Attachment Flashcards
1
Q
Caregiver-Infant Interactions
- Describe this type of interaction
- What is the importance of these interactions?
- What does good quality interactions result in?
A
- Babies from the start have meaningful social interactions with their carers
- Psychologist believe these interactions have important functions for child’s social development
- Good quality early social interactions assassinated with successful development of attachments between babies and their cargiver(s)
2
Q
Reciprocity
- RAP|AI
- What is reciprocity?
- What are alert phases?
- What is active involvement?
A
- Each person (mother/caregiver and baby) responds to other and elicits a response from them “turn taking” (baby smile, adult interacts, baby interacts and so on)
- Alert phases are when babies signal that they want a spell of interaction, mother picks up on this 2/3rds of time according to research but varies according to external factors (stress)
- Active involvement is the idea that both caregiver and baby can initiate interactions (both have an active role), respond to each other
3
Q
Interactional Synchrony
- IS|SB|IA
- What is interactional synchrony?
- Describe research done by Meltzoff and Moore (1977)
- Describe research done by Isabella et al (1989)
A
- Can be defined by a temporal co-ordination of micro-level social behaviour according to Feldman (2007)
- Caregiver and baby carry out action simultaneously, mirror their actions / emotions
- Synchrony begins, Andrew Meltzoff & Keith Moore (1977)- Adult displayed 1 of 3 facial expressions or gestures to babies young as 2 weeks old, baby’s response filmed labelled by independent observers, Babies’ expression gestures mirror adults’ significant association
- Importance of attachment, Isabella et al (1989)- 30 mothers assessed degree of synchrony, quality of mother baby attachment, Higher synchrony better quality mother baby attachment
4
Q
Evaluation for caregiver-infant interactions
- FO|DO|DI|CP
A
- Filmed Observations
- Difficulty observing babies
- Developmental importance (Feldman 2012)
- Counterpoint (Isabella et al 1989)
- Practical value versus ethics
5
Q
Filmed Observations
A
- Strength, interactions usually filmed in a laboratory
- Other activity that may distract baby can be controlled
- Observations recorded can be analysed later, unlikely that researchers will miss key behvs
- More than one observer can view recording, inter-rater reliability of observations
- Babies unaware they are being observed, as a result they will act naturally
- Therefore, data collected should have good reliability and validity
6
Q
Difficulty observing babies
A
- Limitation, hard to interpret baby’s behaviour
- Baby has lack of co-ordination, much off their bodies is immobile
- Movement observed just small hand movements, subtle changes in expression
- Difficult to be sure whether baby smiling of just passing wind for example
- Also, difficult to determined what is taking place from baby’s perspective
- Cannot know if a movement is random or triggered by something the caregiver has done
- This means we cannot be certain that behvs seen in cargiver-infant interactions have a special meaning
7
Q
Developmental importance (Feldman 2012)
A
- Further limitation, simply observing behv does not tell us developmental importance
- Feldman (2012), points out synchrony and reciprocity gives names to patterns of observable behvs
- They are robust phenomena, can be reliably observed by may not particularly be useful in understanding child development
- Does not tell us the purpose of these behvs
- This means we cannot be certain from observational research alone that reciprocity and synchrony are important for child’s development
8
Q
Counterpoint (Isabella et al 1989)
A
- Evidence from other lines of research to suggest early interactions are important
- Isabella et al (1989), found higher synchrony predicted development of a good quality attachment
- This means on balance, caregiver-infant interaction is probably important in development
9
Q
Practical value versus ethics
A
- Basically, waffle about social sensitivity v practicality of research in attachment
- No simple answer about whether social-sensitive but practically-valuable research should be carried out
- Att research has clear real-world applications
- Crotwell et al (2013), found that Parent-Child Interaction Therapy (PCIT) improved interactional synchrony in 20 low-income mothers and pre-school children
- However, Isabella et al (1989) argued research that is socially sensitive can be used to restrict freedom of choice, in this case mothers returning to work
- Att researchers sometimes argue they wish to equip parents with the best understanding possible of their child’s needs, so informed decisions can be made
- Strong argument that att research is valuable, but psychologists need to be clear about its purpose
10
Q
Schaffer and Emerson (1964)
- SEG|AISM
- Describe the procedure, findings and conclusions made by Schaffer and Emerson (1964)
- What are the four stages of attachment according to Schaffer and Emerson (1964)
A
- Glasgow babies (31 boys, 29 girls), visited mothers every month for first year at home and again at 18 months (most from skilled working-class families)
- Asked about protest baby showed with separation to measure attachment, also measured stranger anxiety
- Findings led to 4 stages of attachment, Asocial stage, Indiscriminate att, Specific att and Multiple att
11
Q
Asocial Stage
- At what age does this stage occur?
