Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

AQA: Psychology Paper 1 > Attachment > Flashcards

Attachment Flashcards

1
Q

What is attachment?

A

Attachment is a strong emotional bond (between an infant and their caregiver)

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

Who studied goslings?

A

Lorenz (1935)

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

What are the 2 types of animal studies?

A
  • Lorenz (1935)

- Harlow (1959)

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

Harlow (1959) Procedure [4]:

A
  • 2 wire mothers, each with a different head
  • One wire mother was wrapped in cloth
  • 4 monkeys had the milk bottle on cloth mum and 4 had on plain mum
  • Measured amount of time infants spent with each mum
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Harlow (1959) Findings [4]:

A
  • All 8 monkeys spent most of their time with cloth mum
  • Monkeys who fed from wire only spent short time while feeding with wire mum
  • When frightened ALL monkeys clung to cloth mum
  • Monkeys often kept one foot on cloth mum when playing with new toy for reassurance
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Long-lasting effects of Harlow [3]:

A
  • Motherless monkeys (even with cloth comfort) were socially abnormal e.g. froze or ran from other monkeys
  • Didn’t show normal mating behaviour & didn’t cradle their babies
  • Monkeys that spent a few months with peers recovered but only if it was b4 they were 3 months old
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Lorenz (1935) procedure [4]:

A
  • Clutch of goslings divided into 2 groups
  • 1 group left with acc mum & other eggs put in incubator
  • When incubator eggs hatched the 1st moving thing they saw was Lorenz
  • Lorenz marked the 2 groups to distinguish em and put em together
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Lorenz (1935) Findings [4]:

A
  • Goslings quickly divided back into their groups
  • Lorenz’s group followed him & the others followed their acc mum
  • Lorenz’s group showed no recognition of their acc mum
  • Process of imprinting is restricted to a period where they’re very young
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Lorenz (1952) Long-lasting effects [3]:

A
  • Imprinting is irreversible & long-lasting
  • One of the geese who imprinted on him (Martina) used to sleep on his bed every night
  • Early imprinting has an effect on mate preferences
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Lorenz evaluation- Research support for imprinting [3]:

A

+ Guiton (1966)
+ Leghorn chicks exposed to yellow rubber gloves while being fed in their first few weeks imprinted on em
+ supports the view that animals are not predisposed to imprint on a specific object it just has to be during critical period

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

Lorenz evaluation- criticisms [4]:

A
  • Sum dispute over the characteristics of imprinting
  • imprinting was irreversible- object was stamped 4eva now it is a more plastic & forgiving mechanism
  • Guiton (1966) found u can reverse imprinting on chickens made to mate with rubber gloves by spending time with their acc species
  • suggests imprinting isn’t so different from other learning
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Harlow evaluation- Appearance of monkeys [3]:

A
  • 2 mothers varied more than cloth vs non-cloth
  • the heads were also diff which acts as a confounding variable
  • This makes the findings in his study less reliable cus results coulda been caused by different heads
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Harlow and Lorenz evaluation- animals [3]:

A
  • Animal studies are to generalise findings onto humans
  • But humans differ from animals in important ways e.g their behaviour is governed by conscious behaviour
  • animal findings can be used as a guide but research on humans would always be more appropriate
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Learning theory of attachment- Classical conditioning [5]:

A
  • Pavlov
  • UCS = food & UCR = pleasure
  • During child’s early months things become associated w/ food cus they were present at feeding time e.g mum
  • Mum = NS then eventually CS
  • Mum = CS = Pleasure CR
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Learning theory of attachment- Operant conditioning [5]:

A
  • Skinner
  • Baby hungry so cries/ discomfort
  • When infant is fed the drive is reduced = pleasure
  • This be negative reinforcement
  • Behaviour is likely to be repeated because it is rewarding
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Learning theory of attachment- SLT [4]:

A
  • Bandura
  • Modelling = Mediational processes explain attachment
  • Kids observe parents’ affectionate behaviour and imitate it
  • parents instruct kids on how to behave in relationships & reward appropriate behaviour with hugs & kisses
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Learning theory of attachment ao3- animals [4]:

A
  • Largely based on animal studies e.g skinner, Harlow
  • Behaviourists believe animals no different from humans
  • However humans diff from animals cus behaviour controlled by conscious thought
  • Animal studies may not be suitable research support
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

What are social releases?

