Topic 3 - Attachment (complete!!!!) Flashcards
Define attachment
A close two-way emotional bond between individuals in which each individual sees the other as essential for their own emotional security
What are the two key features of caregiver-infant interactions?
- Reciprocity
- Interactional synchrony
Describe reciprocity - give an example
An interaction is said to show reciprocity when each person responds to the other and elicits a response from them
Example : Caregiver might respond to a baby’s smile by saying something which in turn elicits a response from the baby
Reciprocal interaction often called ‘turn-taking’ - important for conversation, otherwise people talk over each other
Describe reciprocity in terms of:
- Alert phases
Alert Phases:
- Babies have periodic ‘alert phases’ where they signal (e.g. making eye contact) that they are ready for interaction
- Feldman + Eidelman (2007) - found that mothers typically pick up and respond to baby’s alertness around 2/3 of time
- Depends on skill of mother + other external factors e.g. stress (Finegood et al)
- From around 3 months this interaction becomes increasingly frequent (Feldman 2007)
- Involves both mother + baby paying close attention to each other’s verbal signals + facial expressions (Feldman 2007)
Describe reciprocity in terms of :
- Active involvement
Active involvement:
- Traditional views of childhood portray babies in a passive role - only receiving care from adult
- However seems that babies take more of an active role - both caregiver + baby can initiate interactions, appear to take turns in doing so
- Brazelton et al (1975) - described interaction as a “dance” because each partner responds to the other person’s moves
Describe interactional synchrony - give an example
Two people are said to be synchronised when they carry out the same action simultaneously
Interactional synchrony = the temporal co-ordination of micro-level social behaviour (Feldman, 2007)
Takes place when caregiver and baby interact in such a way that their actions and emotions mirror each other
Example: When a baby and caregiver start smiling at each other at the same time
Describe interactional synchrony in terms of:
- When synchrony begins
Include any relevant research
Meltzoff + Moore (1977) = wanted to investigate the age at which interactional synchrony begins :
- Observed beginnings of interactional synchrony in babies as young as 2 weeks old
- Adult displayed 1 of 3 facial expressions or 1 of 3 distinctive gestures
- Babies’ response filmed + labelled by independent observers
- Babies’ expressions + gestures more likely to mirror those of the adult’s more than chance could predict i.e. there was a SIGNIFICANT ASSOCIATION
Suggests interactional synchrony significant for infant development + attachment formation as it begins at such an early age (two weeks old)
Describe interactional synchrony in terms of:
- Its importance for attachment
Include any relevant research
Isabella et al (1989) = investigated how levels of interactional synchrony affected the quality of attachment between infant and caregiver:
- Observed 30 mothers and their babies together + assessed the degree of synchrony
- Also assessed quality of mother-baby attachment
- Found that high levels of synchrony were associated with better quality mother-baby attachment - i.e. the emotional intensity of the relationship
Further supports idea that interactional synchrony essential for quality attachment between caregiver and infant
Caregiver-infant interactions are usually filmed in a lab - state whether this is a strength or weakness and explain why
STRENGTH
- Can link to Meltzoff + Moore’s experiment (interactional synchrony)
- Means that other activity that might distract the baby can be controlled (i.e. high control of EXTRANEOUS VARIABLES because of lab setting)
- Using films means that observations can be recorded + analysed later - unlikely that researchers will miss seeing key behaviours
- Having observable films means that more than one observer can record data + establish INTER-OBSERVER RELIABILITY
- Babies do not know they are being observed as film is observed separately, so behaviour does not change in response to observation - eliminates problem of OVERT OBSERVATIONS
Therefore data collected in such research should have good RELIABILITY and VALIDITY
It’s difficult to observe a babies behaviour because of their lack of co-ordination when observing caregiver-infant interactions - state whether this is a strength or weakness and explain why
WEAKNESS
- Difficult to interpret a baby’s behaviour (often somewhat SUBJECTIVE)
