Maternal Deprivation Hypothesis and PDD

Question 1

What are possible causes of disruption in attachment?

Answer 1

Parent’s job occupation.

Presence of grandparents.

Presence of carers e.g. at nursery.

Abuse.

Health issues.

Question 2

Who created the maternal deprivation hypothesis? When?

Answer 2

Bowlby, 1951.

Question 3

What does the MDH explain?

(Bowlby’s MDH).

Answer 3

What happens when these monotropic attachments are broken.

Question 4

What did Bowlby believe happened if the monotropy is disrupted?

(Bowlby’s MDH).

Answer 4

Bowlby argues that disruption of the attachment results in serious and permanent damage to a child’s emotional, social and intellectual development.

Question 5

What did Bowlby believe was the best way to examine the validity of the MDH?

(Bowlby’s MDH).

Answer 5

To assess the effects of disruption to an infants’ attachments.

Question 6

Why was Bowlby’s MDH revolutionary?

(Bowlby’s MDH).

Answer 6

At the time most professionals assumed meeting physical needs were most important for development e.g. minerals and vitamins.

In this case, Bowlby introduced the idea that psychological needs must also be met - and that this is important for future relationships, cognitive skills and social development.

Question 7

According to the MDH, disruption can occur in three basic ways, what are they?

(Bowlby’s MDH).

Answer 7

Short-term separation.

Long-term deprivation.

Privation.

Question 8

What is separation? Give an example.

(Bowlby’s MDH).

Answer 8

Short term disruption.

Involves distress when separated from a person to whom there is an attachment for a relatively short period of time.

A mild form of deprivation.

E.g. parent job occupation, health issues, holidays, etc.

Question 9

What is deprivation? Give an example.

(Bowlby’s MDH).

Answer 9

Long term disruption.

It occurs when an attachment has been formed and is then broken for what is generally fairly long periods of time.

E.g. health issues, parent job occupation e.g. military, etc.

Question 10

Who proposed the PDD model? When?

(Short-term separation).

Answer 10

Robertson and Bowlby, 1952.

Question 11

What did Robertson and Bowlby do in 1952?

(Short-term separation).

Answer 11

Studied young children separated from their mothers for some time (hospital).

Question 12

Robertson and Bowlby were among the first to study what in detail?

(Short-term separation).

Answer 12

The effects of short-term separation in young children.

Question 13

What did Robertson and Bowlby identify in 1952?

(Short-term separation).

Answer 13

Clearly identified the main stages in children’s response to separation.

Highlighting the importance of minimising the adverse effects of separation on young children.

Question 14

What are the 3 stages in the PDD model?

(Short-term separation).

Answer 14

Protest.

Despair.

Detachment.

Question 15

What does the PDD model explain?

(Short-term separation).

Answer 15

A child’s response to separation.

Question 16

What is short-term separation?

(Short-term separation).

Answer 16

Consists of brief, temporary separations from attachment figures, like attending day care, being left with a baby sitter, or a short period of hospitalisation.

Question 17

Who created the stages in the PDD model? When?

(Short-term separation).

Answer 17

Bowlby, 1969.

Question 18

What did Bowlby do in 1969?

(Short-term separation).

Answer 18

Described the distress (effects) caused by short-term separation in terms of the PDD model.

Question 19

What are the 3 factors in the PDD model?

(Short-term separation).

Answer 19

Protest.

Despair.

Detachment.

Question 20

Outline ‘protest’ as a factor in the PDD model.

(Short-term separation).

Answer 20

The child cries, screams and protests angrily when the parent leaves.

They will try to cling on to the parent to stop them leaving.

Question 21

Outline ‘despair’ as a factor in the PDD model.

(Short-term separation).

Answer 21

The child’s protest begins to stop, and they appear to be calmer although still upset.

The child refuses others’ attempts for comfort and often seems withdrawn and uninterested in anything.

Question 22

Outline ‘detachment’ as a factor in the PDD model.

(Short-term separation).

Answer 22

During which the child seems to behave in a less distressed way.

If the mother of caregiver re-appears during this stage, they are not responded to with any great interest and may be rejected.

Question 23

Outline Douglas’ research from 1975.

(Short-term separation).
(Supports MDH).

Answer 23

Supports Bowlby’s MDH.

This is because they found separations of less than a week for children below the age of 4 correlate with behavioural difficulties.

This suggests that even short disruptions to early attachments can be detrimental to infant development.

Question 24

Outline Robertson and Robertson’s research from 1971.

(Short-term separation).
(Challenges PDD and MDH).

Answer 24

Challenges the PDD model, as well as the MDH.

This is because they found that short-term separation does not have to produce negative effects if the following factors were implemented:

Children introduced to their new surroundings beforehand.
Provide children with a similar routine.
Discuss their mother with them, allows for a reduction in stress.
Good physical and emotional care from the PCG substitute.

