Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM


Top Flashcards (Certified)
All Flashcards

Psychology > Attachment > Flashcards

Attachment Flashcards

(86 cards)

Start Studying
1
Q

define reciprocity

A

a two way process (or mutual interaction) where an action happens one after another

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

define interactional synchrony

A

a simultaneous process where behaviours or emotions are mirrored

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

define attachment

A

an emotional bond between two people shown in their behaviour; a two way reciprocal process which endures over time

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

what did meltzoff and moore study

A

interactional synchrony and reciprocity

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

how many stimuli were shown in meltzoff and moore’s study

A

3 facial expressions, 1 hand gesture

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

describe meltzoff and moore’s method

A

an adult model displayed one of 4 stimuli to a baby with a dummy in its mouth (to prevent response), the dummy was removed and the baby’s expression filmed

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

what made meltzoff and moore’s study a controlled observation

A

the babies’ behaviour was recorded and watched in real time, slow motion and frame by frame, and judged by observers who had not seen the behaviour the baby had seen, observers had 4 categories to record

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

what were the 4 conditions observers recorded in meltzoff and moore’s study

A

tongue protrusion and termination of, mouth opening and termination of

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

describe meltzoff and moore’s results

A

there was an association between infant behaviour and the adult model’s, interactional synchrony was present as early as 3 days, reciprocity was present as early as 2/3 weeks

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

+ evaluation for innate attachment (point 1)

A

research support for innate attachment from controlled observations

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

+ evaluation for innate attachment (evidence 1)

A

meltzoff and moore, found a relationship between infant behaviour and what they had seen an adult model, controlled environment, baby filmed

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

+ evaluation for innate attachment (explain 1)

A

babies do not know/care that they are being observed, no response bias, inter-observer reliability and reliable footage

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

+ evaluation for innate attachment (link 1)

A

the laboratory and controlled environment is not representative of real life, the babies may not have responded in the same way that they would respond to their own mothers or in a real life setting, lacking ecological validity

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q
  • evaluation for innate attachment (point 3)
A

it is hard to know what is going on in an infant’s mind

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q
  • evaluation for innate attachment (evidence 3)
A

many studies looking into early attachment behaviour use infants, such as meltzoff and moore’s research, however the observations made are only based on the surface level, visible behaviour of infants, not the reasoning, thought processes or emotions behind

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q
  • evaluation for innate attachment (explain 3)
A

because the participants in these studies are infants, they lack the ability to communicate, we can never know the true meaning or purpose behind behaviour such as reciprocity or interactional synchrony as it cannot be explained to or fully understood by us

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q
  • evaluation for innate attachment (link 3)
A

while we may not fully know what factors affect the behaviour of babies in terms of interactional synchrony and reciprocity, we can still study babies as only an infant sample can provide information about infants, they cannot speak for themselves and explain their behaviour but controlled observations can give us a pretty good insight

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q
  • evaluation for innate attachment (point 2)
A

the same caregiver-infant interactions are not found in all cultures

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q
  • evaluation for innate attachment (evidence 2)
A

research (le vine et al) has found that kenyan mothers have little physical interaction/contact with their infants but most infants still have a secure attachment

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q
  • evaluation for innate attachment (explain 2)
A

meltzoff and moore’s research could be ethnocentric, ignores how attachments may be formed in other cultures, interactional synchrony and reciprocity may not be valid across other cultures as a universal attachment behaviour, it is not seen in kenya, physical interaction may not be necessary for attachment

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q
  • evaluation for innate attachment (link 2)
A

however, kenya is only one place in the world, others may use physical interaction, reciprocity and interactional synchrony may just be one way of attaching (through physical interaction and mirroring), not the only way of attaching

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

what did schaffer and emerson study

A

stages of attachment

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

what was schaffer and emerson’s sample

A

60 babies from Glasgow, visited at home monthly for the first year then again at 18 months