- Young babies lack co-ordination + much of their bodies are almost immobile
- Therefore movements observed are minute or subtle e.g. difficult to be certain if baby is smiling or just passing wind
- Also difficult to determine what’s taking place from a baby’s perspective e.g. cannot be sure whether a hand twitch is random or triggered by something carer had done
- FLAWED METHODOLOGY - perhaps observing a young baby’s behaviour isn’t the most RELIABLE form of data
Means that we cannot be certain that behaviour seen in caregiver-infant interactions have any special meaning - perhaps data from research isn’t as VALID as initially thought
Some psychologists argue that observing caregiver-infant interactions does not tell us anything about its developmental importance - state whether this is a strength or weakness and explain why
WEAKNESS
- Feldman (2012) argues that ideas like synchrony (and by implication reciprocity) simply gives names to patterns of observable caregiver and baby behaviours
- Argues that they are ‘robust phenomena’-they can be reliably observed, but still may not be useful in understanding child development - does not tell us the purpose of these behaviours
- Caregiver-infant interactions simply put a label on similar behaviours, but does not tell us why these behaviours are significant in development or why they occur
Means that we cannot be certain from observational research alone that reciprocity + interactional synchrony are important for a child’s development
Some psychologists have found that caregiver-infant interactions are important for development - state whether this is a strength or weakness and explain why
STRENGTH (COUNTERPOINT to Feldman’s argument)
Evidence from Isabella et al’s research - found that achievement of interactional synchrony predicted the development of a good quality attachment
Means that, with multiple viewpoints and research taken into consideration, caregiver-infant interaction is most likely important for an infant’s development
Research into early caregiver-infant interactions have practical APPLICATIONS in the real world - state whether this is a strength or a weakness and explain why
STRENGTH
Research has practical applications in parenting skills training
Crotwell et al (2013) found that a 10 minute parent-child interaction therapy (PCIT) improved interactional synchrony in 20 low-income mothers and their pre school children
Means that research into caregiver-infant interactions makes a valuable contribution in improving society - especially for the disadvantaged
Research into caregiver-infant interactions is SOCIALLY SENSITIVE - state whether this is a strength or weakness and explain why
WEAKNESS
Research into caregiver-infant interactions can be used to argue that when a mother returns to work after having a baby, it may risk damaging their baby’s development
Puts blame on mother for child’s development + fuels a potentially harmful STEREOTYPE/TRADITIONALIST view
Note: Most research is in the context between mother + baby (e.g. Isabella, Finegood, Feldman + Eidelman) - very easy to misinterpret CAREGIVER-infant interactions with MOTHER-infant interactions
Caregiver isn’t synonymous with mother - however research makes it very easy to mix these two up - i.e. research makes it seem as if its only the reciprocity and interactional synchrony between mother and child that matters in development
Therefore research into caregiver-infant interactions needs to be carefully evaluated when being added as support for the theory - it can be used to fuel very harmful stereotypes and can be easily misinterpreted
Describe Shaffer + Emerson’s (1964) procedure of their OBSERVATIONAL STUDY which they based their theory of the stages of attachment on
- Sample = 60 babies from Glasgow - majority from skilled working-class families
- Researchers visited babies and mothers in their own homes every month for the first year + once again at 18 months
- Researchers asked the mothers questions about the kind of protest their babies showed in seven everyday separations e.g. baby crying when adult leaves the room shows separation anxiety
- Levels of stranger + separation collated and used to measure the baby’s attachment
Describe Shaffer + Emerson’s (1964) findings of their OBSERVATIONAL STUDY which they based their theory of the stages of attachment on
- Schaffer + Emerson put levels of stranger + separation anxiety as well as assessed attachment to mother in a table
- Identified 4 distinct stages in the development of infant attachment behaviour - used to make their theory of attachment
What are the 4 stages in Schaffer + Emerson’s ( 1964) theory of attachment?
