Unit 4 part 2 The first two years of life Flashcards

1
Q

Attachment theory

A

-> focuses in a specific type of relationship called attachment relationship -affectionate bond or emotional tie
-> are seeked when individual perceives potential alarm or discomfort
–> quality does not matter
- John Bowldy’s Attachment theory (1958) - from psychoanalysis + evolution +ethology = promotes adaptation and survival

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Attachment system

A

= innate motivation, activated in distress, fear, tired, sick
-> attachement is a GOAL DRIVEN SYSTEM to promote optimum proximity
-> works with internal operating models/expectations
-> based on their early experience with with figure, children develop expectations about their attachment figure’s future behavior (in alarming situations)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

What did early mother-child bond ruptures cause?

A

Isolation, emotional distancing, and interpersonal difficulties
–> the formation of a successful attachment was done during a critical period
(6m to 3yrs)
-> critical period => SENSITIVE PERIOD; time frame that is conducive for forming strong attachment

(these conclusions came from the ethology studies of imprinting)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

KONRAD LORENZ

A

(1952) observed imprinting: when newborns recognise and seek proximity with the first object they encounter

-> goslings saw him first so then he was MOTHER
-> concluded there was a critical period as after a certain point they would no longer bond to other caregivers
-> BOWLDY concluded = need to attach is ever present

BEH system: following, clinging, crying
MOTIV. system: maintain proximity to an attachment figure as protection

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Internal Operating Model

A

attachment system takes reference of the internal operating model of the attachment FIGURE and the self in relation to the baby
-> secure attachment: self DESERVES love (other was loving and attentive)
-> insecure attachment: the self is worthy of REJECTION (other was unavailable)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

The goals of the infant is to ___ while ____

A

to explore and learn, this develops in opposition to the tendency of forming attachment
-> while exploring, CAREGIVER is SAFE BASE

Separation activates the system of attachment
-> must first distinguish them THEN they are be able to vocalise and move reasonably and independent

MONOTROPISM (any child can form a strong attachment to one person)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

SEPARATION PROTEST

A

at 6m, when child is able to explore environment alone -> may cry or reach out to prevent departure
–> coincides with STRANGER ANXIETY

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

PHASE 1 & 2 (Birth to 2m + 2m to 7m)

A

B to 2m
-> Show little differentiation to caregiver and others - no recognition

2m to 7m
-> Begins to recognise caregiver (more comforted) BUT still lack object recognition

(if you cannot recognise set as an object you cannot recognise it’s absence) thus they still may present separation protest

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Phase 3 to 4 (7-9m to 2yrs + 2-3yrs onwards)

A

7-9m to 2yrs
-> clearer signs of proximity seeking, separation protest and stranger anxiety (increasingly clearer)

2-3yrs onwards
-> Phy + Cog. Ab. mature = more complex, explore with greater independence
-> Attachment becomes an abstract, internal representation with an understanding of other needs
-> develops trust, understanding of caregiver’s needs (availability) - don’t happen at the same time but inevitably their goal of proximity is equal amongst infants

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Maternal deprivation hypothesis

A

-> Bowlby focused on abnormal social development that results from severe parental neglect or long-term separation from parental figures
-> Prolonged disruption in attachment to the mother figure = maternal deprivation CAUSES illness, abandonment, or institutionalisation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Willian Goldfarb (1947)

A

studied different outcome variables in 30 children, given up by their moms before 9m
–> 1/2 foster care
–> 1/2 institutionalised (and then) foster care after 3.5 yrs
- measured intelligence, reading, and arthmetic at 10-14yrs
RESULT = they observed worse performance in institutionalised children than foster care kids
-> also fearful, restless, unpopular, and needier

–> maladaptive development was due to institutionalisation and the lack of attachment with a caregiver

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

He added that maternal deprivation can be

A

reverse with adequate care, correcting the disruptive effect, ONLY IF its given before the 2.5 yrs
ASSUMES the critical/sensitive period

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Harlow and Zimmerman Rhesus monkeys

A

-> Mesh wire surrogate mom + milk bottle
—> used exclusively for food
-> ANOTHER with Terry cloth that had no food
—> used for comfort (prefered)

bad consequences= real psychological damage, hostile, couldn’t reproduce, or provide adequate care for offspring

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

What did Boldly influence to the general public

A

-> perception on child rearing and parenting, social policy (childcare), and parenting
-> BUT mother deprivation isn’t as severe as thought < environmental enrichment can compensate
-> they also found that institutionalisation isn’t as irreversible as Bowlby thought. it can be mitigated with prepared adoptive parents that were READY to resolve past traumas

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

MARY AINSWORTH

A

-> continued attachment = measuring the emotional state of the children in relation to the type of attachment
- Ainsworth observed the communication between mother and baby
-> beh of baby when mother absent, and when parent returned

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Strange situation study/procedure

A

-Ainsworth: quality of attachment rather than intensity or duration

->7 phases/ 3min each (one-way mirror) - org done with bbs 1-2yrs
assessed on 5 scales, Proximity and contact, Contact maintaining, Avoidance of proximity, Resistance to contact, Search beh

17
Q

What are the phases for Strange Situation Study

A

p1: P+C introduced to room w/ toys
p2: stranger comes in sits, talks, and plays for a minute each
p3: P leaves, stranger plays for 3min then sits
p4: P returns, stranger leaves. Puts C settle + sits
p5: P leaves, C completely alone for 3min
p6: Stranger comes back tries to settle C 3min
p7: S leaves and P comes back and tries to settle

