Lecture 3

Question 1

What caregiver characteristics should we consider?

Answer 1

Parent gender

adoption, fostering and assisted reproduction

LGBTQIA parenting

Question 2

What is the sensitivity hypothesis?

Answer 2

It predicts that early attachment security is dependent upon caregiver responsiveness and signals

Question 3

What else can you call the sensitive hypothesis?

Answer 3

Responsive hypothesis

Question 4

How would sensitive caregiving look like?

Answer 4

Responding to babies crying, cooing, smiling

Being attentive to the baby

Question 5

What are developmental theories?

Answer 5

Developmental theories are a special form of causal or ‘functional’ relationship

e.g. we’re saying one thing leads to another

Question 6

How do we establish causal relations?

Answer 6

1. Observed variables must co-vary (covariation)
2. Covariation must not be spurious (non-spuriousness)
3. Causal factors must precede outcomes (temporality)

Question 7

define covariation

Answer 7

the ability to observe how two or more variables change in relation to each other

Question 8

define spuriousness

Answer 8

what may appear as causation between two variables is actually the result of a third (spurious) variable not accounted for in the analysis

Question 9

What study design would we use to see if there is a positive association between parental sensitivity and attachment security at 14m?

Answer 9

Cross-sectional designs

Question 10

What study design would we use to see if we want to asses whether parental sensitivity measured at 6 months predicts attachment at 14m?

Answer 10

Longitudinal designs

Question 11

What study design would we use to test if when we train parents to be sensitive, do gains in sensitivity lead to changes in attachment security?

Answer 11

Intervention studies

Question 12

What are the features of a typical longitudinal design?

Answer 12

there is covariation

there is no proven non-spuriousness or causal factor precedes outcomes

Question 13

What are the features of an auto-regressive longitudinal design?

Answer 13

measuring attachment security at time 1 + caregiver sensitivity at time 1 compared to attachment security at time 2

there is covariation and non-spuriousness (potentially)

there are no causal factors that precedes the outcomes

Question 14

What are the features of a cross-lagged longitudinal design?

Answer 14

caregiver sensitivity measured at (T1) is compared to caregiver sensitivity at (T2)

alongside attachment security at (T1) compared to attachment security (T2)

caregiver sensitivity (T1) is also compared with attachment security (T2)

attachment security (T1) is also compared with caregiver security (T2)

there is covariation, non-spuriousness (potentially), and causal factor precedes outcomes

Question 15

What are the features of a intervention longitudinal design?

Answer 15

pre-test: assessment of parental sensitivity, assessment of a child attachment security

1: parental sensitivity training
2: control condition (no training)

post-test: parental sensitivity, child attachment security

there is covariation, non-spuriousness, and causal factors precede outcomes

Question 16

What did Ainsworth et al (1978) find about parental sensitivity associated with child attachment security ?

Answer 16

a really large correlation between sensitive caregiving in the home and later attachment security

Question 17

What did Lucassen et al (2011) find about parental sensitivity and the association with child attachment security?

Answer 17

not a large association between parental sensitivity and child attachment security due to the small (but still significant) effect size

Suggest it cannot be the sole factor

so this idea of sensitivity being the primary determinant isn’t true, but its still a determinant

Question 18

What is infant temperament? and does this drive the type of caregiving a child receive?

Answer 18

Individual differences in reactivity and self regulation

Tendency to approach/avoid novel stimuli

Stability of mood (positive/negative affect)

Temperament is heritable in infancy and toddlerhood

Question 19

Is temperament related to attachment security?

Answer 19

Researchers argue this temperament drives the kind of caregiving you receive.

E.g. a fearful baby that cries a lot, a caregiver might find that quite stressful and it might be harder to be sensitive to the baby.

temperament influences the type of insecure attachment that infants have with insensitive caregivers

Question 20

What did Groh et al. (2017) find in its meta analysis on temperament and secure attachment?

Answer 20

Found when you look at all the data together, the difference between the secure and insecure groups’ temperament is small and significant

So temperament plays a role in some of these associations

Question 21

What did Bakermans-Kranenburg et al. (2003) meta analysis find about improving caregiver sensitivity?