- Describe this stage
A
- First few weeks, recognising forming bonds with carers
- Behv towards humans’ objects similar, preference for familiar adults, happy in presence of others
12
Q
Indiscriminate attachment
- At what age does this stage occur?
- Describe this stage
A
- 2 to 7 months, more observable social behv, prefer to be with people over objects
- Prefer recognise familiar adults, accept comfort any adult, not different towards any one person
13
Q
Specific attachment
- At what age does this stage occur?
- Describe this stage
A
- 7 months, anxiety towards strangers (stranger anxiety)
- Separation anxiety from one particular adult (65% bio mother), the primary attachment figure
- Not necessarily the person the infant spends the most time with, it’s the person who offers the most interaction and responds to “signals” with the most skill
14
Q
Multiple attachments
- At what age does this stage occur?
- Describe this stage
A
- Age 1, multiple attachments with other adults that they regularly spend time with
15
Q
Evaluation for the stages of attachment
- EV|CP|PE|RWA|G
A
- External Validity
- Counterpoint (Unreliable observations)
- Poor evidence for asocial stage
- Real World Application
- Generalisability
16
Q
External Validity
A
- Strength of S and E, good external validity
- Most observations made by parents during ordinary activities
- Alternate would have researchers present to record observations, may have distracted babies, made them feel more anxious
- This means it is highly likely that ppts behaved naturally while being observed
17
Q
Counterpoint (Unreliable observations)
A
- Mothers unlikely to be objective observers, may have been biased about what they wished to report occurred
- For example, might not have noticed when baby showed signs of anxiety, may have misremembered
- This means that even if babies behaved naturally, their behv may not have been accurately recorded
18
Q
Poor evidence for asocial stage
A
- Limitation of S and E, validity of measures used to assess att in asocial stage
- Babies have poor co-ordination, fairly immobile
- If baby less than two months old felt anxiety in everyday situations, may have been displayed subtly in a hard to observe way
- Makes it difficult for mothers to see this and report back to researchers on signs of anxiety
- This means that babies may be quite social but because of flawed methods, they appear to be asocial
19
Q
Real World Application
A
- Strength, S and E stages have practical application in day care
- In asocial and indiscriminate att stages, day care likely to be straightforward, babies can be comforted by any skilled adult
- S and E tell us starting day care with an unfamiliar adult may be problematic due to specific att stage
- This means parents use of the day care can be planned using S and E stages
20
Q
Generalisability
A
- Large sample size in S and E study can help with generalisability
- However, sample charac may make sample less generalisable to other populations
- Due to the fact that child-rearing practices vary heavily between social groups/cultures
- Patterns of att development in 1960s may be quite different compared to present day
- Also, only Glasgow babies used, cultural differences not taken into consideration as a result
- Therefore, we cannot assume same stage pattern would apply universally
21
Q
The role of the father
- How is this treated in research on attachment?
- What does “father” mean in relation to attachment?
A
- Role of the father often neglected, most research focuses on mother and baby att
- There is research on specific roles that father plays in development
- Father does not always mean bio dad, refers to closest male caregiver to a child
22
Q
Attachment to fathers
- What question does research attempt to find an answer for?
- What did Schaffer and Emerson (1964) discover about attachments?
- What do they suggest about the role of the father?
- How was this determined?
A
- Do babies attach to fathers and is so when do they do this?
- Fathers much less likely to become the first att figure compared to mothers
- S and E (1964) found majority of babies attached to mother at around 7 months, only 3% of cases was father first sole object of att
- In 27% of cases, father was joint first object of att with mother
- However, it appears that father becomes an important attachment figure
- 75% of babies studied by S and E form att with father by the age of 18 months
- Determined this by fact that baby protested when father walked away, sign of att
23
Q
Distinctive role for fathers
- What question does research attempt to find an answer for?
