romanian orphan studies - institutionalisation

Question 1

what is an institution

Answer 1

a place where someone has to live 24/7 for a long period of time (e.g. an orphanage, a hospital).

Question 2

what is institutionalisation/when someone is institutionalised

Answer 2

they are suffering from the long term effects of living in an institution
often associated with very poor emotional care

Question 3

what is privation

Answer 3

never having formed an attachment, never had the opportunity to build an attachment

Question 4

what was Rutter’s study and aim

Answer 4

• Rutter followed a group of 165 Romanian orphans adopted in Britain
• Aim: to see whether good care could make up for the hell they had experienced in institutions
• Physical, cognitive and emotional development was assessed at 4,6,11 and 15
• Control group of 52 British children adopted at the same time was used as a comparison

Question 5

what were the physical findings

Answer 5

• Romanian orphans were smaller, growth had been stunted (due to malnourishment and lack of love) more under nourished + weighed less than the British orphans
• By the time they were 4, some of the Romanian orphans had caught up-particularly the ones who were adopted before 6 months - early on during critical period
• Physical Underdevelopment due to the lack of emotional care rather than lack of nourishment that psychologists say impacts upon the growth of the child.

Question 6

what were the IQ (intellectual development) findings

Answer 6

• By age 11 (and still remaining at 16) there were differences which hinged upon the age at which each child had been adopted.
• IQ decreased according to age of adoption.
• on average IQ 102 if adopted before 6 months and IQ 76 if after 2 and a half.
• Cognitive development is slowed by lack of love/care (lower IQ)

Question 7

what were the emotional + behavioural findings

Answer 7

• The child is likely to experience difficulty controlling his or her emotions and moving forward in childhood
• may display issues with conduct and general behaviour
• Lacked stability in emotions - outburst of anger

Question 8

what were the attachment findings

Answer 8

• Those adopted before 6 months rarely demonstrated this attachment style
• The child is likely to find it difficult to attach to the new caregiver
• The child is likely to find it difficult forming and maintaining friendships

Question 9

what was the disinhibited attachment finding

Answer 9

• Those adopted after 6 months showed disinhibited attachment which involves attention seeking, clinginess and indiscriminate treatment of all adults (known or unknown)
• Likely caused by the many carers the child experienced in the institution (children will treat strangers with inappropriate familiarity as they are so desperate for love).

Question 10

what are the +ve AO3 points for Rutter’s study

Answer 10

• lack of confounding variables
• real life application
• support for disinhibited attachment

Question 11

expand on the +ve AO3 point: lack of confounding variables

Answer 11

• there are fewer confounding variables than other studies into institutional care.
• That is because children will have often suffered a bereavement or neglect/abuse prior to institutionalisation which acts as a massive confounding variable. → adopted so early on, in institution really early on
• in Rutter’s study we can be fairly confident that it is the institution causing the behaviour/traits we are measuring

Question 12

expand on the +ve AO3 point: real life application

Answer 12

• Apparently orphanages have been made better as a direct result of Rutter’s research.
• Where children are institutionalised they are given a key worker who they can bond with.
• This allows them to develop attachments that will prevent damage to their development

Question 13

expand on the +ve AO3 point: support for disinhibited attachment

Answer 13

• Zeanah (2005) compared 136 Romanian children (aged 1 – 2.5) who had spent over 90% of their lives in an institution to a control group of Romanian children who had never been in an institution.
• Institutionalised children much more likely to show disinhibited attachment

Question 14

what are the -ve AO3 points for Rutter’s study

Answer 14

• Generalisability
• Perhaps the children needed more time?

Question 15

expand on the -ve AO3 point: generalisabilty

Answer 15

• The results from the Romanian orphanage studies cannot be easily generalised
• This is because the standard of care in these institutions was so atrocious that it is incomparable to any other institutional care
• This means that results about institutionalisation and its effects cannot be generalised

Question 16

expand on the -ve AO3 point: perhaps the children needed more time

Answer 16

• Psychologists have criticised the conclusions Rutter and Zeanah have come to and suggested that perhaps if the children had been given more time to adjust before the assessments were made, they would have shown greater evidence of recovery.
• More data should have been obtained through the teenage years, early twenties and onwards in order to draw out whether the effects of institutionalisation were irreversible.