Answer 21

Found it is possible to improve caregiver sensitivity so they can see changes/improvements in sensitivity from T1 to T2 when you get training

Question 22

What are genetically sensitive designs?

Answer 22

Adoption studies, whereby we’re able to rule out genetics as a factor because the caregiver and the child are not biologically related

Question 23

What is internalising (disorders)?

Answer 23

for example anxiety, depression, somatic complaints, things that later on in adolescence or adulthood would be diagnosed as these

Question 24

What is externalising (disorders)?

Answer 24

conditions that we might see as antisocial behaviour, conduct problems, hyperactivity, children who are externalising their emotional responses to the world

Question 25

How do the attachment styles differ when responding to a threat/stressor?

Answer 25

Insecure resistant - fearful of novelty, might withdraw, more like to have internalising problems Insecure avoidant - difficulty with relationships and intimacy and therefore they might kind of have a very difficult social relationship with other people, and as a result show some of these externalising problems Secure - when there is a threat/stressor I will go to the sensitive caregiver as a source of support and comfort Disorganised - develop an overall propensity for either external or internal effects and they might just be at risk in general to all mental health difficulties

Question 26

What did Fearon et al (2010) find from their first studies?

Answer 26

Found that insecure children were significantly more likely to have externalising problems than secure children (average effect) Effect seems to be stronger in boys than girls

Question 27

What are some pro-social behaviours?

Answer 27

* Attending to Welfare of Others * Empathic responding (e.g., comforting) * Co-operation (e.g., helping, sharing)

Question 28

Why should one be cautious when researching the sensitive hypothesis?

Answer 28

* Weak-moderate associations (so other factors matter) * Studies often collapse kids into secure/not secure, so it is unclear what kinds of parenting leading to different types of insecurity * Cross-lagged designs not very common * Preponderance of work in WEIRD countries, little evidence from non-heterosexual biological families * It's also unclear why some parents are more sensitive than others… one possibility is that parents' own previous attachment history might shape their parenting

Question 29

What are criticisms of the sensitivity hypothesis?

Answer 29

Some argue that the measure of sensitive caregiving is problematic, it might not just be a single thing but a lot of things. When looking at these meta analyses, they tend to lump all of the insecure children together into one group. Often these studies will break the categories into just secure and insecure. Although there have been studies in different countries , there is still a lot of countries that are still not represented in this research. Sensitive caregiving could be viewed as middle class / western style of caregiving

Question 30

What did Bowlby and Ainsworth focus on?

Answer 30

Remember Bowlby focused on having or not having a caregiver Whilst Ainsworth came up with different kinds of attachment. So we all may have a caregiver or an attachment figure but she said that they might differ in terms of quality. So this is where we get secure/ insecure/disorganised.

Question 31

What did Fearon say about sensitive caregiving on infants and their mental health?

Answer 31

if you have a secure infant who has a sensitive caregiver, if that infant experiences threats/stress they have a working model of their caregiver as someone who is reliable. If they're in a stressful situation, they will go to that caregiver and use them as a source of support. The idea is that this positive expectation about other people and about how other people behave when you are stressed , is your foundation of your later mental health and well-being.

Question 32

What did Groh et al. (212) metal analysis find about internalising and attachment in infants?

Answer 32

Insecure groups have slightly more elevated levels of internalising than the secure group Avoidant children have elevated levels of internalising (Aligns with the fact that avoidant children minimise emotion compared to resistant children who maximise emotion) They found the resistant children were not more likely to have internalising problems than any of the other children

Question 33

What did Groh et al. (2014) find about whether secure attachment allows you to form better relationships with others?

Answer 33

Does having a secure attachment as an infant/child enable you to become someone who's better at forming and building relationships with other people? seemingly yes, as no matter what type of insecure style you are, there was always an effect found suggesting they (insecure style) were less socially competent compared to secure children These findings show us that the relationship a child had with primary caregivers might set themselves up for later relationships beyond the family.

Question 34

What did Deneault et al. (2023) meta-analysis find about pro-social behaviour in children?

Answer 34

The securely attached children were more likely than the insecurely attached children to demonstrate pro-social behaviours in different situations (not primarily, small correlation)