- What did Grossmann et al (2002) find?
- What does this suggest about the role of the father
A
- Do fathers hold specific value, a different role, unique contribution to early development?
- Grossmann et al (2002), longitudinal study (baby to teen), researchers looked at both parents behv and its relationship to quality of baby’s later att to other people
- Quality off baby’s att with mothers (not fathers) related to att in adolescence, suggests att to father less important than att to mothers
- However, Grossmann et al also found quality of fathers’ play with babies related to quality off adolescent att
- Suggests father has different role from moths, one more to do with play and stimulation, less to do with emotional development
24
Q
Fathers as a primary attachment figures
- What question does research attempt to find an answer for?
- What did Field (1978) find?
- What does this suggest about the role of the father?
A
- Distinction is made between primary and secondary att figures (PAF, SAF), first specific att is primary att later atts are secondary atts
- More to primary att than being first, special emotional significances to att
- This relationship with PAF forms basis of all later close emotional relationships
- Some evidence to suggest when fathers take role of PC, they are able to adopt emotional role more typically associated with mothers
- Field (1978), babies face to face with PC mothers, SC fathers and PC fathers
- Found PC fathers like PC mothers spent more time smiling, imitating and holding babies than SC fathers
- These actions are part of reciprocity and interactional synchrony which are part of the process of att formation
- Suggests father has potential to be more emotion-focused PAF, have the capability of providing responsiveness required for close emotional att
- They may only express this when given role of PC
25
Q
Evaluation for the role of the father
- CORQ|CE|CP|RWA|BIR
A
- Confusion over research questions
- Conflicting evidence (McCallum and Golombok 2004)
- Counterpoint (May not be conflicting)
- Real-world application
- Bias in the research
26
Q
Confusion over research questions
A
- Limitation, lack of clarity over question being asked
- “What is role of the father”, more complicated a question than it sounds
- Some researchers concerned with role of father as PAF, some with role of father as SAF
- Former tended to see fathers as behaving differently from mothers, having distinct role
- Latter found fathers can take on a “maternal” role
- Makes it difficult to offer simple answer as to “role of the father”, really depends on what specific role is being discussed
27
Q
Conflicting evidence (McCallum and Golombok 2004)
A
- Limitation, research findings vary according to methodology used
- Longitudinal studies (Grossmann et al) suggested fathers as SAF have important and distinct role in child’s development involving play and stimulation
- However, if this where the case (a distinct, important and unique role only a father can take on)
- We would expect children growing up in single-mother and lesbian parent families would turn out different than those from heterosexual families
- McCallum and Golombok (2004), consistently shows that children do not develop differently from children in heterosexual families
- This means the question as the whether father has distinctive role remains unanswered
28
Q
Counterpoint (May not be conflicting)
A
- Could be that fathers typically take distinctive roles in hetero family, but parents in single-mother and lesbian-parent families adapt to accommodate the role played by fathers
- This means question of distinctive role for fathers is clear, fathers tend to adopt distinctive role but families can adapt to not having a father
29
Q
Real-world application
A
- Strength, research can be used to offer advice to parents
- Parents may worry over who should take on the role as the PC, mothers feel pressured to do so because of stereotypical views (mom stays home, dad works)
- In some families this stereotypical solution may not be suitable or even possible to carry out, research into the role of the father can give reassuring advice to parents
- For example, hetero parents can be informed that fathers are capable of becoming PAF, lesbian parent, single mother families can be informed that not having father does not affect child development
- This means parental anxiety about role of father can be reduced, also good for the mental health of family with circumstances where they go against the “normal”
30
Q
Bias in the research
A
- Possible that observers have preconceptions of how father do or should behave
- Could be created by stereotypical accounts and images of parenting roles and behv
- Could be influenced by advertising by political or religious views
- Stereotypes risk observer bias, they see what they expect to rather than recording objective reality
- However, psych observers are trained in the issue of bias, also procedures like dual observations where different observers watch same behv and agree on what is taking place
- This gives good inter-observer reliability; in conclusion no one is immune to bias but psychologists are aware of the issues and should not be affected as others would be
31
Q
Animal studies of attachment- Lorenz’s research
- What research did ethologists conduct?
- What did their observations inform to psychologists?
- What did Lorenz work with?