- Stage 1 = Asocial Stage
- Stage 2 = Indiscriminate Attachment
- Stage 3 = Specific Attachment
- Stage 4 = Multiple attachments
Describe the Asocial stage in Schaffer + Emerson’s ( 1964) theory of attachment
Stage 1:
- Age: first few weeks of life
- Observable behaviour towards humans and inanimate objects fairly similar
- However baby does still show some signs of preferring company of familiar people + are more easily comforted by them
- Baby is beginning to form bonds with certain people which form the basis of later attachments
Describe the Indiscriminate Attachment stage in Schaffer + Emerson’s ( 1964) theory of attachment
Stage 2:
- Age: 2-7 months
- Babies begin to display more obvious + observable social behaviours
- Now show clear preference for company of human beings than inanimate objects
- Recognise + prefer company of familiar people
- However at this stage baby will accept cuddles and comfort from any person - therefore ‘indiscriminate attachment’
- Do not usually show separation anxiety or stranger anxiety
Describe the Specific Attachment stage in Schaffer + Emerson’s ( 1964) theory of attachment
Stage 3:
Age: 7 months
- Baby begins to show classic signs of attachment to one particular person
- Begins to show stranger + separation anxiety
- Baby has now formed a specific attachment - the person whom the attachment is formed = primary attachment figure
- Primary attachment figure not necessarily the individual child spends most time with but the one how offers the most reciprocity + interactional synchrony with the most skill
- Primary attachment figure is the baby’s mother 65% of the time
Describe the Multiple Attachments stage in Schaffer + Emerson’s ( 1964) theory of attachment
Stage 4:
Age: begins from 8 months-1 year onwards
- Shortly after babies start to show attachment behaviour (stranger + separation anxiety) to one person its usually extended to multiple attachments
- These new relationships = secondary attachments
- Observed that 29% of the children formed secondary attachments within a month of forming a primary attachment
- By the age of 1 year, majority of babies have developed multiple attachments
Shaffer and Emerson’s research into the stages of attachment have good EXTERNAL VALIDITY - state whether this is a strength or weakness and explain why
STRENGTH
Most observations (except stranger anxiety) were made during ordinary activities and reported to the researchers
Meant that researchers did not have to be present to record observations, if they were then it might have distracted the babies or made them feel more anxious
Means that it is highly likely that ppts behaved naturally whilst being observed
There may have been an issue with asking mothers to be the observers in Shaffer and Emerson’s research into the stages of attachment - explain why and state whether this is a strength or weakness
WEAKNESS (COUNTERPOINT to good external validity argument)
- Mother’s unlikely to be OBJECTIVE OBSERVERS - introduces BIAS into their findings and decreases the RELIABILITY of their corresponding theory
- Might have been BIASED in terms of what they noticed and reported e.g. might not have noticed when their baby was showing signs of anxiety or may have misremembered it
- Means that even if baby’s behaved naturally, its pointless if their behaviour wasn’t accurately recorded
It can be argued that there is poor evidence for the Asocial stage in Schaffer and Emerson’s (1964) theory of attachment - explain why and state whether this is a strength or weakness
WEAKNESS
METHODOLOGY for assessing attachment in the asocial stage may have VALIDITY issues
Young babies have poor co-ordination + are fairly immobile
If babies less than 2 months old felt anxiety they might have displayed it in quite subtle, hard to observe ways
Therefore difficult for mothers to observe and report back to researchers on signs of anxiety and attachment in this age group
Means that babies may actually be quite social in this stage, but because of flawed methods in assessing this, the appear asocial
COMPROMISES CREDIBILITY of overall theory
Schaffer and Emerson’s (1964) theory on the stages of attachment has real world application - state whether this is a strength or weakness and explain why
STRENGTH
Theory has practical application in day care
e.g. in asocial and indiscriminate attachment stage day care likely to be straightforward - babies have no specific attachments and can be comforted by any skilled adult
By using the theory, we can predict that day care, especially starting day care with an unfamiliar adult, may be problematic during the specific attachment stage
Means that parents’ use of day care can be planned using Schaffer + Emerson’s theory - has real world practical application which can help the lives of ordinary people
Schaffer and Emerson’s sample in their research into the stages of attachment were babies from Glasgow - state whether this is a strength or weakness and explain why
WEAKNESS
Sample taken from and INDIVIDUALIST culture - Glasgow
Other psychologists found that in COLLECTIVIST cultures, multiple attachments from a very early age are more the norm (IJzendoorn 1993)
Findings of their research (and by implication their theory) may not be GENERALISABLE as their sample is not REPRESENTATIVE of the target population
Cannot apply theory to all cultures
What is the difference between a primary caregiver and a primary attachment figure?
