LS2 - Stages Of Attachment

Question 1

Stages Of Attachment Procedure

Answer 1

Shaffer & Emerson - 60 babies from working class families in Glasgow, every 4 weeks in the first year the mum and baby was visited, then again at 18 months. DAta from diary entries, observations and reports were collected, the mother was asked to focus on separation behaviour, testing for separation protests and stranger aniety.

Question 2

Stages Of Attachment Findings

Answer 2

Schaffeer & Emerson - 65% of the babies had the mother as their primary attachement, 30% were jointly with their mother and someone else, 3% their father & 27% their mum and dad. Once one attachment happened more came through e.g. by 18 months 75% were attached to their father.

Question 3

4 Stages Of Attachment

Answer 3

Pre-Attachment
Indiscriminate Attachments
Discriminate Attachments
Mulitple Attachments

Question 4

Pre-Attachment

Answer 4

(Birth - 3 months) - 0-6 week babies react similary to human and innaminate objects, oast this babies become attracted to other humans and show this through facial expressions

Question 5

Indiscriminate Attachments

Answer 5

(3-6/7 months) - Babies at this satge become more social and prefer familiar adults, accepting comfort/hugs however no preference and separation protest.

Question 6

Discriminate Attachments

Answer 6

(7/8 months) - Show separation protest when one person puts them down and special joy at reunion with that person forming a primary attachment figure, with this comes stranger anxiety.

Question 7

Multiple Attachments

Answer 7

(9 months onwards) - Attachments are hierachal, with primary attachment on top, then secondary attachments. Although these were weaker in comparison to the main bond.

Question 8

Strengths

Answer 8

Good External Validity
Longitutdinal Design
No Ethical Issues

Question 9

Weaknesses

Answer 9

Methodoloigcal Issues
Biased Sample
Measuring Multiple Attachments
Connflicting Evidence On Multiple Attachments

Question 10

Good External Validity (+)

Answer 10

Observations were done in the families houses and parents did most observation, meaning babeis were unlikely to show demand characteristics, showing mundane realism.

Question 11

Longitudinal Design (+)

Answer 11

Over 18 months, this has better validity over cross-sectional design, as there’s hgiher internal validity due to decreased individual differences.

Question 12

No Ethical Issues (+)

Answer 12

Consent was obtained from parents, there was no harm or deception.

Question 13

Methodological Issues (-)

Answer 13

Observations and self report are prone to bias e.g. self report mothers may have shown social desirability bias and only reported a good relationship with the infant.

Question 14

Biased Sample (-)

Answer 14

Sample was from a working class popualtion so can’t be generalised to middle class families. Also it was from the 1960s, infant-carer relationships may have changed since then e.g. more women go out to work not and more fathers are becoming stay at home parents.

Question 15

Measuring Multiple Attachments (-)

Answer 15

Multiple attachments weren’t tested accurately i.e. just because a baby got distressed, it may not mean the baby was attached, therefore it’s difficult to establish a difference between playmate and caregiver.