A

Behaviours that elicits a particular response from the caregiver, leading to attachment e.g. crying, smiling, making sound

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Continuity hypothesis:

A

Attachments formed during childhood affect later relationships

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Internal Working Model (IWM) [definition]:

[2]:

A
  • Mental model of the world tht allows individuals to predict & ctrl their environment.
  • In attachment its abt ppl’s expectations for relationships
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

Explain why attachments are formed using bowlby’s monotropic theory. [5]:

A
  • Attachment behaviour evolved for survival
  • A child who isn’t attached is less well protected
  • Our infant ancestors would be in danger if they weren’t close to an adult
  • Parents must attach to kid to keep em safe & cared for
  • Parents who look after offspring are more likely to produce subsequent generations
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

Critical period [definition]:

A

Biologically determined period of time where certain characteristics develop. They will not develop outside of this time window

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

Bowlby believes that babies…

A

have an innate drive to become attached

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

When is the critical period for attachments?

A

Around 3-6 months

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

Monotropy [definition]:

A

Idea that the 1 relationship the infant has w/ their primary caregiver is significant to their emotional development

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

How does attachment form according to bowlby? [6]:

A
  • Bby has innate drive to attach so they can survive
  • Bby possesses social releases which make others wanna care for it
  • Child has 1 main attachment figure
  • Attachments must be formed in critical period
  • Early attachment provides IWM which tells them how loveable they & how trustworthy ppl can be
  • Attachments formed as child will affect later relations
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

Critical vs sensitive period [2]:

A
  • According bowlby it isn’t possible to form attachments after 6 months
  • Researchers use sensitive period now instead
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q

Consequences of attachment [2]:

A
  • short term: gives the child insight into caregiver’s bhvr & enables child to influence caregiver’s bhvr
  • long term: acts as template for all future relationships cus it generates expectations abt what loving relationships look like
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q

Bowlby- IWM [4]:

A
  • cognitive framework on understandings of the world, self & others
  • Ppl’s interactions r guided by mem/experience from IWM
  • Around age of 3 this becomes part of child’s personality
  • Primary caregiver acts as prototype for relations via IWM
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
30
Q

Bowlby’s monotropic theory ao3- critical vs sensitive [3]:

A
  • Bowlby = impossible to form attachments after 6 months
  • Rutter et al shows attachments past period are less likely but not impossible
  • For this reason researchers prefer sensitive period rather than critical
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
31
Q

Bowlby’s monotropic theory ao3- multiple attachment model [3]:

A

+ MAM= all attachments are integrated into IWM
+ Doesn’t acc contradict cus bolby’s theory still suggests secondary attachments r important for development its just 1 is the most important
+ therefore supports bowlby’s theory

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
32
Q

Bowlby’s maternal deprivation theory =

A

continued disruption of attachment between infant & caregiver can lead to long term cognitive social & emotional difficulties for the kid

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
33
Q

What did Bowlby think maternal deprivation lead to? [5]:

A
  • delinquency
  • reduced intelligence
  • increased aggression
  • depression
  • affectionless psychopathy
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
34
Q

Bowlby’s monotropic theory ao3- social implications [3]:

A
  • Bowlby believed mother to be primary caregiver & this care should be given continuously
  • Puts too much pressure on mother if child struggles in later life
  • This is an issue as it could lead to unfair consequences for mums
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
35
Q

Bowlby’s monotropic theory ao3- determinism [4]:

A
  • Theory is that bbys have innate drive to attach & so do parents
  • Takes away ppl’s choice to parent
  • How is adoption possible if innate drive?
  • reduces a loving bond between carer and child to sumn programmed almost artificial
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
36
Q

What are the conditions of Ainsworth’s strange situation? [4]:

A
  • Stranger anxiety
  • Separation anxiety
  • Reunion
  • Safe haven/ explore behaviours
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
37
Q

Strange situation- procedure [4]:

A
  • Ainsworth (1970)
  • American bbys 12-18 months old
  • Observation had 8 episodes around 3 mins long
  • Controlled lab observation
38
Q

How does the strange situation go? [4]:

A
  • Baby left by mother
  • Baby left with stranger
  • Bby attempted to be comforted by stranger
  • bby reunited with mum
39
Q

What were the 3 attachment types ainsowrth found?