Primary caregiver: person who spends the most time with the baby, caring for its needs
Primary attachment figure: The person whom the baby has the strongest attachment to
Often the same person fulfils the same two roles but not always
What did Schaffer and Emerson (1964) find about a baby’s attachment to their father as an attachment figure?
- In only 3% of cases the father was the first sole object of attachment at 7 months old
- In 27% of cases the father was the joint first object of attachment with the mother at 7 months old
- Found that most fathers go on to become important attachment figures at later ages
- 75% of babies formed an attachment with their father by the age of 18 months
Describe Grossmann et al’s (2002) procedure in his LONGITUDINAL STUDY into the distinctive role of the father as an attachment figure
Aim: To investigate whether caregiving men make a unique contribution to early development
- Carried out a LONGITUDINAL STUDY were babies’ attachment measured up to their teens
- Researchers looked at both parents’ behaviour and its relationship to the quality of the baby’s later attachments to other people
Describe Grossmann et al’s (2002) findings and conclusions in his LONGITUDINAL STUDY into the distinctive role of the father as an attachment figure
- Quality of baby’s attachment with mothers, but not fathers, related to attachments in adolescence
- However, found that quality of fathers’ play with babies related to the quality of adolescent attachments
- Suggests that fathers have a different role from mothers - one that is more to do with play + stimulation rather than emotional development
What is the significance of a primary attachment figure?
Baby’s primary attachment figure has special emotional significance
Relationship with primary attachment figure forms basis of all later close emotional relationships
Describe Field’s (1978) procedure in their study into the role of the father as a primary attachment figure
Aim: To investigate whether fathers are able to adopt the emotional role associated with mothers when they become the primary attachment figure
- Filmed 4 month old babies in face-to-face interaction with primary caregiver mothers, secondary caregiver fathers and primary caregiver fathers
Describe Field’s (1978) findings and conclusions in their study into the role of the father as a primary attachment figure
- Both primary caregiver mothers and primary caregiver fathers spent more time smiling, imitating and holding babies than secondary caregiver fathers
- Smiling + imitating = examples of interactional synchrony and reciprocity - part of the process of good quality attachment formation
- Suggests that fathers do have the potential to be the more emotion-focused primary attachment figure
- Fathers can provide the responsiveness needed for close emotional attachment
- However seems like this is only expressed when the father is given the role of the primary caregiver
There is a lack of clarity between researchers when studying the role of the father in attachment, leading to inconsistent findings - state whether this is a strength or weakness and explain why
WEAKNESS
Some researchers are interested in understanding the role of the father as secondary attachment figures whereas others are more concerned with fathers as primary caregivers
Former tend to see fathers as behaving differently from mothers and having a distinct role (e.g. Grossmann et al)
Latter have found that fathers can take on a ‘maternal’ role
Makes it difficult to offer a comprehensive answer to the ‘role of the father’ - conflicting perspectives provide conflicting evidence
Means that its difficult to draw conclusions about the role of the father - answer is circumstantial on the perspective you’re looking at
Findings on the role of the father vary according to the methodology used, resulting in conflicting evidence - state whether this is a strength or a weakness and explain why
WEAKNESS
LONGITUDINAL studies (e.g. Grossmann et al) have suggested that fathers as secondary attachment figures have an important + distinct role in a child’s development - involving play and stimulation
However if the father has a distinctive and important role, we would expect to see children growing up in single-mother and lesbian-parent families develop differently from two-parent heterosexual families
McCallum + Golokbok (2004) found that these children do not develop differently from children in two-parent heterosexual families
Studies are HETERONORMATIVE - line of research looking into the role of the father is based on the assumption that babies have two opposite gender parents
Means that fathers may not actually have a distinct role in development at all like studies suggest - as children without them develop the same way
Research into lesbian-parent and single-mother families into infant attachment may not actually clash with findings into the role of the father - explain why and state whether this is a strength or a weakness
STRENGTH (COUNTERPOINT to the conflicting evidence argument)
