types of attatchment Flashcards
What was the sample of the strange situation?
What did they aim to study?
100 MC Americans
Studied 4 behaviours to determine attachment type:
Stranger anxiety (distress when in the presence of unfamiliar adults)
Separation anxiety (distress when separated from caregiver)
Reunion behaviour (childs reaction when united with caregiver)
Willingness to explore (child feeling ree to explore by using caregiver as a secure base)
Summarise the procedure of the strange situation
Series of 3 minute episodes: mother+baby, stranger enters, mother leaves and returns
Ainsworth observed from the other side of a 1 way mirror(>children didn’t know)
Analysis>measuring types of attachment as secure (type B), insecure avoidant (type A) and insecure resistant (type C)
What are the 7 phases of the strange situation?
(Think about the 4 behaviours to determine a childs attachment style for each phase)
Child encouraged to explore
Stranger comes in and tried to interact with child
Caregiver leaves and child and stranger together
Caregiver returns and stranger leaves
Caregiver leaves child alone
Stranger returns
Caregiver returns and is reunited with child
One limitation of the strange situation is that it’s subject to culture bias
PET
E: All ppts were from the USA, reflecting the norms and values of individualistic cultures. Findings may be different for collectivist cultures e.g. Japanese mothers are rarely separated from their babies>high levels of separation anxiety
T: Findings aren’t universal, only apply to Western cultures
One strength of the strange situation is that the attachment types identified can predict later life outcomes
PET
E: E.g. securely attached (B) have best later life outcomes: more successful in education, friendship, romantic relationships
T: Increases predictive validity
What was the sample in Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg’s study?
32 studies, from 8 countries
1990 children
All mother children relationships
A weakness of the strange situation Is that a fourth type of attachment had been discovered, which isn’t accounted for
PET
E: “Disorganised attachment”-shown in infants with odd mix of insecure avoidant and resistant behaviours
T: Ainsworth’s credibility is decreased as it’s seen as incomplete
What are cultural variations in attachment?
The differences in attachment patterns that exist between infants, and their caregivers in different cultures
What was the procedure in Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg’s study?
Meta-analysis (gather existing data) from attached assed in a range of cultures using strange situation, proportions (3 attachment types) were examined
In jzendoorn and Kroonenberg’s study:
Which attachment type is most common in all cultures?
Which country had the highest level of insecure avoidant children?
And insecure avoidant children?
Which country has the highest number of ppts? Issue?
Secure
Germany (35%)
Japan (27%)
USA>cannot be generalised
Explain why Japan had the highest percentage of insecure resistant children?
Dependency is encouraged, normal for infants to be separated from their mothers, explains why they’re extremely distressed when separated
Explain why Germany had the highest percentage of insecure avoidant children?
Mothers cold parenting style encourages independence and obedience, children therefore don’t rely on parents for security
What was the procedure and findings of Simonelli et al’s Italy study?
Explain the findings of this study
Assessed 76 1 year old babies in Italy using the strange situation
Found that 36% were insecure avoidant, 14% were insecure resistant
Due to work patterns and day care
In Italy, mothers work long hours and use more childcare
One strength of Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg’s study is that it used the strange situation
PET
E: has high levels of control
T: can be easily replicated, giving the study high levels of reliability
One weakness of Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg’s study is that the validity of the strange situation has been questioned
PET
E: strange situation claims to measure attachment, but instead may be measuring infants temperament (nature)
T: lowers validity as they may be measuring something completely different