A
  • Type A: avoidant attachment
  • Type B: secure attachment
  • Type C: resistant attachment
40
Q

Type A =

A

Avoidant attachment

41
Q

Type B =

A

Secure attachment

42
Q

Type C=

A

Resistant attachment

43
Q

Ainsworth Type A [4]:

A
  • Avoidant attachment
  • 22% of bbys
  • Largely ignored mum when she left & returned
  • Treated the stanger in a similar way
44
Q

Ainsworth Type B [5]:

A
  • Secure attachment
  • 66% of bbys
  • Used mum as safe base for exploration
  • Upset when mum left
  • Not easily comforted by stranger but by mum when she returned
45
Q

Ainsworth Type C [5]:

A
  • Insecure resistant attachment
  • 12% of bbys
  • Intensely distressed when mum left
  • Very worried abt stranger/ high stranger anxiety
  • Conflicting desires upon reunion e.g resist being picked up but would try other methods to maintain proximity
46
Q

Strange situation ao3- ecological validity [4]:

A
  • Lab experiment have very low ecological validity
  • In real life we do not control any variables
  • Bby could be reacting to foreign environment
  • We don’t know how bbys react to separation irl
47
Q

Strange situation ao3- Culture bias [4]:

A
  • Study carried out on only american middle-class bbys
  • sample was also small
  • so not representative of all bbys so can’t be applied to all children
  • Means findings aren’t v generalisable
48
Q

Strange situation ao3- Reliability [4]:

A

+ Observations like ainsworth’s have a high reliability
+ Measurements confirmed as reliable by calculating interobserver reliability which is determined by outside judges
+ they found 0.94 agreement between raters
+ Makes observations acceptable cus they reliable

49
Q

Strange situation ao3- Maternal sensitivity [4]:

A
  • Ainsworth suggests secure attachments are related to maternal sensitivity
  • Raval et al (2001)
  • found low correlations between maternal sensitive and strength of attachment
  • suggests that sumn other than sensitivity is the central mechanism to establishing attachment
50
Q

Who conducted a cross-cultural meta-analysis on attachment types?

A

Van Ijzendoorn & Kroonenberg (1988)

51
Q

Cultural variations in attachment- procedure [3]:

A
  • Van Ijzendoorn &Kroonenberg (1988)
  • Meta-analysis of findings of 32 strange situation studies
  • 8 countries e.g Germany, Japan, UK, Israel
52
Q

Cultural Variations in attachment- findings [5]:

A
  • All countries had more secure attachment than other a
  • Insecure avoidant second most common except Israel and japan which were collectivist at the time
  • UK Type A= 22% B= 75% C= 3%
  • Israel A= 7% B= 64% C= 29%
  • Germany A= 35% B= 57% C= 8%
53
Q

Van Ijzendoorn & Kroonenberg Uk [3]:

A
  • Type A= 22%
  • Type B= 75%
  • Tye C= 3%
54
Q

Van Ijzendoorn & Kroonenberg Israel [3]:

A
  • Type A= 7%
  • Type B= 64%
  • Type C= 3%
55
Q

Van Ijzendoorn & Kroonenberg Germany [3]:

A
  • Type A= 35%
  • Type B= 57%
  • Type C= 8%
56
Q

What did Van Ijzendoorn & Kroonenberg claim was the cause of differences in second most common attachment type? [2]:

A
  • Collectivist cultures had more Type C than Type A
  • Individualist cultures had more Type A than C
  • e.g Japan & Germany
57
Q

Cultural similarities in attachment [4]:

A
  • Tronick et al (1992)
  • Studied African tribe called the Efe
  • The kids were looked after & breastfed by other women but slept w/ their own mum at night
  • Despite this infants at 6mo still showed one primary attachment
58
Q

Cultural differences in attachment- Germany [3]:

A
  • Grossmann & Grossmann (1991)
  • Found higher lvls of insecure attachment than in other cultures
  • German culture involves interpersonal space between bby & parent, so bbys don’t engage in proximity-seeking
    behaviours
59
Q

