Types of attachment

Question 1

Other attachment types

Answer 1

Main and Solomon (1986) identified a fourth category of attachment – disorganised (Type D), a mix of resistant and avoidant behaviours. On one hand the addition of an extra attachment type appears to be a huge problem for Ainsworth’s classification. Type D children display a distinctive mix of resistant and avoidant behaviours in the Strange Situation, clearly showing that Ainsworth’s categorisation of types is incomplete.
On the other hand Type D children are unusual and Type D behaviour appears to be the result of experiencing some kind of severe neglect or abuse. Therefore Type D attachment does not appear to be a normal variation in attachment. It can therefore be argued that Ainsworth’s classification of avoidant, secure and resistant attachment types is an adequate description of normal attachment types.
In conclusion Ainsworth’s classification of attachment types holds up well as a description of normal variations in attachment. However Type D attachment adds something useful to her classification in the form of an abnormal attachment type.

Question 2

Good predictive validity

Answer 2

One strength of teh strange situation is that’s outcome predicts a number of aspects of the baby’s later development. A large body of research has shown that babies and toddlers assed as type B tend to have better outcomes than others both in later childhood and in adulthood. In childhood this includes better achivevmneyt in school and less involvement in bullying. Securely attached Abbies also tend to go on to have better mental health in adulthood. Those babies assessed as having insecure resistant attachment and those not falling into Types ABC tend to have worst outcomes. This suggests that the strange situation measure something real and manful in a baby’s development

Question 3

Counterpoint good predictive validity?

Answer 3

The strange situation clearly measures something important that is associated with later development. However not all psychologists believe this something is attachment. For example jermone pagan suggested that genetically influenced anxiety levels could account for variations in attachment behaviour in the strange situation and later development. This means that teh strange situation Amy not saccutally measure attachment.

Question 4

Good reliability.

Answer 4

A further strength of the strange situation is good inter rater reliability. Back et al tested inter rater reliability for the strange situation for a team of trained observers and found aggreement on attachment types in 94% of case. This high level of reliability may be because the producer takes place under controlled conditions and because behaviours involve large movement and are therefore easy to observe for example anxious babies cry and craw; away from strangers. This means that we can be confident that attachment types as assessed by the strange situation does not depend on subjective juydemenst.

Question 5

The test may be culture bound

Answer 5

One limitation of the strange sutatuon is that it mayn’t be valid measure of attachment in different cultural contexts. The strange situation was developed in Britain and the US. It may be culture bound only valid for use in certain cultures. One reason for this is that babies have different experiences in different cultures and these experiences may affect their response to the strange situation. For example in one Japanese study by Takashi babies displayed very high levels of separation anxiety and so a disportioncate number were clasessided as insecure resistant. Takashi suggests that this anxiety response was not due to high rates of attachments insecurity but to teh unusual nature of the experience in Japan where mother baby separation is very rare. This means that it is very difficult to know what the strange situation is measuring when used outside Europe and the US