It could be that fathers take on a distinctive role in two-parent heterosexual families, but lesbian-parent and single-mother families adapt to accommodate role played by fathers
e.g. a single-mother could play both the role of the ‘mother’ and the ‘father’, whilst one lesbian-parent could act as the ‘father’ in the family whilst the other acts as the ‘mother’
Means that the father does have a distinct role after all - when present fathers tend to adopt this role, while other families can adapt to not having a father
Research into the role of the father in infant attachment has real world APPLICATION - state whether this is a strength or weakness and explain why
STRENGTH
Research findings can be used to offer advice to parents
Parents + prospective parents sometimes struggle in making decisions over who will be the primary attachment figure
Mothers may feel pressured to stay at home because of the stereotypical views of a mother’s and a father’s role
Equally fathers may feel pressured to focus on work instead of parenting - even if the mother would earn more money (puts unnecessary economic pressure on families)
Research into role of the father can be used to reassure parents - e.g. heterosexual parents can be informed that fathers are quite capable of being a primary attachment figure
Lesbian-parent and single-mother families can also be reassured that not having a father around wouldn’t affect a child’s development (McCallum + Golombok 2004)
Means that research into role of the father has real world PRACTICAL VALUE to a vast number of the population - can help ease parental anxiety
Research into the role of the father into an infant’s attachment does not take into account the multitude of EXTRANEOUS VARIABLES that may impact a child’s emotional development - state whether this is a strength or weakness and explain why
WEAKNESS
Multitude of different factors not taken into account e.g. culture, the father’s beliefs, father’s age, marital intimacy, amount of time father spends away from home etc.
It is difficult to control all of these (possibly) CONFOUNDING VARIABLES - therefore difficult to draw complete conclusions on the role of the father
There may be a BIAS in research into the role of the father - explain why and state whether this is a strength or a weakness
WEAKNESS
Preconceptions about how fathers do or should behave can be created by stereotypical accounts and images of parenting roles e.g. those used in advertising
These stereotypes (e.g. fathers are not primary caregivers, fathers are stricter etc.) may cause unintentional OBSEVER BIAS
Observer records what they ‘expect’ (findings therefore SUBJECTIVE) rather than recording OBJECTIVE REALITY
Can be used as a criticism of Grossman et al’s study as well as Field’s study
Decreases the overall RELIABILITY of research findings into role of father, which in turn COMPROMISES the VALIDITY of the corresponding theory
Describe Lorenz’s (1952) procedure on his research into imprinting on animal studies of attachment
- randomly divided large clutch of goose eggs
- Half of the eggs hatched with the mother goose in their natural environment (CONTROL group)
- Other half of eggs hatched in an incubator where first moving object they saw was Lorenz (EXPERIMENTAL group)
Describe Lorenz’s (1952) findings and conclusions on his research into imprinting on animal studies of attachment
- Incubator group followed Lorenz everywhere whereas CONTROL group only followed the mother goose
- When two groups were mixed up CONTROL group continued to follow the mother whilst EXPERIMENTAL group followed Lorenz
- Concluded that this was due to imprinting = bird species that are mobile from birth (e.g. geese) attach to the first moving object they see
- Identified a critical period in which imprinting needs to take place
- Depending on species critical period can be as brief as a few hours after birth
- If imprinting does not occur during critical period, found that chicks do not attach themselves to a mother figure
Describe Lorenz’s (1952) CASE STUDY into sexual imprinting on animal studies of attachment
- Investigated relationship between imprinting and adult mate preferences
- Observed a peacock that had been reared in a reptile house of a zoo
- First moving objects peacock saw after hatching were giant tortoises
- As and adult the bird would only direct courtship behaviour towards giant tortoises
- Concluded that the peacock had undergone sexual imprinting
There has been research support into Lorenz’s (1952) studies into imprinting on animal studies of attachment - state whether this is a strength or a weakness and explain why
STRENGTH
There is the existence of support for the concept of imprinting
Regolin + Vallortigara (1995) research:
- Chicks were exposed to simple shape combinations that moved e.g. triangle with a rectangle in front
- made sure this shape was the first moving thing they saw to encourage imprinting
- A range of shape combinations were then moved in front of them and they followed the original most closely (i.e. the one they first saw during the supposed critical period)