Cultural differences in attachment-Japan [6]:

A
  • Takashi (1990)
  • Used strange situation on 60- middleclass Japanese kid
  • They showed no evidence of avoidant attachment
  • 32% insecure- resistant attachment
  • Extremely distressed when mum left- 90% of kids had to drop out of study it was a shitshow
  • Cus in jpn kids rarely separated from mum which explns why they were so distressed
60
Q

Cultural differences in attachment ao3- culture bias [4];

A
  • Strange situation tht behaviour has the same meaning in all cultures
  • but acc cultural understanding and pov of behaviour diff
  • Strange situation created & tested in US so may be culturally biased as it uses US social norms
  • e.g belief that attachment related to anxiety
61
Q

Cognitive interview ao3- sample still biased [3]:

A
  • Research in diff countries still on middle-class bbys
  • Middle class just a small part of population
  • So results not v representative & cannot be generalised
62
Q

Cognitive interview ao3- Global culture [4]:

A
  • Bowlby= universal similarities in attachment r cus attachment is innate
  • Van Ijzendoorn & kroonenberg’s meta analysis
  • Concluded that sum cultural similarities due to mass media spreading ideas abt parenting
  • Mean cultural similarities = media not innate drive
63
Q

Cognitive interview ao3- intra-cultural variation [4]:

A
  • Van & K found there was larger diff intra-culturally
  • One study of tokyo found no.s similar to western
  • Wheras rural sample has more Insecure- resistant
  • Shows sub-cultures also plays a part not just culture
64
Q

Bowlby maternal deprivation study- 44 thieves [4]:

A
  • Analysed case history of 88 kids in the guidance clinic he worked at
  • 44 were thieves & the other half were the control group
  • Bowlby suggested half of em were emotionless psychopaths
  • They could steal from others cus it didn’t matter to them
65
Q

What is meant by the term ‘emotionless psychopath’?

A

Ppl who lack normal signs of affection, shame or sense of responsibility

66
Q

44 thieves findings [4]:

A
  • Bowlby found the diagnosed thieves had experienced frequent separation from their mum
  • 12/14 (86%) affectionless thieves experienced separation from mum
  • None of control pts experienced early separation from mum
  • whereas 39% of thieves did experience it
67
Q

Maternal deprivation ao3- Real-world application [3]:

A

+ Theory had a massive +ve impact on how children were looked after in hospitals
+ B4 kids were separated from parents when in hospital- visiting was discouraged/ forbidden
+ Bowlby’s work led to major change in how kids handled

68
Q

Maternal deprivation ao3- psychopathy [3]:

A
  • It concludes that affectionless psychopathy is caused by maternal deprivation
  • It’s only correlation data bro not even proven
  • Has implications on mothers who can’t be emotionally present
69
Q

Maternal deprivation ao3- Researcher bias [4]:

A
  • Bowlby conducted the psych assessments himself & diagnosed the thieves
  • He knew whether or not they were in the theft group
  • So his findings may be biased cus its his expectations
  • which undermines their validity
70
Q

Maternal deprivation ao3- support for Long term effects [4]:

A

+ Bifulco et al (1992)
+ study on women who experienced separation from their mothers
+ 25% later experienced anxiety & depression compared with only 15% w/ no separation
+ Supports critical period and deprivation

71
Q

Romanian orphanage- procedure [4]:

A
  • Rutter (1990)
  • 165 kids who spent time in Romanian institution
  • 111 were adopted before age of 2
  • %4 adopted by age of 4
72
Q

What type of study is the Romanian orphanage?

