Bowlby (1944) (Psychodynamic)

Question 1

What type of experiment was it?

Answer 1

Case study

Question 2

What was the sample of thieves?

Answer 2

44 children who had stole. 31 boys, 13 girls aged 5-17.
Average intelligence

Question 3

What was the control group?

Answer 3

Further 44 children who attended the clinic.
Similar age, sex, IQ.
Emotionally disturbed but did not steal

Question 4

How was the sample created?

Answer 4

Opportunity sampling

Question 5

What was the procedures?

Answer 5

1) Each child was given tests to assess their intelligence
2) A social worker interviewed the mother
3) The psychologist and social worker reported to the psychiarist (bowbly) who then interviewed the child and mother
4) Then continued to meet with the psychartrist weekly over a period of 6 months

Question 6

What were the findings?

Answer 6

6 different personality types
14 were classed as affectionless - of these, 12 had experienced frequent separations from their mothers. These were rare amongst other types (17 in total
17 had mothers who were hostile
Some had fathers who openly hated them

Question 7

What were the main conclusions?

Answer 7

Children would not have become offenders if they had not had experiences that were harmful to healthy development - vital important
Damage to the relationship would affect the superego (right or wrong)
This study has placed emphasis on psychodynamic factors

Question 8

What are the implications for treatment?

Answer 8

Treatment should be offered, but this process is extremely slow
Prevention is better than treatment

Question 9

Is it possible to draw causal findings?

Answer 9

Prolonged seperation was not manipulated - Only demonstrated a relationship between the variables

Question 10

Was the data recorded biased?

Answer 10

Produced rich qualitative data but it is based on the view of one person.
Case histories were largely based on recollections of the parent about the events that happened many years ago (inaccurate)

Question 11

Was the sample valid?

Answer 11

All 88 children in this study were emotionally disturbed, may not be appropriate to generalise

Question 12

Was it ethical?

Answer 12

Participants were not afforded confidentiality - first names and initials and case studies provide so much detail
Decision to use the data was retrospective