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

what two behaviours were observed in schaffer and emerson’s research

A

seperation anxiety and stranger distress

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
describe schaffer and emerson's method
use of triangulation (interviews and observation), at visits they would approach the baby to observe signs of distress, mother was interviewed about various situations, asked to rate babies' response on a 4-point scale
26
describe schaffer and emerson's results
mother was the main attachment figure (65%), only 3% were attached to father, by 18 months 32% had multiple attachments and 75% formed an attachment to the father
27
what are the 4 stages of attachment
asocial, indiscriminate, specific and multiple
28
describe the characteristics of the asocial stage of attachment
occurs between 0-6 weeks, similar responses to people and objects but bias to human-like stimuli, discriminate familiar people by smell and voice
29
describe the characteristics of the indiscriminate stage of attachment
occurs between 6 weeks- 6 months, more sociable, do not prefer specific individuals, no fear of strangers, recognise difference between people and objects
30
describe the characteristics of the specific stage of attachment
occurs at 7 months+, separation anxiety, fear of strangers, attachment formed with main caregiver
31
describe the characteristics of the multiple stage of attachment
occurs at 10/11 months+, multiple attachments formed soon after first, attachments behaviours towards different people
32
+ evaluation for stages of attachment theory (point 1)
the research support holds high validity
33
+ evaluation for stages of attachment theory (evidence 1)
schaffer and emerson used triangulation, a combination of observation and interviews
34
+ evaluation for stages of attachment theory (explain 1)
multiple ways of investigating creates increased validity using a variety of data collection methods, the study is also high in ecological validity, research was conducted in homes of the babies, replicative of real life
35
+ evaluation for stages of attachment theory (link 1)
study lacks in temporal validity, conducted in 1967, mothers still expected to stay home and care for child, now mothers are more likely to go back to work and more non-nuclear families (single parent/same sex parents), research is not representative of this
36
- evaluation for stages of attachment theory (point 2)
the research support may be biased, questioning validity
37
- evaluation for stages of attachment theory (evidence 2)
schaffer and emerson's study involved observations of the babies by their mother and the researchers
38
- evaluation for stages of attachment theory (explain 2)
mothers may be personally biased or feel pressure from the desirability bias to lie or exaggerate, researcher may interpret behaviour incorrectly or manipulate results in order to skew their results the way they want (researcher bias)
39
- evaluation for stages of attachment theory (link 2)
???????????
40
research support for father having a role in attachment (1)
bowlby and grossman similarly suggested that the father's role in attachment is in play rather than in nurturing aspects, the father is more likely to become a child's play companion, this is still important to attachment but just in a different way
41
research support for father having a role in attachment (2)
field and brown et al similarly found that fathers can take on a more nurturing role, the key to the attachment relationship is level of responsiveness and involvement not gender of the parent
42
research support against father having a role in attachment (3)
mccallum and golombok found that children growing up in a single or same sex parent family did not develop differently from those in heterosexual two parent families, father does not have distinct role
43
research support against father having a role in attachment (4)
it is possible that most men are just not psychologically equipped to form intense attachments, lacking in emotional sensitivity compared to women and lower oestrogen levels which underlies caring behaviour
44
economic implications of father having a role in attachment
paternity/maternity leave, stay at home parents, child support, gender pay gap
45
what did lorenz study
animal attachment (in goslings)
46
describe lorenz' method
goslings were either hatched with their mother or in an incubator, where the first moving object they saw was lorenz
47
describe lorenz' results
goslings followed their respective mothers (imprinting), a critical period of 13-16 hours, even after mixing goslings stayed the same
48
what did lorenz believe about imprinting
that imprinting cannot be reversed, nor can the animal imprint upon anything else
49
how were lorenz' geese affected later in life
affected ability to display normal social and sexual behaviours (sexual imprinting)
50
+ evaluation of lorenz' study
research support for imprinting, guitton's chicks imprinted on yellow rubber gloves, males tried to mate with gloves later, removing animals from their natural habitat and relations is unethical
51
- evaluation of lorenz' study
imprinting not as permanent as lorenz thought, it is 'plastic', guitton reversed chicks imprinting by socialising them with their own species, animal studies can only represent animals, not humans
52
what did harlow study
animal attachment (rhesus monkeys)
53
describe harlow's method
harlow separated 8 infant monkeys from their mothers and placed them in cages with two surrogate mothers made of either wire or cloth, either fed by the cloth or wire mother, harlow scared the monkeys to see which mother they would go to for safety
