Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Developmental Psychology > Lecture 9 - Attachment and deprivation > Flashcards

Lecture 9 - Attachment and deprivation Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
Psychology 101 flashcards GRE® Psychology flashcards AP® Psychology flashcards
1
Q

What are the 3 issues raised by attachment theory?

A
  1. Role of mother or other CG’s
  2. how does attachment develop in children in daycare/ away from mothers?
  3. Attachment beyond infancy?
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Outline issue 1) is mother always key attachment figure?

A
  • 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
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Outline issue 2) childcare and attachment

A
  • 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)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Who found attachments are just formed to responsive people?

A

(Cohen & Campos, 1974; Schaffer & Emerson (1964)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Outline Belsky (1988)

A

+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

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Outline Clarke-Stewart (1991)

A

day care children had better intellectual and social dev compared to home cared

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Outline what is meant by good/ bad quality daycare

A

Good:

  • good staff:child ratio
  • stimulating env
  • gives insecure children chance to form secure attachments
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Outline Howes et al (1999)

A

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
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Outline issue 3) implications of attachment type in later life

A
  • 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)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Outline Kochanska (2001)

A
  • 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

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Outline Sroufe et al (2005)

A

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

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Who came up with adult attachment interview (AAI)

A

George, Kaplan & Main (1985)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Outline George, Kaplan & Main (1985) adult attachment interview

A
  • assesses adult attachment types
  • semi-structured interview
  • talk about attachments with parents/ CGs
  • try to recall early child experiences
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

What were the adult attachment classifications

A
  1. Autonomous/ Secure (B)
    - need open, objective recall of childhood experiences, even if they were bad
  2. Dismissing (A)
    - think early attachmes had little value
  3. Preoccupied/ emeshed (C) - preoccupied by parents, trying to gain approval
  4. Unresolved mourning/ loss (D) - experienced trauma they havent got over it
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Outline attachment across generations

A
  • 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)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Outline Main et al (1985)

A
  • looked at links between AAI and SS

- found common links between AAI of parent and SS of their child

17
Q

Outline Van Ijzendoorn

A

Invented ‘intergenerational transmission’

- which Main supported

18
Q

Outline Internal working models

A
  • 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
19
Q

Outline Solomon & George (1999) - Stability of attachment

A
  • attachment type continuity from 12 months - 6 years
  • changes often due to life events - trauma
  • can get secure if illness/ povery/ divorce ending
20
Q

Outline Bar-heim et al (2000) and Vaughn et al (1979) - Stability of attachment

A

Secure goes to insecure due to divorce, death, poverty, abuse, illness/ psychiatric disorder

21
Q

Outline Waters et al (2000) - Stability of attachment

A

20 year longitudinal study

  • SS in infancy mirror adult attachment type
  • Mostly continuity, any discontinuity was due to negative life events
22
Q

What did Bowlby argue about lack of attachment

A

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
23
Q

Outline research/ empirical evidence for Maternal Deprivation

A
  1. Critical period for attachment formation (lorenz)
  2. Child distressed when seperated from mother
  3. Dev delays in institutional children - no stimulation/ interaction (maternal deprivation)
  4. Harlows monkeys
  5. Delinquency in children with a seperation experience
    (X - Cant confirm cause and effect)
24
Q

Outline Harlow’s Rhesus Monkeys (1959)

A
  • wondered what underpins attachment relationships
  • Isolated 8 newbowns, 4 fed by cloth, 4 by wire
  • for 165 days (5.5 months)
25
Q

Outline Harlow’s Rhesus Monkeys (1959) findings

A
  • 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
26
Q

Outline Harlow & Harlow (1962)

A
  • 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
27
Q

Evaluate Bowlys Hypothesis

A

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)

28
Q

Outline Roy (2000)

A
  • 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
29
Q

Evaluate case studies

A

X - cant generalise

√ - learn lots

30
Q

Outline Koluchova (1972) Czech twins

A
  • 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:
31
Q

Outline Koluchova twins progress

A
  • 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
32
Q

Outline Genie (Curtiss, 1977)

A
  • 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
33
Q

Outline Genie progress

A
  • 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
34
Q

Why did twins do better?

A
  • 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
35
Q

Outline Tizzard et al - env role in offsetting deprivation

A
  • 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
36
Q

Outline Tizzard et als findings

A
  • 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
37
Q

Whats the consensus on deprivation

A
  • 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

Developmental Psychology (9 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions