Lecture 9 - Attachment and deprivation Flashcards
What are the 3 issues raised by attachment theory?
- Role of mother or other CG’s
- how does attachment develop in children in daycare/ away from mothers?
- Attachment beyond infancy?
Outline issue 1) is mother always key attachment figure?
- Traditionally yes (bowlby)
- depends on culture/ context - multiple attachments, nursery, stay at home fathers, grandparents, single mums/ dads (10% of CG’s)
- Attachments just formed to responsive people (those who provide safe abse/ comfort)
- Attachments to mom/ dad can be different
- Security is characteristic of relationship, not individual
- Parenting style, personality, previous attachment of parents - characteristics key in determining attachment quality
- Its about interaction
Outline issue 2) childcare and attachment
- Belsky (1988)
- Clarke-stewart (1991)
- No evidence in attachment differences in chilcare/ home raised kids (Scarr (1998)
- Character of parent is crucial
- Childcare quality > quantity
- If childcare is high quality, it is fine
- Howes et al (1999)
Who found attachments are just formed to responsive people?
(Cohen & Campos, 1974; Schaffer & Emerson (1964)
Outline Belsky (1988)
+20 hours of non-maternal care a week in 1st year = likelihood of insecure attachment, less compliance, more aggression
- day care had better peer relationships
Outline Clarke-Stewart (1991)
day care children had better intellectual and social dev compared to home cared
Outline what is meant by good/ bad quality daycare
Good:
- good staff:child ratio
- stimulating env
- gives insecure children chance to form secure attachments
Outline Howes et al (1999)
low quality daycare leads to:
- destructive behaviour
- less consideration for others feelings
high quality daycare:
- if no stimulation at home, and there is at daycare, its beneficial
- makes them less hostile, more focused etc
Outline issue 3) implications of attachment type in later life
- Attachment type in infancy - Predicts other types of dev and later behaviour
- Securely attached -> socially competent child (confident, popular, co-operative with adults, empathetic)
- Kochanska (2001)
- Sroufe et al (2005)
Outline Kochanska (2001)
- Studied 9-33 months infants in lab episodes that elicit fear, anger or joy
Type A - more fearful
Type C - less joyful
Type B - less fear, anger, distress
Outline Sroufe et al (2005)
Found Secure attachment at 12 months leads to positive effects at 2,3.5, 10 and 15 years
- at 2: lots of exploration and pretennd play
- at 3.5: curious, played better with peers, better relationships with teachers/ staff
- at 10: better social skills, more friends
- at 15: higher SE, open with feelings, better at reading emotions
X -western study, may differ
Who came up with adult attachment interview (AAI)
George, Kaplan & Main (1985)
Outline George, Kaplan & Main (1985) adult attachment interview
- assesses adult attachment types
- semi-structured interview
- talk about attachments with parents/ CGs
- try to recall early child experiences
What were the adult attachment classifications
- Autonomous/ Secure (B)
- need open, objective recall of childhood experiences, even if they were bad - Dismissing (A)
- think early attachmes had little value - Preoccupied/ emeshed (C) - preoccupied by parents, trying to gain approval
- Unresolved mourning/ loss (D) - experienced trauma they havent got over it
Outline attachment across generations
- Main et al (1985)
- van-ijzendoorn
- IWM
- Reflective self-function - challenging way you reflect on childhood, changes AAI classification
- Continuous secure vs earned secure (changed vias reflective self-function)
Outline Main et al (1985)
- looked at links between AAI and SS
- found common links between AAI of parent and SS of their child
Outline Van Ijzendoorn
Invented ‘intergenerational transmission’
- which Main supported
Outline Internal working models
- Based off experiences on interactions with others in past
- Can influence your parental sensitivity - as we base our behaour off previous relationships
- Can break this insecure cycle via reflective self-function
Outline Solomon & George (1999) - Stability of attachment
- attachment type continuity from 12 months - 6 years
- changes often due to life events - trauma
- can get secure if illness/ povery/ divorce ending
Outline Bar-heim et al (2000) and Vaughn et al (1979) - Stability of attachment
Secure goes to insecure due to divorce, death, poverty, abuse, illness/ psychiatric disorder
Outline Waters et al (2000) - Stability of attachment
20 year longitudinal study
- SS in infancy mirror adult attachment type
- Mostly continuity, any discontinuity was due to negative life events
What did Bowlby argue about lack of attachment