A
- Ethologists conducted animal studies of the relationships between new-born animals and their mothers
- Their observations informed psychologists understanding of cargiver-infant att in humans
32
Q
Imprinting
- Describe the procedure, findings and conclusions of Lorenz (1952)
- What is imprinting?
A
- Lorenz (1952), first observed imprinting when as a child, a neighbour gave him a newly hatched duckling that followed him around
- The procedure consisted off goose eggs being randomly divided into two groups, one group (half) hatched with mother in natural environment
- Other group (half) hatched in an incubator where first moving object they saw was Lorenz
- Found that group that hatched with Lorenz followed him, control group hatched in presence of mother followed her
- When two groups mixed up and placed under a box, control group followed mother, experimental group followed Lorenz (difference was apparent by a dot placed on the geese’s feet)
- This phenomenon is imprinting, bird species that are mobile from birth attach and follow the first large moving object they see
- Lorenz identified critical period where imprinting needed to take place, dependent on species can be as brief as few hours after hatching/birth
- If imprinting does not occur in this time Lorenz found that chicks did not attach themselves to a mother figure
33
Q
Sexual imprinting
- What else did Lorenz study?
- Describe Lorenz’s (1952) case study
- What is sexual imprinting?
A
- Lorenz investigated relationship between imprinting and adult mate preferences
- He observed that birds that imprinted on a human would often later display courtship behv towards humans
- In case study Lorenz (1952) described peacock that had been reared in reptile house where the first moving object it saw after hatching were giant tortoises
- Rearing means brining up and caring for a child till they are fully grown
- As an adult bird, it would only direct courtship behv towards giant tortoises
- Lorenz concluded this meant peacock had undergone sexual imprinting
34
Q
Evaluation for Lorenz’s research
- RS|G|ATUHB
A
- Research support (Regolin and Vallortigara 1995)
- Generalisability
- Applications to understanding human behaviour
35
Q
Research support (Regolin and Vallortigara 1995)
A
- Strength, existence for support for the concept of imprinting
- Regolin and Vallortigara (1995), supports Lorenz’s idea of imprinting
- Chicks exposed to simple shape combos that moved such as a triangle with a rectangle in front
- Range of shape combos moved in front of them, followed original the most closely
- Supports view that young animals are born with innate mechanism to imprint on moving object present in critical window of development, as predicted by Lorenz
36
Q
Generalisability
A
- Limitation, the ability to generalise findings/conclusions from birds to humans
- Mammalian att system different and more complex than that in birds
- Mammals att is a two-way process, mom shows emotional att to child, child att to mom
- This means that it is probably not appropriate to generalise Lorenz’s ideas to humans
37
Q
Applications to understanding human behaviour
A
- Humans do not imprint to first moving object they see, imprinting therefore has limited value to understanding the development of human att
- However, may be true that humans acquire some behv by means of “imprinting”
- Explains why may people prefer first computer system they use, struggle to adapt to others
- Therefore, it can be argued that Lorenz’s research on imprinting is of value in understanding some human att-related behv
38
Q
Animal studies of attachment- Harlow’s research
- What did Harlow work with?
A
Worked with rhesus monkeys, more similar to humans than Lorenz’s birds
39
Q
The importance of contact comfort
- Describe the procedure, findings and conclusions of Harlow (1958)
- What is contact comfort?
A
- H observed new-borns kept alone in cage, often died but usually survived if given something soft like cloth to cuddle
- Harlow (1958) tested idea that soft object serves some of the functions of a mother
- He reared 16 baby monkeys with two wire model “mothers”, in one condition milk dispensed by plain-wire mother, in second condition milk dispensed by cloth-covered mother
- Found that baby monkeys cuddled cloth-covered mother in preference to plain-wire mother
- Sought comfort from cloth one when frightened (noisy mechanical teddy bear), regardless if it had the milk
- Shows that “contact comfort” was of more importance to the monkeys than food when it cam to att behv
40
Q
Maternally deprived monkeys as adults
- What did Harlow find when he followed up the deprived monkeys?
A
- H and colleagues followed monkeys who had been deprived of “real” mother into adulthood to see if early maternal deprivation had permanent effect, severe consequences found
- Monkeys reared with plain-wire mother only were the most dysfunctional, however, even those reared with cloth-covered mother did not develop normal social behv
- Deprived monkeys were more aggressive, less sociable than other monkeys, bred less often than typical monkeys, unskilled at mating
- When deprived monkeys became mothers, they neglected their young and some attacked their children even killing them in some cases
41
Q
The critical period for normal development
- What is the critical period according to Harlow?