This suggests that the PDD model can be avoided and attachment breakage can be minimised, and is not a universal feature of monotropic attachment breakdown.

Question 25

What did Bowlby say about the effects of deprivation on an infant?

(Long-term deprivation)

Answer 25

They were negative and permanent/ irreversible.

Question 26

What is long-term deprivation?

(Long-term deprivation)

Answer 26

Involves lengthy or permanent separations from attachment figures, most commonly due to divorce.

Question 27

What percentage of UK marriages end in divorce?

(Long-term deprivation)

Answer 27

42%.

Question 28

Within two to three years of divorce, what percentage of divorced parents not living with their children (usually the father) had lost contact with their children?

(Long-term deprivation)

Answer 28

50%.

Question 29

Give an example of long-term deprivation.

(Long-term deprivation)

Answer 29

E.g. death or imprisonment of a parent and resulting adoption by different caregivers.

Question 30

What is privation?

(Privation)

Answer 30

Concerns children who have never formed an attachment bond.

Question 31

Is privation or deprivation more detrimental to an infants development? What do research results say?

(Privation)

Answer 31

Privation is more likely than deprivation to lead to lasting damage.

However, research results are contradictory, with some individuals fully recovering, while others make little if any improvement.

Question 32

Cases of privation are often rare. What is used to research them?

(Privation)

Answer 32

Case studies.

Question 33

When did Bowlby conduct his 44 thieves study?

(Bowlby’s 44 thieves)

Answer 33

1944.

Question 34

What did Bowlby’s 44 thieves study aim to test?

(Bowlby’s 44 thieves)

Answer 34

Test the MDH and see whether frequent early separations were associated with a risk of behavioural disorders.

In particular, a disorder deemed “affectionless psychopathy”.

Question 35

How many participants were in Bowlby’s 44 thieves? What were their ages?

(Bowlby’s 44 thieves)
(Procedure)

Answer 35

88 children.

5-16 years.

Question 36

What was similar about all the PPs in Bowlby’s 44 thieves?

(Bowlby’s 44 thieves)
(Procedure)

Answer 36

All children had been referred to the child guidance clinic where Bowlby worked.

Question 37

How many children in Bowlby’s 44 thieves were referred to the clinic due to stealing?

(Bowlby’s 44 thieves)
(Procedure)

Answer 37

44 of the children had been referred to the clinic because of stealing.

These were the ‘thieves’ group.

Question 38

How many (of the 44 thieves) were deemed affectionless psychopaths?

(Bowlby’s 44 thieves)
(Procedure)

Answer 38

16.

Question 39

Bowlby identified 16 of these thieves as affectionless psychopaths. What about the others?

(Bowlby’s 44 thieves)
(Procedure)

Answer 39

The remaining 44 children in the study had not committed any crimes; they were emotionally maladjusted, but did not display antisocial behaviour.

None of this control group were diagnosed as affectionless psychopaths.

Question 40

What was the PP split in Bowlby’s 44 thieves?

(Bowlby’s 44 thieves)
(Procedure)

Answer 40

88 children.

44 referred thieves, 16 being affectionless psychopaths.
44 crimeless children - emotionally maladjusted (no ASB).

Question 41

Of the 44 crimeless control group, how many were affectionless psychopaths?

(Bowlby’s 44 thieves)
(Procedure)

Answer 41

None.

Question 42

How did Bowlby get information from the 88 participants?

(Bowlby’s 44 thieves)
(Procedure)

Answer 42

He interviewed the children and their families and was able to build up a record of their early life experiences.

Question 43

What percentage of the 16 affectionless psychopaths had experienced “early and prolonged separations from their mothers”.

(Bowlby’s 44 thieves)
(Findings)

Answer 43

86%.

Question 44

What percentage of the other thieves (the ones who weren’t classed as affectionless psychopaths) had experienced early and prolonged separations?

(Bowlby’s 44 thieves)
(Findings)

Answer 44

17%.

Question 45

What percentage of the control group (“non-thieves”) had experienced frequent early separation?

(Bowlby’s 44 thieves)
(Findings)

Answer 45

4%.

Question 46

What was concluded from Bowlby’s 44 thieves?

(Bowlby’s 44 thieves)
(Conclusions)

Answer 46

Findings suggest a link between early separations and later social and emotional maladjustment.

Question 47

Does Bowlby’s 44 thieves support the MDH?

(Bowlby’s 44 thieves)
(Evaluations)

Answer 47

Yes, as it suggests that early and prolonged separations from mothers can cause severe antisocial behaviour later in life.

Question 48

In its most severe form, what can maternal deprivation lead to?

(Bowlby’s 44 thieves)
(Conclusions)

Answer 48

Affectionless psychopathy.