18
Q

What did Ainsworth identify

A

-> lasts 20 minutes but it is cut short if child is really stressed

-> infant displays willingness to use parent as safe base to derive SECURITY, in reunions (p4+7)
-> identified 4 attachment types
- Type B: secure attachment
- Type A: Insecure-avoidant attachment
- Type C: Insecure-resistant/ambivalent attachment
- Type D: Disorganised attachment (Mary Main)

19
Q

Type A: Insecure-Avoidant attachment

A

Child show few or no signs of missing parent; when absent and actively ignores parent in reunion -> emotional distance
-> If picked up there may be squirming but not active rejection
-> treats mom and stranger the same
-> during separation there is a lack of distress
- 14% to 15%

20
Q

Type B: secure attachment

A

-> C shows signs of missing parent, makes efforts to reunite w/ parent - figure is trusted - safe base to explore the environment
-> Desire for proximity and contact maintenance + Prefers mom. In distress can find some comfort in stranger but prefers mom
-> 44-60%

21
Q

Type C: insecure-resistant/ambivalent attachment

A

-> C is clingy, no exploration. when alone extremely distressed w/ stranger
-> distressed when left alone, cannot be settles when parent comes back
-> they are pleased to see the mother but is angry and reject parent
-> Child shows resistance beh
- 8-11%
(reflect the child’s lack of willingness to use the parent as a safe base)

22
Q

Type D: Disorganised attachment (Mary Main)

A

Lack of consistent beh., hesitation about approaching mom but confusion about separation -> NO standard response
-> uncertain about how to make use of caregiver as a source of security
5-15% general population; 28-30% clinical population

23
Q

Ainsworth critique

A

SSS/SSP: shows ^ ecological validity
-> can be generalised to other real-life situations
-> confined to the artificiality of Labs
-> demonstrates nature of attachment (C can have different attachment with different ppl)

-> SSS doesn’t reflect where child. is left alone in the care of others

24
Q

Ways parents are in the first years of life influences…

A

attachment style

warm and attentive (no regard to bio or not) -> secure

negative acts or rejection -> Insecure-avoidant

unreliable or inconsistent care (smts unresponsive + smts overbearing) -> insecure-ambivalent

inadequate care -> disorganised attachment

25
Q

Disorganised-disoriented attachment + working models of attachment

A
  • due to psychopathology in parents = bbs act negative towards them
    can lead to maladaptive beh later on

Adult Attachment Interview
- AAI adults also create working models of attachment based on early facility experiences (influencing their parenting LTR on)
-> focus on relationship w/ parents in situations, stressfulness (cate. with 4 attachment s)
-> infancy and adulthood + parent-child relationships = stable
-> BUT those with insecure attachment not doomed

26
Q

Language acquisition

A

Universal sequence
- sm learn many lang at once, sm faster than others
-> END OF SENSORIMOTOR PERIOD 6th stage
(15-18m)
symbolic function appears-> verbal lang arises at same time as other manifestations
-> Lang characterised by greater distance between signifier (sound) + signified (meaning)

27
Q

Prelinguistic Period (0-12m)

A

-> bb talk, motherese or child directed speech (adults use higher pitch, simples words, grammar, reps, slower, exaggerated emo. tone)
-> C-directed speech (enc. learning) -> 4m, make sounds to communicate internal state

-> NONverbal gestures (0-9m): infant-adult (infant) interaction
-> PROTOS (triangulation Chi-Adu-Obj)
—> Protoimperatives/gestures (9m) -points to achieve
—> Protodeclarative/ gestures (12m) -points to share

28
Q

1st semester prelinguistic (universal)

A
  • reflex vocalisation 0-2m (high-pitched)
  • cooing 2-3m
  • Babbling 4-6m (consonant-like sounds and vowels in iso.) (12m -> develops accent, prosody)
29
Q

2nd semester prelinguistic (NATIVE LANG)

A

-reduplicative babbling 6-9m (rep same syllables+ C-V syllabic strings)
- Babbling in the reduplicative 9-12m (C-V syllables, shorter strings + other syllabic structures)
(12 to 13m realize individual words have meaning)
17m can understand meaning of nouns and verbs to use

30
Q
  1. The holophrase period
  2. Word combination period
A
  1. 12-24m
    -utter first word (+1 word per week)
    -comprehension develops before speech
    -holophrase: single word the expresses complete meaningful thought
    -naming explosion (18m) increase in vocab
  2. > 24m
    -Grammar: 2-word combo (18-24m)
    –> 3-word combo (>24m)
    - grammar proficiency= length of sentence
    - MLU = mean length of utterance
31
Q

Learn vs. Nativist Perspective

A

-> lang is learned through experience and reinforcement of lang use. they imitate sounds that they’ve been exposed to
-> parents shape infant lang.

-> learning cannot account for all aspects of lang.
-> everyday lang is incoherent so if child imitated it they’d speak incoherently
-> (NOAM CHOMSKY) LAD: Lang. acquisition device (detect regularities with exist in everyday speech) => create mini-theory to produce correct sentences (mouses vs. mice)

32
Q

IF LAD exists - location

A

not yet located, NS, specific areas of brain found to be specialised for lang (lateralisation of brain functioning for lang)

-> BROCA’S AREA = Paul Broca disrupted ability to produce speech brooks aphasia

-> WERNICKE’S AREA = studies brain of a patient w/ disrupted ability to understand lang. (speech lack meaning) left temporal lobe

(the fact that the brain has spefici areas for speech shows that its some what innate) = interactionist perspective

33
Q

interactionist perspective

A

(the fact that the brain has specific areas for speech shows that its some what innate)
-> social and bio factos + cog abilities (Piaget’s cog development)