- What happens if an attachment is not formed in this period of time?
A
- H concluded like L that there was a critical period for att formation, mother figure had to be introduced to young monkey within 90 days for att to form
- After this time, att was impossible, damage done by early deprivation became irreversible
42
Q
Evaluation for Harlow’s research
- RWA|G|EI
A
- Real-world value
- Generalisability to humans
- Ethical issues
43
Q
Real-world value
A
- Strength of H’s research, important real-world applications
- Helped social workers and clinical psychologists understand that lack of bonding experience may be a risk factor in child development
- Allowed them to intervene to prevent poor outcome (Howe 1998)
- Now understand importance of att figures for baby monkeys in zoos and breeding programmes in the wild
- This means that the value of H’s research is not just theoretical but also practical
44
Q
Generalisability to humans
A
- Limitation of H’s research, ability to generalise findings/conclusions from monkeys to humans
- Rhesus monkeys are much more similar to humans than L’s birds, and all mammals share some common att behvs
- However, human brain and human behv still more complex than that of monkeys
- This means that it may not be appropriate to generalise H’s findings to humans
45
Q
Ethical issues
A
- H’s procedures were very stressful for monkey ppts, effects were long-term
- Monkeys similar to humans, may have suffered to a similar extent
- However, H’s research has practical application that have benefited large numbers off humans and animals
- Therefore, it could be argued that the studies were justified
46
Q
Explanations of attachment
- What are the two explanations for attachment?
A
The two explanations of attachment are Learning theory and Bowlby’s theory
47
Q
Learning Theory
- What did Dollard and Miller propose?
- What does their approach emphasise?
A
- Dollard and Miller (1950) proposed that care-giver infant att can be explained by learning theory
- Their approach emphasises the importance of the att figure as a provider of food
- Basically, proposed that children learn to love whoever feeds them
48
Q
Classical conditioning
- Describe classical conditioning in relation with attachment
A
- Learning to associate two stimuli together, we begin to response to one in the same war as we already respond to the other
- Food is the unconditioned stimulus (UCS), being fed gives us pleasure, an unconditional response (UCR)
- Caregiver starts as neutral stimulus (NS) which is something that produces no response
- When cargiver (NS) provides food (UCS), the baby feels pleasure (UCR), an association begins with the NS and UCS
- When baby now sees cargiver they expect food, the cargiver has become the conditioned stimulus (NS + UCS = CS)
- This conditioning once it has taken place makes the baby produce a conditioned response (CR) of pleasure when they see the caregiver
- CR is love to a learning theorist, an att is formed and cargiver becomes and att figure when conditioning has successfully occurred
49
Q
Operant conditioning
- Describe operant conditioning in relation with attachment
A
- Learning consequences of behv, if behv produces pleasant consequence, that behv likely
- to be repeated (behv is positively reinforced)
- If behv produces unpleasant consequence (punishment), less likely to be repeated (behv is negatively reinforced)
- OC can explain why babies cry for comfort, important behv in building att
- Crying leads to response from caregiver, for example feeding
- As long as correct response provided by cargiver, crying is reinforced
- Baby then directs crying for comfort towards cargiver who response with comforting “social suppers or” behv
- This reinforcement is a two-way process, baby reinforced for crying cargiver negatively reinforced because crying stops (escape from something unpleasant)
- Positive reinforcement is when an action leads to a reward/desired outcome
- Negative reinforcement is when an action leads to the end of something unpleasant
50
Q
Attachment as a secondary drive
- What does this draw on the concept of?
- How does this relate to attachment?
- What does Sears et al (1957) suggest?
A
- Learning theory draws on the concept of drive reduction
- Hunger can be thought as a primary drive, its an innate bio motivator
- We are motivated to eat in order to reduce the hunger drive (drive reduction)
- Sears et al (1957) suggested that as caregivers provide food, primary drive of hunger generalised to them
- Att is thus a secondary drive learned by an association between cargiver and satisfaction of primary drive
- Basically, the cargiver reduces the drive of hunger by providing food leaving the primary drive satisfied
