P1: Attachment Flashcards
Define Interactional synchrony
Coordination of micro-level behaviour (Mirroring emotions n actions)
High synchrony = higher quality attachment.
Synchrony = foundation.
Occurs at 2 weeks old
Define Reciprocity
Occurs at 3 months old
Involves close attention to each others verbal signals n facial expressions
Described as a dance
Baby takes an active role, both parties take turn initiating interactions.
Evaluate Care-giver interactions
+ control: Filmed from multiple different angles ∴rewatched n analysed also babies unaware of filming ∴ good validity
- Observation limitation: Observe hand movements or change in expression. DK mental process occurring. unsure if theres special meaning
- Socially sensitive: child disadvantaged ∵ mum leaves to work = restricted opportunities ∴ mum must stay
Describe the Role of the Father
3% = father primary attachment
75% = secondary attachment at 18months
Dad less important in long-term emotional development
Dad’s job = play n stimulation, not nurturing
Evaluate the Role of the Father
- Fatherless kids: no different to regular. e.g. gay parents = no different ∴ not as important
- Conflicting theories = no absolute answer. Both evidences shows Dad is primary n/or secondary = psychologists cannot answer themselves
- Unknown why dad’s aren’t primary: Tradition? = possible ∴ no need to act nurturing or maybe females = hormones = higher lvl of nursing, Biological drive
Describe Schaffners Stages of Attachment
-Asocial Stage: Similar behaviour to obj n humans
slight ppl preference (First few weeks)
-Indiscriminate Attachment: Display observable social behaviour, recognises/prefers familiar ppl (2-7 months)
-Specific Attachment: Separation n stranger anxiety to primary (7months)
-Multiple Attachment: Secondary attachments formed, (Majority formed by 1yr)
Describe the Experiment conducted by Schaffer n Emerson investigating Stages of attachment
60 Glasgow Babies visited monthly for 1yr n at 18months. Separation n stranger anxiety measured by asking Mum Q
Found:
50% babies showed separation anxiety to 1 adult from 25-32 weeks. Attachment to most sensitive person not most time spent
Evaluate Schaffer’s stages of attachment
+ Ecological Validity: Observations made by everyday ppl in ordinary activities = no demand = natural
+ Longitudinal Study: Good Internal Validity n no confounding variable (age). Quick version = cross-section design (multiple kids at once)
- Assessment of distress: distress not distinguished e.g. when playmate leaves ≠ primary attachment fig leaving
- Asocial Stage: described as important, babies are immobile n poor coordination = hard to make judgement. maybe social but we can’t tell
Describe Lorenz’s animal study on imprinting
Divide 12 goose eggs randomly. Half hatch with mum(control) n half with Lorenz
Observed birds n courtship
Found:
Incubator group followed Lorenz
Critical Point = few hours after hatching. Otherwise = no attachment. Sexual imprinting occurs too(template of desirable characteristics attained for mating)
Evaluate Lorenz’s animal study on imprinting
- Generalisation: Mammalian attachment system ≠ birds system.e.g. More emotional attachment ∴ cannot generalisable
- Conclusions Questioned: Found Chickens imprinted with Yellow washing up gloves. Overtime (experienced) = learned to mate with own kind ∴ imprinting not permant
Describe Harlow’s Animal study on Importance of Contact Comfort
16 Rhesus Monkeys, 2 wire model mums.
1st condition= Milk dispensed by plain wire mum
2nd condition= milk dispensed by cloth-covered mum n IRL studies preformed.Deprivation of real mum effects.
