Animal studies of attachment Flashcards
(17 cards)
describe the procedure Harlow used to study in monkeys?
tested to see if baby monkeys preferred soft, cloth mother (providing comfort) or wire mother providing milk (physical needs)
16 baby monkeys left individually with mothers to see which one they preferred
measured how long monkey spent with each mother
also tested to see which mother they would go to when frightened
what did Harlow find and what does this show?
all monkeys spent most time with soft, cloth mother and only went to wire mother for food
shows emotional needs more important than food in attachment formation
monkeys also returned to cloth mother when frightened which supports secure base idea
what did Harlow find about monkeys reared with no real mother?
they had permanent effects of maternal deprivation- more aggressive and less sociable, less skilled at mating, became neglectful and aggressive mothers,
what did Harlow find about the critical period for monkeys?
90 days- if attachments aren’t formed in this period, they likely won’t form at all and there will be permanent irreversible damage
how does Harlow’s research generalise to humans?
rhesus monkeys are more similar to humans than many other animals and share attachment behaviours
e.g. internal working model, secure base, comfort above food, maternal deprivation
how might Harlow’s research also not be generalisable?
human brain and behaviour much more complex than monkeys- some aspects of attachment are different
e.g. critical period diff in humans- up to 2.5 yrs and some children do recover (Romanian Orphans) so more of a sensitive period than critical
how does Harlow’s research have real-life application (real-world value)?
-helped social workers and clinical psychologists understand the effects that a lack of bonding experiences may have on children in later life
e.g. foster parents are advised to form attachments with child but they didn’t used to
how could ethics be a counter evaluation of Harlow’s research?
criticised for ethical issues- Harlow himself was aware of the suffering he caused, since he referred to the wire mothers as ‘iron maidens’ after a medieval torture device
the knowledge gained about importance of attachment could outweigh psychological damage to monkeys
how does Harlow’s study support Bowlby’s monotropic theory?
supports critical period, monotropy, internal working model, secure base
how does Harlow’s study challenge the learning theory of attachment?
monkeys prefer comfort not food
what was the procedure of Lorenz’s study on geese?
studied imprinting: birds follow the first moving object they see within a critical period and this forms attachment
randomly divided goose eggs:
-half hatched in natural environ with goose mother being the first object they saw (control)
-half hatched in incubator with Lorenz being the first moving object they saw (experimental)
what did Lorenz find in his study on geese?
-control group imprinted to goose mother and followed her everywhere
-experimental group imprinted to Lorenz and followed him everywhere
-mixed up the groups and they continued to follow the thing they had imprinted to
CRITICAL PERIOD for geese identified as 12-17 hours= if imprinting doesn’t occur in this time, geese don’t attach to mother figure at all
what conclusion did Lorenz draw about the consequences of imprinting?
short term consequences for survival and long term for forming internal templated for later relationships
what is meant by Lorenz’s idea of sexual imprinting? what is this supporting evidence for?
birds which imprinted on humans would display courtship towards humans
also SUPPORTING EVIDENCE: case study of peacocks who imprinted to giant tortoises courted them as adults
supports internal working model which is part of Bowlby’s monotropic theory of attachment
how might Lorenz’s research lack generalisability?
humans don’t imprint- their attachment process is very different
e.g. it is a two way process based on emotional needs, critical period is much longer of up to 2.5yrs, primary attachment at 7 months
suggests Lorenz’s research may not apply to humans
however, how could Lorenz’s research apply to humans?
shows attachment is innate because geese are biologically programmed to form an attachment to the first moving object they see
so although not identical to humans, the purpose of attachment for survival is the same
also supports concept of internal working model- due to sexual imprinting- and we know internal working model is also in humans, just in a diff way
how have some of Lorenz’s observations been criticised?
Lorenz’s idea that imprinting had long term consequences on mating behaviour (sexual imprinting), has been challenged by Guiton et al
they found chickens imprinted on yellow washing up gloves would try to mate with the glove (as Lorenz predicted) but would later learn with experience that mating with chickens is better
suggests consequences might not be as long term as Lorenz predicted