Question 49

In its least severe form, what can maternal deprivation lead to?

(Bowlby’s 44 thieves)
(Conclusions)

Answer 49

Antisocial behaviour, e.g. theft.

Question 50

Give 3 evaluative points about Bowlby’s 44 thieves?

(Bowlby’s 44 thieves)
(Evaluations)

Answer 50

The evidence is correlational, which means that we can only say that deprivation/ separation and affectionless psychopathy are linked, not that one caused the other.

The data on separation was collected retrospectively and may not be reliable. Parents may not have accurately recalled separations during infancy. They may have over or underestimated the frequency.

How do we know whether these children experienced deprivation or whether they had good substitute emotional care during their separations?

Question 51

Outline Rutter’s research from 1972.

(Challenges Bowlby’s 44 thieves study)

Answer 51

Challenges Bowlby’s 44 thieves study.

This is because Rutter stated that Bowlby grouped together a wide variety of experiences under the general heading of maternal deprivation (such as hospitalisation, death of mother and family breakdown) - all of which would have different effects on children.

Rutter argued that an affectionless character was not associated with maternal loss (deprivation) but a lack of love - privation in many of Bowlby’s examples.

This suggests that Bowlby should have correctly operationalised what he was testing for, in order to produce results with a greater accuracy.

Instead, Bowlby could have used a more idiographic approach, rather than a nomothetic approach - as the findings and conclusions being made are very personal to the individuals that were in the study.

Question 52

Outline Spitz’s study from 1945.

(Supports Bowlby’s views on long-term deprivation in the MDH)

Answer 52

Supports Bowlby’s views on long-term deprivation in the MDH.

This is because they visited very poor orphanages and other institutions in South America, that looked after children; giving them very little warmth or attention from staff - making the infants apathetic.

Many suffered from anaclitic depression (helplessness and loss of appetite).

This suggests that a lack of emotional care and separation from mother creates severe long-term severe effects

However, the orphanage would most likely create environments of privation - not deprivation.

This challenges the validity of Spitz’s research.

Question 53

Outline Barret’s research from 1997.

(Challenges the PDD model and its lack of acknowledgement for individual differences in short term separation)

Answer 53

Challenges the PDD model and its lack of acknowledgement for individual differences in short term separation.

For instance, securely attached children and more mature children cope better with separations.

This suggests that only some children experience distress.

Question 54

Outline Spitz and Wolf’s research from 1946.

(Supports Bowlby’s MDH)

Answer 54

Supports Bowlby’s MDH.

This is because they found that the monotropy’s critical period, if exposed to long-term separation would result in permanent physically and mental damage.

This reinforces the severity of infant separation at a young age.

Question 55

Outline Goldfarb’s research from 1947.

(Supports Bowlby’s MDH)

Answer 55

Supports Bowlby’s MDH.

This is because they found that infants in an orphanage for more than 3 years were less developed and more aggressive, when tested 12 years after leaving.

This suggests that the breaking of a child’s monotropy (critical period) is detrimental to not only their childhood, but also adulthood lives.

Question 56

Outline Rodgers and Pryor’s study from 1998.

(Supports long-term deprivation early in life and how this leads to poor outcomes for the child)

Answer 56

Supports long-term deprivation early in life and how this leads to poor outcomes for the child.

This is because they found that children experiencing two or more divorces have the lowest adjustment rates and the most behavioural problems.

This suggests that Bowlby’s ideas of childhood consequences are carried into adulthood.

It also links to Bowlby’s ideas of an internal working model - as two or more divorces creates a negative ‘blueprint’ for future relationships, perhaps causing the seen behavioural problems.

Question 57

Outline Lewis’ study from 1954.

(Challenges the MDH)

Answer 57

Challenges the MDH.

This is because they partially replicated Bowlby’s 44 thieves study on a larger scale, looking at 500 young people; finding that their sample, long-term separation from the mother did not equal criminal behaviour, and thus thieves.

This suggests that there are potentially other factors that may affect the outcome of maternal deprivation at a young age.

Moreover, as Lewis’ study has a large sample size, it helps to decrease the impact of individual differences.

Question 58

Outline ‘situational factors’, as an evaluative weakness of Bowlby’s MDH.

Answer 58

Emotional problems shown by children in orphanages and other institutions may have been due to the poor quality of those institutions, rather than the maternal deprivation.

Question 59

Outline ‘interactionalist approach’, as an evaluative weakness of Bowlby’s MDH.

Answer 59

It is hard to identify where one factor starts and the other ends

It is unlikely that they work in isolation - and is most likely a combination of both.

Instead: separation, deprivation, and privation should be looked at as a whole - and applied ideographically.

This would create findings and conclusions that are individual and possess greater validity.