Maternal deprivation - AO3

Question 1

Maternal deprivation

Limitation = deprivation vs privation

Answer 1

• P: Limitation = privation vs deprivation
• E: Rutter (1981): privation greater effect than deprivation
• E: Some children in 44 thieves study spent time in hospitals, may never formed strong attachments
• L: This means that Bowlby may have overstated effects of deprivation on development

Question 2

maternal deprivation

Limitation = Critical vs sensitive period

Answer 2

• P: Limitation = critical vs sensitive period
• E: Koluchova (1976): case study of twins who had severe physical and emotional abuse form 18 months - seven years
• E: Able to fully psychologically recover by age 14 after care and treatment
• L: This means that lasting harm is not inevitable even in cases of severe deprivation

Question 3

maternal deprivation

Limitation = conflicting evidence

Answer 3

• P: Limitation = conflicting evidence
• E: Lewis (1954): 500 young people, no association between early spearation and later psychopathy, or criminality or relationship difficulties
• E: Contradicts Bowlby’s 44 theives study, likely to be more valid due to larger sample size
• L: This means that maternal deprivation may not be an accurate explanation for abnormal development

Question 4

What is a strength of maternal deprivation?

Answer 4

• P: Strength = practical applications
• E: Before Bowlby’s time, people didn’t think the role of a mother was important - many custody disputes were settled in favour of the father because mothers were not regarded as necessary
• E: The law of continuity has led to the common use of key workers - nursery nurses responsible for building an attachment with paritcular babies in day care
• L: This means that though socially sensitive, theories of maternal deprivation have had positive contributions to the wider world