54
describe harlow's results
all monkeys preferred the cloth mother, spending more time with her even if not feeding and seeking her if frightened
55
how were harlow's monkeys affected later in life
more timid, didn't socialise well with other monkeys, were easily bullied, difficulty mating, inadequate mothers, aggressive behaviour
56
could the effects on harlow's monkeys be reversed
monkeys kept in isolation for 3 months were least affected and effects could be reversed, over a year the monkeys never recovered the effects of privation
57
- evaluation of harlow's study
highly unethical, frightened monkeys and created irreversible negative effects in some, sometimes necessary to breach ethical guidelines, couldn't be carried out with humans, monkeys are similar
58
+ evaluation of harlow's study
influential research with important real life application, guidelines for child care, shows how infants seek comfort over food, animal studies cannot be generalised to humans due to huge biological differences
59
in learning theory (classical conditioning) what is the unconditioned stimulus?
food
60
in learning theory (classical conditioning) what is the unconditioned response?
happiness/satisfaction (infant)
61
in learning theory (classical conditioning) what is the neutral stimulus?
mother
62
in learning theory (classical conditioning) what is the conditioned stimulus?
mother
63
in learning theory (classical conditioning) what is the conditioned response?
happiness/satisfaction (infant)
64
in learning theory (operant conditioning) what is the primary reinforcer and why?
food- directly satisfies hunger
65
in learning theory (operant conditioning) what is the secondary reinforcer and why?
caregiver- associated with the primary reinforcer (food)
66
according to learning theory (operant conditioning) why does attachment occur?
the child seeks the person who can supply the reward (food)
67
what is positive reinforcement in the context of learning theory attachment?
infant receiving food creates feeling of pleasure (reward)
68
what is negative reinforcement in the context of learning theory attachment?
hunger is taken away from the infant by the caregiver
69
what is punishment in the context of learning theory attachment?
the child does not attach to the caregiver as it does not receive food and suffers hunger
70
+ evaluation of learning theory of attachment (point 1)
explains some aspects of attachment
71
+ evaluation of learning theory of attachment (evidence 1)
infants do learn through association (classical conditioning), mother (neutral stimulus) is associated with food (unconditioned stimulus), child attaches to mother because food elicits pleasure (unconditioned response), child pairs food and mother so over time loves mother without food (conditioned response)
72
+ evaluation of learning theory of attachment (explain 1)
food may not be the main factor, comfort and responsiveness may be more important rewards, theory does have some value in explaining attachment
73
+ evaluation of learning theory of attachment (link 1)
reductionist to think that attachment is solely due to food, classical conditioning is not a full explanation of attachment, not based on human behaviour
74
- evaluation of learning theory of attachment (point 2)
lack of research on humans learning by classical conditioning
75
- evaluation of learning theory of attachment (evidence 2)
classical conditioning is based on animal studies, pavlov's dogs salivated (ucr) at the presentation of food (ucs) until a bell (ns) was introduced with the food causing the bell (cs) to become a trigger for salivation (cr)
76
- evaluation of learning theory of attachment (explain 2)
it is not possible to generalise conclusions made about how dogs learnt to how humans attach, it ignores huge biological and social factors, humans have more complex brains, social structures and language
77
- evaluation of learning theory of attachment (link 2)
learning theory (classical conditioning) has little value, it reduces human behaviour to a species lower on the evolutionary scale
78
- evaluation of learning theory of attachment (point 3)
too simplistic to assume children only love parents because of food
79
- evaluation of learning theory of attachment (evidence 3)
harlow found that rhesus monkeys preferred comfort over food, monkeys sought mother that was comforting (cloth) even if the wire mother fed them
80
- evaluation of learning theory of attachment (explain 3)
if learning theory was correct, the monkeys would have chosen the wire mother to spend more time with as she fed them, the opposite was found in harlow's study
81
- evaluation of learning theory of attachment (link 3)
learning theory could be considered to be wrong
82
- evaluation of learning theory of attachment (point 4)
bowlby contradicts learning theory
83
- evaluation of learning theory of attachment (evidence 4)
his theory superseded learning theory, infants attach to a monotropic figure due to comfort and attention not food
84
- evaluation of learning theory of attachment (explain 4)
secure base is more important than food provided
85
- evaluation of learning theory of attachment (link 4)
however, learning theory can explain why infants may have multiple attachments, multiple people may regularly feed an infant, while bowlby can't
86
explain 'innate' in the context of bowlby's monotropic theory
infants have an inborn need to attach to one main attachment figure

Psychology (9 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2025 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions