Attachment Flashcards
(95 cards)
Attachment definition by Schaffer.
A close emotional relationship between 2 people characterised by mutual affection and a desire to maintain proximity.
4 primary behaviours that shows attachment in infancy and early childhood by Maccoby (1980).
Seeking to be near the other person.
Showing distress in separation from that person.
Showing relief or joy on reunion.
An orientation to the person.
Reciprocity definition.
A form of interaction between infant and caregiver involving mutual responsiveness with both the infant and the caregiver responding to each others signals.
Meaning of reciprocity by Brazelton et al (1975).
Interaction between both infant and caregiver flows back and forth.
Brazelton et al describes this as a dance.
This is because they respond to each others movements like a couple dancing.
Alert phases (reciprocity).
Babies signal that they are ready for interaction (example: eye contact). These increase in frequency from around 3 months old.
Parents typically respond to their children’s alertness 2/3 of the time, 67%
Still face study - Tronick, 1975 (reciprocity).
Studying children around 1.
Mother interacts, smiles and plays with her baby and the baby replicates this behaviour.
The mother is then instructed to have a still face for 2 minutes and not interact or play with the baby. The baby then starts to scream and get upset.
Shows that babies are active agents, they are deliberately trying to elicit a response from the caregiver.
Interactional synchrony definition.
When 2 people interact and mirror what the other is doing in terms of their facial and body movements. (present in infants as young as 2 weeks old)
Interactional synchrony study.
A baby starts with a dummy in their mouth to prevent a facial response.
The baby then watches an adult model display a facial expression or hand movement.
Then the dummy was removed from the baby’s mouth and the expressions were filmed.
An association was found between the expression or gesture the adult had made and the actions of the baby.
This suggests that this behaviour is not learnt and is innate.
Meltzoff and Moore (1983) later found the same responses in 3 day old babies.
Strengths of caregiver infant interactions.
Most of the research is filmed and are controlled observations.
This means that other distractions for the baby can be controlled, key behaviours are less likely to be missed, more than one observer can record data (interobserver reliability - consistency) and babies don’t know when they are being observed, so they wont change their behaviour.
This makes it more reliable and valid.
Research evidence shows that reciprocity and interactional synchrony are important for a child’s development. Found that at 3 and 9 month old high levels of synchrony were associated with better and more secure attachment.
Creates expectations for future life.
Practical applications.
Limitation of caregiver infant interactions.
It is hard to interpret a baby’s behaviour.
Possibly due to lack of coordination, unsure whether actions are voluntary or not. We must assume behaviour because there is no way to ask the baby.
Some behaviour may have occurred by chance.
Observing a behaviour does not tell us its developmental importance.
Descriptive not explanatory. Ideas such as interactional synchrony and reciprocity simply give us names of observable behaviours.
We cannot be certain from observational research alone that reciprocity and interactional reciprocity are important for a child’s development.
Glasgow Babies (1964) method.
Observational study on 60 infants (31 male and 29 female) from working class families in Glasgow.
Longitudinal study.
The researchers visited the babies in their homes every month for the first 12 months and once again at 18 months.
Researchers interviewed mothers and observed the children in relation to separation anxiety and stranger anxiety in a range of activities.
Naturalistic.
Overt.
Participant.
Glasgow Babies (1964) key findings.
At 6-8 months 50% of the babies showed separation anxiety, measured through crying and vocalisations.
By 10 months 80% of the children had a specific attachment and 30% had multiple attachments.
Stage 1 of attachment.
Asocial stage.
Age : birth - 2 months.
Both objects and people produce a favourable reaction, towards the end of this stage they display a preference for faces.
Attention seeking behaviour is not directed at anyone in particular showing that an attachment could be made with anyone.
Stage 2 of attachment.
Indiscriminate attachment.
Age : 2-6 months.
Infant shows preference for human company over non-human company. They can distinguish between faces, but are comforted indiscriminately (by anyone).
They get upset when people fail to interact with them. From 3 months infants smile more at familiar faces.
Stage 3 of attachment.
Specific attachment.
Age : 7-12 months.
Infant shows preference for one caregiver, infant looks for a particular person for security and protection, infant shows joy upon reunion, stranger and separation anxiety showing.
50% show their first specific attachment at 6-8 months. Primary caregiver is the person who offers the most interaction, 65% of cases this is the mother.
Stage 4 of attachment.
Multiple attachments.
Age : 12 months onwards.
Attachment behaviour displayed to many other people (secondary attachments). Dependant on the people the infant is exposed to.
29% formed a secondary attachment within a month after specific attachments. By 1 year old majority of babies have multiple attachments. By 18 months old, only 13% were attached to 1 person.
Strengths of The Glasgow Babies research.
Natural environment, no manipulation, good external validity,
longitudinal, interview and observe, clearly shows stages babies progress through. Practical applications - identifying normal progression.
Limitations on The Glasgow Babies research.
Less control over extraneous variables, naturalistic, social desirability bias from the mother
lacks population validity, relatively small sample all from working class background.
Attachment to fathers.
Compared to mothers, fathers are much less likely to become a baby’s first attachment.
Schaffer and Emerson’s fidings into attachment to fathers.
3% of cases the father was the main attachment. In 75% of the infants studied an attachment was formed with the father by the age of 18 months , this was determined by the fact that infants protested when their fathers walked away.
Study into role of the father.
Gottesman
Longitudinal study.
Looked at how attachment with the parents affected an infants quality of life in the future.
Quality of attachment with mothers was related to attachments later on in life, but not with fathers. This suggests that the attachment with the father is less important.
He also found that fathers have a different role in attachment, one to do with play and stimulation and less to do with emotional development.
Why fathers are less likely to be the primary attachment figure
One study found Men seem to lack the emotional sensitivity to infant cues which women offer spontaneously. This may be due to biological factors (hormones - oestrogen associated with caring behaviour)
Why fathers could be primary attachment figures.
One study found Men also become hormonally adapted to parenthood - men’s testosterone levels drop to help a man respond more sensitively to his children’s needs.
Another study found that when fathers take on the role of being the primary caregiver, they adopt behaviours more typical of mothers.
Field filmed 4 month old babies in face to face interactions with primary caregiver mothers and fathers and secondary caregiver fathers.
Primary caregiver fathers spent more time interacting with their baby than secondary caregiver fathers.
Shows that fathers can provide the responsiveness needed for a close emotional attachment, but perhaps only when they are given the role of the primary caregiver.
Strengths of studies into the role of the father.
Practical applications (giving advice to parents in different types of families).
Both roles are important - one study found that secure attachment with both parents is needed. One is not more important than the other.