If you have no opportunity to form attachments:
- vitamin quote
- Believed there was a critical period: 2.5 years - need to form attachment before then, otherwise it wouldnt happen
- should also avoid prolonged seperation - harms cog/ soc dev
- Need warm, intimate relationship with mother
Outline research/ empirical evidence for Maternal Deprivation
- Critical period for attachment formation (lorenz)
- Child distressed when seperated from mother
- Dev delays in institutional children - no stimulation/ interaction (maternal deprivation)
- Harlows monkeys
- Delinquency in children with a seperation experience
(X - Cant confirm cause and effect)
Outline Harlow’s Rhesus Monkeys (1959)
- wondered what underpins attachment relationships
- Isolated 8 newbowns, 4 fed by cloth, 4 by wire
- for 165 days (5.5 months)
Outline Harlow’s Rhesus Monkeys (1959) findings
- All clung to cloth for support, even if wire fed
- ran to cloth when scared
- All fed fine
- Showed impaired development, indifferent/ abusive to other monkeys
Outline Harlow & Harlow (1962)
- Totally isolate monkeys, no sound, light or contact with others
- Were socially inept/ maladjusted when meeting other monkeys
- could be reversed if under 3 months, not if it was 6-12 months
Evaluate Bowlys Hypothesis
X - doesnt have to be mother
X - ‘sensitive’ not ‘critical’ period
√ - improved institutional care env
- more stimulation, better staff:child ratio, can now form meaningful relationships
√ - Less institutes, more fostering (76% in care are fostered now)
√- easier visiting in hospitals
X - made working mothers guilty, especially if missing the window
X - not monotropic like he said (Roy et al 2000)
Outline Roy (2000)
- studied 6 year olds: 19 from institutions. 19 from foster homes
- both had worse school outcomes than normal children
- institutions group worse than foster homes
- Institution kids had worse attention, more hyperactivity, greater emotional disturbance than foster cares
- argued this was due to having multiple caregivers - couldnt form attachments to primary CG
Evaluate case studies
X - cant generalise
√ - learn lots
Outline Koluchova (1972) Czech twins
- 1.5-7 by psychopathic stepmother and inadequate father
- Bio mother died at 11 months
- Kept in small bare cupboard, little food, no exercise or sunlight
- Discovered at 7:
Outline Koluchova twins progress
- Discovered at 7: could hardly walk, no fine motor skills, no spontaneous speech, - mistrusting, timid, couldnt recognise common objects, very fearful, physically small
- Rickets (soft bones, due to no vitamin D)
- age 7-10 put into childrens home - rapid dev, entered mainstream school at 10
- by 14, IQ was normal
- still had severe deprivation in developing emotional bonds
Outline Genie (Curtiss, 1977)
- severely neglected from 2-13 years
- daytimes chained to potty
- tied into sleeping bad at night
- no one spoke to her, father just growled/ scratched at her
- found at 13
Outline Genie progress
- Found at 13
- extremely underweight
- made unintelligble sounds, not toilet trained, shuffled feet (couldnt walk)
- had good perception/ spacial reasoning
- over time learned to walk/ use toilet
- couldnt speak/ poor grammar - missed critical stage in brain dev
- brain regions in charge of grammar werent used so died off
- developed emotional responses
- attacched to those in rehab center - showed distress when they leave
Why did twins do better?
- had first few months with mother
- also younger when found, may not have missed critical stages
- had each other, not alone
- rehab was more favourable underr these conditions
- Genie was maybe more severe and much longer
Outline Tizzard et al - env role in offsetting deprivation
- studied 65 english working class children raised in nurseries from birth - 2 years
- Care was high quality (well fed, well trained staff, lots of toys/ books, very stimulating env)
- BUT high turnover
- prevented any intimate relationship with CG - staff couldnt interact with them for long period
- compared 3 groups of children at 2, 8, 16
1. Returned to family aged 2
2. adopted between 2-8
3. remained in nursury
Outline Tizzard et als findings
- IQ highest in adopted group, they were good at reading, securely attached to adoptees (who gave them lots attention)
- returned to family didnt do as well
- did worse if stayed in nursery
- shows adoption is favourable
- and you need a good env stimuli in adopted familes
Whats the consensus on deprivation
- suggests effects of deprivation can be reversed - especailly with positive, stimulating env
- Enriched env as compensation for deprviation
- Critical period is challenged
- Catch up effects evidence
- Delinquency and mental health issues more likely later on