Supports the view that young animals are born with an innate mechanism to imprint on a moving object present in the critical period of development - as Lorenz predicted
Lorenz’s (1952) research into imprinting on animal studies of attachment lack GENERALISABILITY to humans - explain why and state whether this is a strength or weakness
WEAKNESS
Lack the ability to GENERALISE Lorenz’s findings and conclusions from birds to humans
Mammalian attachment system quite different and much more complex than that in birds
e.g. in mammals attachment is a two way process (seen in reciprocity + interactional synchrony)
- Its not just the young who are attached to their mothers but the mammalian mothers also show and emotional attachment to their young
This means that it’s most likely not appropriate to generalise Lorenz’s findings to humans - defeats the whole purpose of his research
Some psychologists argue that Lorenz’s (1952) research into imprinting on animal studies of attachment can be APPLIED to human behaviour - state whether this is a strength or weakness and explain why
STRENGTH
Although human attachment is very different from that in birds there has been attempts to use the idea that some kind of ‘imprinting’ explains human behaviour
e.g. Seebach (2005) - suggested that computer uses exhibit ‘baby duck syndrome’
‘Baby duck syndrome’ = the attachment formed to a person’s first computer operating system, leading them to reject others
Lorenz’s (1952) research into imprinting on animal studies of attachment has some ETHICAL ISSUES - explain why and state whether this is a strength or weakness
WEAKNESS
Debate on whether this chicks can even consent, or whether consent is even necessary in animal studies
Questionable to attach (somewhat forcibly) young chicks to humans instead of their biological mothers
Humans arguably less capable of teaching these chicks how to survive than their biological same species mother - Lorenz wouldn’t have the full capabilities of raising these chicks appropriately
Therefore questionable whether decreasing these chick’s survival capabilities by making them imprint on humans is worth the value of the research findings
Findings cannot even be fully generalised to human behaviour - was there any point in harming these chicks? What was the point of his research when it can’t even serve its purpose?
Describe Harlow’s (1958) procedure on his study into ‘contact comfort’ on animal studies of attachment
- Observed that newborns kept alone in a bare cage often died, however when given a cloth to cuddle they usually survived
- Tested idea that a soft object serves a similar functions to a mother
- Reared 16 baby monkeys with two wire model ‘mothers’
- In one condition milk was dispensed by the plain-wire mother
- In the second condition milk was dispensed by the cloth-covered mother
Describe Harlow’s (1958) findings and conclusions on his study into ‘contact comfort’ on animal studies of attachment
- Baby monkeys cuddled the cloth-covered mother in preference to the plain-wire mother
- Monkeys sought comfort from cloth mother when frightened (e.g. by a noisy mechanical teddy bear), regardless of which of the mothers dispensed milk
- Concluded that ‘contact comfort’ was of more importance to the monkeys than food when it came to attachment behaviour
Describe Harlow’s (1958) procedure and findings on maternally deprived monkeys as adults
- Followed the monkeys who had been deprived of a ‘real’ mother in his contact comfort study into adulthood
- Wanted to investigate if early maternal deprivation had a permanent effect
- Monkeys reared with plain-wire mothers were the most dysfunctional
- However, even those reared with cloth-covered mothers did not develop normal social behaviour
- Monkeys were more aggressive + less sociable
- Bred less often as they (the monkeys) were unskilled in mating
- When deprived monkeys became mothers they often neglected their young -even attacking their children, killing them in some cases
Describe Harlow’s (1958) conclusions on the ‘critical period’ for normal development
- Mother figure had to be introduced to a young monkey within 90 days for an attachment to form
- After the 90 days attachment = impossible and damage done by early deprivation becomes irreversible
Harlow’s (1958) research into ‘contact comfort’ and early deprivation in his animal studies of attachment have real-world value - state whether this is a strength or a weakness and explain why
STRENGTH
Research has important real world APPLICATION
Helped social workers and clinical psychologists understand that a lack of bonding experience may be a risk factor in child development
Preventative measures can be taken to prevent poor outcomes of early deprivation (Howe, 1998)
Also now understand the importance of attachment figures for baby monkeys in zoos and conservation programmes around the word
Means that VALUE of Harlow’s research not just theoretical but also practical