Schaffer stages + study Flashcards
State the stages of attachment
Asocial
Indiscriminate
Specific
Multiple
Stages of attachment: Asocial
First few weeks
Behaviour towards non-human objects and humans similar
Some preference for familiar adults (easier for them to calm baby and baby happier in their prescence)
Stages of attachment: Indiscriminate
2-7 months
Preference for people over inanimate objects
Recognise and prefer familiar adults
No separation/stranger anxiety
Accept cuddles and comfort from any adult
Stages of attachment: Multiple
Soon after specific, by one year
Attachent to other adults who they regularly spend time with (secondary attachments)
State the evalutions for Schaffer’s stages of attachment
- Problem studying asocial stage
- Conflicting evidence on multiple attachments
- Measuring multiple attachments
Evaluate Schaffer’s stages of attachment: Problem studying asocial stage
During first few weeks of life, babies are mostly immobile and have poor co-ordination, not much observable behaviour
Evaluate Schaffer’s stages of attachment: Conflicting evidence on multiple attachments
Some research indicates most/all form attachment to single main carer before capable of developing multiple attachments (Bowlby, 1969) Others, especially those working in cultures where multiple varegivers are the norm, believe babies form multiple attachments from the outset (van Ijzendoorn et al. 1993) (collectivist cultures)
Evaluate Schaffer’s stages of attachment: Measuring multiple attachments
If a baby gets distressed when an individual leaves the room, doesn’t mean the individual is a “true” attachment figure. Bowlby (1969) pointed out chuldren have playmates, kids can get distressed when they leave the room, doesn’t mean kid has attachment to playmate. These observations leave no way to distinguish between behaviour shown towards secondary attachment figures and playmates
What was the aim of Schaffer and Emerson (1964)?
To investigate the formation of early attachments; in particular the age they were developed at, their emotional intensity and to whom they were directed
What was the method of Schaffer and Emerson (1964)?
60 babies (31 males, 29 females from Glasgow, majority from skilled working-class families) Babies and mothers visited at home every month for first year and at 18 months. Researchers asked the mothers questions about the kinds of protests babies showed in 7 everyday separations Designed to measure infant's attachment Researchers assesed stranger anxiety
What were the findings of Schaffer and Emerson (1964)?
Between 25 and 32 weeks of age, 50% of babies showed separation anxiety towards a particular adult, usually mother (specific attachment)
Attachment tended to be to the caregiver who was most interactive and sensitive to infant signals and facial expressions (reciprocity) Not always the person who the infant spent the most time with
By 40 weeks, 80% had a specific attachment and almost 30% displayed multiple attachment
State the evaluations of Schaffer and Emerson (1964)
Good exteral validity
Longitudinal design
Limited sample characteristics
Evaluating Schaffer and Emerson (1964): Good external validity
Carried out in the families’ own homes and most of the observation (apart from stranger anxiety) was done by parents during ordinary activities and reported to researchers later. Behaviour unlikley affected by prescence of observers. Good external validity
Evaluating Schaffer and Emerson (1964): Longitudinal deisgn
Same children were followed up and observed reguarly. Quicker alternative is observing different children at each age (cross-sectional design). longitudinal designs have better internal validity, don’t have confounding variable of individual differences between participants (participant variables)
Evaluating Schaffer and Emerson (1964): Limited sample characteristics
Sample size was good considering large volume of data gathered on each participant. All being from Glasgow and same social class over 50 years of age is a limitation Child-rearing practices differ from culture to culture and historical period to another, Don't generalise well to other social and historical contexts