Found:
Cuddles clothe regardless of milk dispenser. Contact comfort > food. IRL monkeys = suffered more aggression, less sociable, less skilled at mating, also neglected n killed own off-spring sometimes
Evaluate Harlow’s animal study on the importance of contact comfort
+ Practical Application: Helps social workers understand risk of child abuse, how to stop n importance of attachment figures in zoos
- Ethics: Monkey generalisable to humans ∴ suffering = human-like. Harlow described wire mums = ‘iron maidens’. counter point: sufficiently important research
Explain the learning theory of attachment
Importance of food, Cupboard love
-Classical Condition: UCS , UCR….NS , CS….CS , CR
-Operant Condoning: why babies cry for comfort
Negative Reinforcement
-Drive Reduction: Hunger = primary drive
attachment = secondary ∴ primary drive = generalised to them
Evaluate the learning theory of attachment
- Counter evidence(animal studies): Lorenz - attachment retained regardless of feeder. Harlow - contact comfort > food ∴ everyone equivalent, food ≠ attachment
- Counter evidence(human studies): Schaffers stages of attachment. Primary = most responsive not feeder ∴ food ≠attachment, more factors involved
+ useful elements: many aspects of human development affected by conditioning ∴ can play a role e.g. classical conditioning = comfort
Explain Bowlby’s monotropic theory of attachment
-Attachment = innate(survival advantage). Monotropic = primary attachment figure, more time spent = better LAWS: 1) Law of continuity = consistent care 2) Law of accumulated separation: effects of separation adds up.
-Social Releasers: Innate ‘cute’ behaviour = gain attention from adults, purpose = activate attachment system.
-Critical Period(upto 2yrs): no attachment by then = hard to build attachments later on.
First attachment = internal working model ‘template’ of what relations are like
Evaluate Bowlby’s theory of attachment (monotropy)
- Mixed evidence: Schaffer stages of attachment. Small minority formed multiple attachments at once ∴ contradicts bowlby
+ Evidence (social releasers): When asked to ignore babies, distress occurs -> curled up n lay motionless = strong response = elicit social interaction
+ Evidence (internal working model): patterns of attachment passed on (generation). 99 mums studied with poor attachment to mums = likely had 1yr olds poorly attached - Socially sensitive: Law of accumulation = blame mum(unintentionally), Bowlby’s intention = boost mum’s status n importance
Describe Ainsworth’s Strange Situation
Aim: Assess quality of child’s attachment to a caregiver 5 categories judge: 1)Proximity seeking 2) Exploration/secure base 3) Stranger anxiety 4) separation anxiety 5) Response to reunion.
- 7 procedures (3mins long each)
1) Encouraged to explore 2) stranger enter n chats to caregiver 3) caregiver leaves 4)caregiver returns n stranger leaves 5) caregiver leaves 6) stranger returns 7) caregiver returns
Found: (all British babies)
-Secure-attachment: 60-75% babies. Happy to explore, but seeks proxy with mum. Moderate separation n stranger anxiety. Requires comfort on caregiver return
-Insecure-avoidant: 20-25% explores freely, no proxy wanted. no separation n stranger anxiety. no comfort needed on caregiver return
-Insecure-Resistant: 3% Explores less, seeks more proxy. Considerable separation n stranger anxiety. Resists comfort on caregiver return
Evaluate Ainsworth’s Strange Situation
- Confounding variable(Temperament): Assumed separation n stranger anxiety linked to attachment. temperament more influence? ∴ challenges validity
- Cultural differences: Different culture = different actions e.g. Japanese mums = rarely separate from baby ∴ high stranger anxiety
+ Inter-rater Reliability: Different Observers agreed 94% on conclusion ∵ lab conditions = attachment type not dependent on observer.
+ Predictive Validity: Secure attachment = school success, long relations. Insecure-resistant = bullying, mental health issues ∴can explain future outcomes = good validity
Describe the key study preformed evaluating cultural variations in attachment using Meta- analysis
32 studies of Strange Situation looked at across countries.
Found:
Secure: China = 50%, Britain = 75%
Insecure-resistant = Individualistic = >14%(similar to OG) Collectivist = <25% (insecure-avoidant reduced)
-Variations between results(in same country) = 150% greater than those between countries
Describe the key study preformed evaluating cultural variations in attachment called An Italian Key Study
76, 12months old assessed with Strange Situation= compare to pervious results n see if they still matched.
Mums varied in education lvl.
