Romanian Orphan Studies Flashcards
What did the president in Romania in the 1990s require Romanian women to have?
5 children. Romanian parents could not afford to keep their children and they ended up in huge orphanages in very poor conditions. Many of the children were later adopted.
Briefly outline what is meant by institutionalisation. (2 marks)
The effects of growing up in an institution, such as a children’s home or orphanage for continuous periods of time and in these places very little emotional care is provided.
Who conducted the ERA (English and Romanian adoptee) study?
Rutter et al (2011)
What was his procedure?
Followed 165 Romanian orphans adopted in Britain to test to what extent good care could make up for poor early institutional experiences. Physical, cognitive and emotional development were assessed at the age of 4, 6, 11 and 15 years. They were compared to a control group of 52 British children adopted around the same time.
What did he find?
• When they first arrived in the UK, 50% of adoptees showed signs of mental retardation and the majority were severely undernourished.
• At 11, the adopted children showed differential rates of recovery that were related to their age of adoption:
o IQ:
The mean IQ of those adopted before the age of six months was 102
The mean IQ of those adopted between six months and two years was 86
The mean IQ of those adopted after two years of age was 77
These IQ differences remained at age 16.
o Attachment:
Children adopted before the age of six months rarely displayed disinhibited attachment (see below).
Children adopted after the age of six months showed signs disinhibited attachment. Symptoms include attention seeking, clinginess and social behaviour directed discriminately towards all adults, both familiar and unfamiliar.
What did he conclude?
Institutionalisation has significant negative long-term effects on children’s attachment and other areas of development (such as IQ).
Overall, there was a positive correlation between time spent institutionalised and the severity of the long-term effects e.g. the longer a child is institutionalised the more severe the long-term effects
Explain why Rutter’s study is an example of a longitudinal study. (2)
It was carried out over a long period of time where he followed and measured the physical, cognitive and emotional development for 15 years.
Explain why a control group was used in Rutter’s study. (2)
Act as a baseline for Ruter to compare differences in IQ and attachment. So could be more sure that differences in IQ and attachment where due to institutionalisation.
Who conducted the Bucharest early intervention project?
Zeanah et al. (2005)
What was her procedure?
Used the strange situation to assess attachment type in 95 children aged 12-31 months who had spent most (an average of 90%) of their lives in institutional care. They were compared to a control group of 50 children who had never lived in an institution. Carers were also asked about whether the child displayed any of the characteristics of disinhibited attachment such as clinginess and/or attention seeking behaviour directed inappropriately at all adults.
What did she find?
• 19% of the institutional group were securely attached and 65% were classified with disorganised attachment.
• 74% of the control group were securely attached.
• Features of disinhibited attachment were found in 44% of the institutional group compared to less than 20% in the control group.
What does she conclude?
Institutionalisation has a significant negative effect on children’s attachment type.
What are the effects of institutionalisation?
-Disinhibited attachment
-Mentor retardation – low IQ
Describe disinhibited attachment.
Unusual behaviour characterised by children who are equally friendly and affectionate towards people they know and strangers.
Rutter (2006) explained disinhibited attachment as an adaption to living with multiple carers during the sensitive period. In poor quality institutions like those in Romania, a child might have 50 carers none of whom gave them enough consistent care to form a secure attachment.
Describe mental retardation.
Rutter found that although most children had signs of retardation, most of those adopted before they were six months old caught up with the control group by age four. Therefore, damage to intellectual development as a result if institutionalisation can be recovered provided adoption takes place before the age of six months (the age at which attachments form).
Evaluation point 1:
(+) real life application
Langton (2006) found that the study of the Romanian orphans had led to improvements in the way children are cared for in institutions e.g. children’s homes avoid having large numbers of caregivers for each child and each child is given a key worker which means they have the chance to develop normal attachments, helping to avoid disinhibited attachment.
Evaluation point 2:
(+) internal validity
The Romanian orphans allowed researchers to study institutionalisation without some significant confounding variables. Previous orphan studies used children who had been traumatised by abuse, neglect or bereavement before they were institutionalised. These factors acted as a confounding variables making it difficult to know if mental retardation and disinhibited attachment were a result of institutionalisation or a result of previous trauma. This is a strength because the Romanian orphan were less likely to have suffered abuse and therefore less likely to be previously traumatised. Confounding variables are not present so we can be more sure that institutionalisation is causing mental retardation and disinhibited attachment.
Evaluation point 3:
(-) Lacks generalisability
Romanian orphanages had particularly poor standards of care, especially in forming relationships with the children, and extremely low levels of intellectual stimulation. These conditions were not typical of orphanages and therefore the results of these studies cannot be applied to other institutions. This is a weakness as it limit our understanding of the typical effects of institutionalisation.
Evaluation point 4:
(+/-) temperament
In Rutter’s study, children were not randomly assigned to conditions meaning there could be confounding variables such as temperament (e.g. more sociable children are more likely to be adopted early). This lowers the internal validity as we cannot be sure if it is institutionalisation or temperament which is causing the effects.
Zeanah did use random allocation to either fostering or institutionalisation which removes the confounding variable of parents choosing a particular child based on temperament. this increases internal validity as we can be more sure that it is institutionalisation that is causing the effects. However, this may be seen as unethical as a children who were allocated to institutionalisation suffered from long-term psychological harm.
Evaluation point 5:
(-) long-term effects of institutionalisation are unclear
Although these studies have followed children who were adopted into their teens, it is still too early to say what the long-term effects are and there will need to be continual follows up throughout their adult lives to make firm conclusions.
