who is feeding and changing the baby, it might be those who play with the baby rather than just always being there.
Contradictory evidence from Harlow’s Monkeys
-Harlow’s Monkeys grew up with tether a wire mother who had a feeding bottle attached or with a soft cloth mother with no food
-according to learning theory the Monkey should have attached to the wire mother but they more commonly attached to the soft cloth mother and would even cling to it when they felt scared (sign of attachment)
Again shows that feeding was not the main cause of attachment but the mother who provided comfort and not generally food.
Extrapolation/Caution should be taken
-Due to ethical restrictions, associated with using humans for human research we must use animals
-Theorists suggest human and animal especially monkey are very closely linked genetically and psychologically so we use them
-however, although humans and monkeys share 94% DNA, making generalisations should be make with great caution as humans are much more complex species than monkeys
We cannot necessarily assume that monkeys and humans would respond in the same way or even similar.
Reductionist
-Learning theory reduces complexities of human nature to simply reward and punishment and stimulus response
-These ideas are too simple to explain how humans really attach to one another
-Learning theory ignores the idea of attachment as an innate response and evolutionary safety as Bowlby explains
-Harlow’s study also proves attachment is closely linked with feelings of security and safety (cloth mother)
Thus refuting the idea of Learning theory and conditioning as a means of explanation for a possibly much more complex biological, environmental explanation for attachment