Found:
50% Secure , 36% Insecure-avoidant = lower rate of secure than previous study ∵ Increase in working mums? ∴ more professional childcare used. Cultural changes
Evaluate cultural variations in attachment
+ Large sample(Meta-analysis): almost 2000 babies analysed = good internal, reduces impact of biased methodology/ unusual participants
- Confounding variable(Temperament): Assumed separation n stranger anxiety linked to attachment. temperament more influence? ∴ challenges validity
- Cultural Variation: Comparisons made between countries not cultures but within countries = different cultures e.g.Urban Tokyo = western studies results
- Imposed Etics: e.g. Germany = seen as a sign of independents. Designed by Americans based on UK theory ∴ not applicable
Describe Bowlby’s Theory on Maternal Deprivation
Continued emotional care essential for normal emotional n intellectual development. Separation = leads to maternal deprivation.
- Separation: Child not physically present with primary
- Deprivation: Losing emotional care due to separation
- Critical Period: Separated from mum for extended period(1st 30months) without sub for emotional care = psychological damage inevitable. Suffer mental retardation, Low IQ, affection less psychopathy ∴ cannot develop normal relations (associated with criminality)
Describe the Key study Bowlby preformed investigating the effects of Maternal Deprivation
44 Thieves accused of stealing. All interviewed + family too for signs of affection less psychopathy.
Found:
14/44 affection less psychopathy. 12 experienced prolonged separation in 1st 2yrs of life.
Evaluate Bowlby’s Theory of maternal deprivation
- Flawed Methodology: Researcher bias. War-orphans = traumatised n had poor aftercare = other factors which caused development difficulties rather than separation
- Counter-evidence: replicated 44 thieves for 500 ppl = early prolong maternal separation ≠ criminality= limitation ∵ other factors involved
+ Animal Studies: Rats separated for more than 1 day from mum= permeant effect on social development. Rats ≠ humans so cannot generalise tho
Describe the effects of institutionalisation
- Disinhibited attachment: Child equally friendly/affectionate to strangers n friends
- Damage to Intellectual development: Shows signs of mental retardation
Describe the key study preformed investigating romania orphan studies
165 Romanian orphans before adoption in Britain. Longitudinal study(4,6,11,5 yrs old measured at). AIM: extent of good care can make up for poor early experiences. Mental, physical, emotional.Control = 52 British kids
Found:
Recovery rate related to age of adoption. Before 6months=IQ102, 6months-2yrs=IQ86, after 2yrs= IQ77
Kids adopted after 6months = clingy, attention-seeking. ∴ support sensitive period view
Describe Bucharest Early Intervention Project Key study
Used Strange Situation on 95kids aged 12-31months who spent most time in institution. vs 50 control.
Found:
19% institutionalised group were securely attached
65% classified with disorganised attachment
Evaluate Romain Orphan Studies
+Practical Application: Improved care in institutions. Avoid large No. caregivers, 1-2 caregivers now ∴ can develop normal attachment
- Issue Generalising: Conditions of orphans V bad ∴ not applicable to most institutions = unusual situation = cannot generalise
- Long-term effects unclear: Orphans only followed into mid-teens. Longer time in institution = more catching up in IQ during adulthood. Early adopted= no issues may now have issues.
- Less Confounding Variables: Studies before involved traumatised kids. affected by abuse n bereavement(grief) ∴ hard to observe. this study kids abandoned at birth ∴ good internal validity
Explain the influence of early attachment on later relationships Tip: Internal Working Model
First attachment = template for future relations
- Secure infants = better friendships n less likely to bully
- Insecure-avoidant = mostly likely to be victims
- Insecure-Resistant = Most likely to bully
Explain a Key study called Romantic relationships preformed investigation influence of early attachment on later relationships
620 replies to love quiz in newspaper. Quiz = current n most important relation, general love EXP, attachment type.
Found:
56% securely attached, 25% Insecure-avoidant, 19% Insecure-Resistant. Reflection in romantic relation: Secure: Long-lasting, Avoidant: jealous n fear intimacy
Evaluate Influences of early attachment on later relationships
- Issues with validity: Assess using interviews, quiz ∴ Demand Characteristics n requires childhood reflections. Maybe distorted views or memories
- Association(Correlation): Correlation ≠ causation. ALT explanation temperament. counter to Bowlby’s theory
- Influence on future: Exaggerated, ppl not always doomed. just greater risk. Too pessimistic, fate is not absolute.