A

Longitudinal

73
Q

Romanian orphanage- Findings [4]:

A
  • They were smaller & weighed less than brit counterpart
  • CLassed as mentally retarded
  • By age 4 sum kids caught up- true for most adopted before 6 months
  • Many kids after 6 months showed disinhibited attachments & struggled w/ peer relations
74
Q

Name the effects of institutionalisation [5]:

A
  • Lower IQ
  • Struggle to form attachments in later life
  • Quasi autism
  • Physical underdevelopment
  • Poor parenting
75
Q

Le mare & Audet (2006) [4]:

A
  • Longitudinal study of 36 romanian orphans adopted into Canadian families
  • Orphans were physically smaller than control group
  • This diff disappeared by 10 1/2 years
  • suggests recovery is possible
76
Q

Romanian orphanages ao3- Representative [3]:

A
  • Once children were adopted they may not wanna be a part of the study
  • This means we don’t acc know the extent of affect of individual differences
  • Sample not fully representative of all orphans
77
Q

Romanian orphanages ao3- Other factors [4]:

A
  • There may be other factors that caused the lack of development not just emotional deprivation
  • The physical conditions at the orphanages were appalling
  • Could have also been lack of cognitive stimulation
  • so it may not be maternal deprivation
78
Q

Romanian orphanages ao3- Longitudinal [3]:

A

+ They followed the lives of these kids for many years
+ This allows for us to get acc findings of long term effects & not just predicted/ implied ones
+ Increases validity of results

79
Q

Romanian orphanages ao3- Slower development [3]:

A
  • May not be an effect they just develop slower
  • Findings in utter was at age 12 a lower number of kids had disinhibited attachment
  • So rather than institutionalisation could be caused by different development speed
80
Q

Hazan & Shaver- procedure [5]:

A
  • Hazan & Shaver 1987
  • Put a love quiz in ‘the rocky mountain news’ local paper
  • Asked Qs abt current attachment history & childhood attachment types
  • Also Qs abt attitudes towards love (IWM)
  • Analysed 620 responses
81
Q

How many responses were analysed by Hazan & Shaver? [3]:

A
  • 620
  • 205 men
  • 415 women
82
Q

Hazan & Shaver- findings [6]:

A
  • 56% classified as secure attachment
  • 25% avoidant
  • 19% avoidant
  • +ve correlation between attachment type & love experiences
  • Secure had longer relationships (10 yrs vs 5 &6)
  • Secure had a +ve IWM
83
Q

What are the behaviours influenced by IWM? [4]:

A
  • Childhood friendships
  • Poor parenting
  • Romantic Relationships
  • Mental health
84
Q

How does the IWM influence childhood friendships? [4]:

A
  • Sroufe et al 2005
  • Minnesota parent-child study followed ppts from infancy to adolescence
  • Ppl who were securely attached in infancy were rated highest for social competence
  • They were also more popular & empathetic
85
Q

How does the IWM influence poor parenting? [4]:

A
  • Harlow’s monkey research
  • showed link between poor attachment & later difficulties w/ parenting
  • Quinton et al shows the same for humans
  • Lack of IWM means ppl lack reference points to form attachments w/ their own kids
86
Q

How does the IWM influence romantic relationships? [3]:

A
  • Hazan & Shaver
  • Between early attachment type & relationships
  • Ppl who were securely attached had longer-lasting relationships
87
Q

How does the IWM influence mental health? [4]:

A
  • Lack of attachment during critical period = no IWM
  • Kids w/ attachment disorder have no preferred attachment figure
  • inability to interact w/ others b4 age 5, experience severe neglect & frequent change of caregivers
  • Attachment disorder can be classified/in the DSM
88
Q

Influence of early attachment ao3- correlational [3]:

A
  • Research linking IWM & early attachment is correlation not experimental
  • so can’t claim relationship between early attachments & later love styles
  • Both love styles & attachments styles could be caused by some else
89
Q

Influence of early attachment ao3- determinist [4]:

A
  • Overly determinist
  • e.g Hazan & Shafer suggest v early experiences have a fixed effect on later adult relationships
  • Basically insecurely attached kids are fucked
  • Inappropriate to outright say past determines u
90
Q

Influence of early attachment ao3- alt explanations [4]:

A
  • Feeney (1999)
  • adult attachment patterns may be cus of the relationship not the adult
  • Adult relations guided by tendency to seek others who confirm ur expectations
  • Thus it is the adult secure relationship causing the attachment type not vice versa
91
Q

Influence of early attachment ao3- reductionist [4]:

A
  • Theory assumes kids who had insecure attachment types would automatically have poor relationships
  • This not always the case
  • Research has shown that ppl are capable of having happy relationships despite having insecure attachment
  • Therefore over simplistic

AQA: Psychology Paper 1 (4 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions