attachment Flashcards
(96 cards)
1
Q
Lorenz animal study: aim (A01)
A
Lorenz wanted to investigate imprinting in attachment formation
2
Q
Lorenz animal study: findings (A01)
A
- experimental group imprinted on Lorenz demonstrated by fact that they followed him wherever he went
- control group hatched imprinted on their mother
- two groups were mixed up control group continued to follow mother + experimental group followed Lorenz
- Lorenz noted imprinting would only occur w/in critical period
- Lorenz reported that geese who imprinted on human would later display courtship behaviour towards humans
2
Q
Lorenz animal study: procedure (A01)
A
- Lorenz randomly split batch of grey goose eggs into two groups
- One group were hatched by their mother in natural environment control group other group were hatched in an incubator where first moving object they saw was Lorenz -experimental group
- behaviour of geese was then carefully observed
- Lorenz also observed effect of imprinting on adult mate preferences
3
Q
Lorenz animal study: critical period been questioned (A03) (1)
A
P: Sluckin questions validity of critical period
E: Sluckin replicated Lorenz’s research using ducklings instead of goslings- like Lorenz he got ducklings to imprint on him
E: but, Sluckin kept 1 duck in isolation beyond ducklings to imprint him-he found it was possible to imprint this youngsters
L: concluded that critical period was actually sensitive period but attachments could still be formed
3
Q
Lorenz animal study: printing can be reserved (A03) (2)
A
P: printing can be reversed
E + E: Guiton found that chickens who imprinted on yellow washing up gloves would try to mate w/ them as adults but that w/ experience they eventually learned to prefer mating w/other chickens
L: suggests that impact of imprinting on mating behaviour is not as permanent as Lorenz believed
4
Q
Harlow animal study: aim (A01)
A
wanted to find whether contact comfort was more important in attachment than food cupboard love theory
5
Q
Harlow animal study: procedure (A01)
A
- Harlow reared 16 baby rhesus monkeys w/two surrogate mothers
1 of “mothers” was made of wire + other was covered in soft material wire mother produced milk whereas cloth-covered mother did not - amount of time spent w/ each mother as well as feeding time was recorded
- monkeys were deliberately frightened w/loud noise to test for mother preference during stress
- long-term effects were recorded eg. monkey’s behaviour in adulthood in terms of sociability + their relationship to their own offspring
6
Q
Harlow animal study: findings (A01)
A
- monkeys spent most of their time on their cloth mother even though she did not supply milk- cloth mother provided “contact comfort” which was clearly preferable monkeys even stretched across to wire mother to feed while still clinging to cloth mother
- When frightened by loud noise monkeys clung to cloth mother
- As adults monkeys were abusive to their offspring even killing them in some cases- monkeys were also more aggressive + less sociable than other monkeys
7
Q
Harlow animal study: conclusion (A01)
A
study shows that “contact comfort” is of more importance to monkey than food when it comes to attachment
8
Q
Harlow animal study: highly valued research (A03) (1)
A
P: findings had profound effect on psychologists’ understanding of mother-infant attachment
E: showed that attachment doesn’t develop as result of being fed by mother figure but as result of contact comfort
E: also showed importance of quality of early relationships for later social development
L: this research has led to important developments in area of attachment
8
Q
Harlow animal study: practical application (A03) (2)
A
P: insight to attachment from Harlow’s research has had important practical applications in range of contexts
E + E: helped social workers understand risks factors in child neglect + abuse + so intervene to prevent it
L: able to apply our knowledge of animal research to real life situations
9
Q
Harlow animal study: ethical issues (A03) (3)
A
P: faced severe criticism for ethics of this research-monkeys suffered greatly as result of Harlow’s procedures
E: eg. they were deliberately stressed + frightened
E: Rhesus monkeys are closely related to humans suggesting that these animals suffered more greatly than less developed animals such as geese
L: unethical practices seriously undermine credibility of psychology as science
but Harlow’s research is sufficiently important to justify these negative effects eg. they have highlighted importance of contact comfort in child development
10
Q
Harlow animal study: can’t be generalised to humans (A03) (4)
A
P: Psychologists disagree on extent to which studies of animals such as geese + monkeys can be generalised to humans
E + E: eg. Rhesus monkeys much similar to humans than Lorenz geese-all mammals share some common attachment behaviours
but human brain + behaviours is much more complex than monkeys
L: limitation-might not be appropriate to generalise findings on animals studies on humans
11
Q
learning theory: operant conditioning (OC) (A01)
A
Reinforcement produces an attachment eg. crying leads to response from caregiver eg. feeding
caregiver provides pleasant response crying is positively reinforced- means behaviour is likely to be repeated to illicit response
reinforcement is two-way process same time as baby is reinforced for crying caregiver receives negative reinforcement because crying stops – escaping from something unpleasant is reinforcing attachment is reinforced for both infant + caregiver
11
Q
learning theory: classical conditioning (CC) (A01)
A
infant learns to associate primary caregiver w/food
- before conditioning= (UCS) food–> happy baby (UCR)
- during conditioning= mother (NS) + food (UCS) –> happy baby (UCR)
- after conditioning= (CS) mother–> happy baby (CR)
12
Q
learning theory: valuable insight gained (A03) (1)
A
P: learning theory provides valuable insight to how an infant becomes attached to its main caregiver + key role food plays in this interaction
E +E: Understanding of role of food can lead to practical applications eg. providing advice that if feeding is important in attachment process then anyone who wants to create an attachment eg. father should be involved where possible
L: strength as learning theory has helped to increase attachment between babies + their caregivers-learning theory studies observable + testable behaviours allowing for its theories to be scientifically measured + assessed
13
Q
learning theory: attachment formed w/x feeding (A03) (2)
A
P: Many infants form attachments w/people who DO NOT feed them
E: eg. research by Schaffer + Emerson found that in 39% of cases- primary attachment figure was not person who fed them
E: many infants attach to parents who neglect or abuse them
L: clearly suggests that attachment is not due to regular feeding but contact comfort contradicting learning theory
14
Q
learning theory: contradictory research (A03) (3)
A
P: heavily criticised by Harlow’s research on rhesus monkeys
E +E: eg. found that monkeys formed an attachment w/cloth mother that provided comfort rather than wire mother that provided food
L: suggests that attachment is not due to regular feeding but contact comfort contradicting learning theory
15
Q
learning theory: alternative explanation (A03) (4)
A
P: there are alternative explanation for the learning theory
E+ E: learning Bowlby’s Monotropic theory of attachment could use this as an alternative explanation for WHY attachments form rather than only looking at HOW attachments form
L: theory focuses on attachment as an evolutionary mechanism for survival purposes + may be seen as more complete explanation of attachment compared to learning theory
16
Q
Bowlby’s Monotropic theory: monotropic bond (A01)
A
attachment is to 1 specific caregiver usually to biological mother monotropic bond is more important than any other attachments that child may form
17
Q
Bowlby’s Monotropic theory: internal working model (IWM) (A01)
A
monotropic bond acts as template for all later relationships template known as internal working model has powerful effect on nature of child’s future relationships
internal working model affects child’s later ability to be parent themselves as it appears to be passed on through families eg. if child is insecurely attached to its parents they are likely to have similar attachment to their own children
18
Q
Bowlby’s Monotropic theory: critical period (CP) (A01)
A
Bowlby first 2 years of life are critical period for attachment to develop
If attachment does not develop it might seriously damage child’s social + emotional development
19
Q
Bowlby’s Monotropic theory: evolutionary principle (EP) (A01)
A
Bowlby’s explanation of attachment is based on evolutionary principles + argues that humans have evolved biological need to attach to caregiver to increase their survival chances
Infants show innate behaviours eg. smiling + crying which make attachment to maternal figure possible
Bowlby called these behaviours social releasers because they bring out care giving behaviours from adults
20
Q
Bowlby’s Monotropic theory: support for IWM (A03) (1)
A
P: idea of IWM is supported by evidence
E: Bailey et al assessed attachment of 99 mothers to their babies + their own mothers
E: found majority had same attachment classification both to their babies + their own mothers
L: supports Bowlby’s view that an IWM of attachment is passed through families
21
Bowlby’s Monotropic theory: sensitive rather than CP (A03) (2)
P: Critics argue that the idea of CP is not supported by evidence
E: psychologists instead suggest that there is sensitive period where attachments are most likely to be developed but argue that they could be formed at other times
E: Research has demonstrated even children raised in isolation can go on to form attachments w/ caregivers after CP
but Lorenz study SUPPORTS idea of CP- found that if imprinting didnt occur w/in few hours of geese being hatched it did not occur at all
L: increasing validity of Bowlby’s claim
22
Bowlby’s Monotropic theory: multiple attachment rather than monotropic bond (A03) (3)
P: Bowlby’s claim that children form single specific attachment is not supported by research
E: eg. Schaffer and Emerson found that by 10 months of age most babies had formed multiple attachments w/parents, grandparents, siblings
E: Bowlby also believed that monotropic bond is in some way different to other attachments but it may be that this attachment is just stronger than other attachments not necessarily of greater importance
L: matters bc monotropic bond is very important to Bowlby’s theory yet research suggests it lacks validity
23
Bowlby’s Monotropic theory: research from animal studies (A03) (4)
P: Research from animal studies
E: flaw as generalisation from human to animals is very difficult if not impossible due to evolutionary dissociating
E: Humans have quantitative differences on all animals + they're likely to affect attachment processes-eg. Child social releasers more advanced
L: limitation bc questions extent to which we can use research to support Bowlby's monotropic theory
24
caregiver infant interactions: reciprocity (A01)
interactions involve both parties producing responses from each other
take turns as people do in conversation
eg. an infant cries + caregiver responds by feeding or cuddling baby- baby babbles words + caregiver talks back
25
caregiver infant interactions: interactional synchrony (IS) (A01)
Two people are said to be ‘synchronised’ when they carry out same action at same time
IS takes place when mother + infant interact in way that their actions and emotions mirror each other
Isabella observed 30 mother + infants + found that high levels of interactional synchrony were associated w/better quality mother-infant attachment.
26
caregiver infant interactions: supporting evidence (A03) (1)
P: supporting evidence
E: Evans + Porter studied reciprocity, synchrony + attachment quality in 101 infants + their mothers for first year after birth
E: Mothers + babies were invited into the lab on three occasions- 12 months quality of mother–infant attachment was assessed
Babies judged to be securely attached tended to be those that had most reciprocal interactions + most synchrony
L: suggests that care-giver interactions play vital part in forming attachments
27
caregiver infant interactions: evidence of innate interactions (A03) (12
P: evidence of innate interactions
E: Meltzoff + Moore found that infants aged 2-3 weeks tended to mimic adults’ specific facial expressions + hand movements
E: mimicking of behaviour has also been observed in babies as young as 3 days old
L: study suggests that caregiver interactions are an innate ability used to aid in formation of attachment
28
caregiver infant interactions: cultural variations (A03) (3)
P: Caregiver-infant interactions are not found in all cultures
E: Le Vine et al reported Kenyan mothers have little interaction or physical contact w/their infants but high proportion of secure attachments
E: majority of research into this area may be criticised for being ethnocentric + ignoring how attachments may be formed w/in other cultures
L: study weakens support for idea that caregiver interactions are necessary for attachment formation
29
caregiver infant interactions: difficult to interpret baby's behaviour (A03) (4)
P: difficult to interpret baby's behaviour
E: eg. baby may be laughing after letting wind out or baby may be crying bc they're hungry or tired
E: it is harder to giver fair + unbiased interpret on behaviour being shown on baby
L: limitation-observational research alone can't be certain that reciprocity + synchrony are important for childs development
30
stages of attachment SCHAFFER+EMERSON: procedure (A01)
1. 60 babies from skilled working class Glasgow homes were studied
2. babies were visited at home every month for first year + again at 18 months
3. mothers were questioned about how child behaved when they were separated + how they behaved w/ unfamiliar adults
31
stages of attachment SCHAFFER+EMERSON: findings (A01)
1. Between 25- 32 weeks of age about 50% of babies showed signs of separation anxiety towards particular adult usually mother
2. 40 weeks 80% of babies had specific attachment + almost 30% displayed multiple attachments
32
stages of attachment age + key features: asocial phase (A01)
birth-3 months
Infants become attracted to other humans from six weeks old- smile more at faces than objects
33
stages of attachment age + key features: indiscriminate attachment (A01)
3 -7 months
Infants begin to recognise + prefer familiar faces- however they will accept comfort from any adult
their attachment behaviour is said to be indiscriminate because all adults are treated same
34
stages of attachment age + key features: specific attachment (A01)
7-8 months
around 7 months infants start to develop anxiety around strangers + become distressed if separated from 1 specific adult- known as primary attachment figure
35
stages of attachment age + key features: multiple attachment (A01)
9 months onwards
form multiple attachments w/other people who they spend lot of time w/like their grandparents + other children- relationships are called secondary attachments
36
stages of attachment: cultural variation (A03) (1)
P: Many researchers believe that infants must establish 1 primary attachment before they develop further multiple attachments
E: but there is evidence from cross cultural research to show that babies are capable of developing multiple attachments from birth
E: Cultures where this is more likely to occur are called collectivist cultures bc families work together jointly in everything
L: there is no agreement w/in psychology about when multiple attachments are formed
37
stages of attachment: good external validity (A03) (3)
P: good external validity
E: Schaffer + Emerson’s study was carried out in families’ own homes + most of observations were done by parents during ordinary activities + reported to researchers later
E: behaviour of babies was unlikely to be affected by presence of observers-an excellent chance that Ps behaviour naturally while being observed
L: increases external validity of Schaffer + Emerson’s study
37
stages of attachment: problems measuring attachment (A03) (2)
P: limitation of research into this area is that it is very difficult to measure behaviour of very young children
E: particularly problematic during the asocial stage as babies aren’t very mobile which means there is very little behaviour to observe-even when child does become mobile their behaviour could be incorrectly interpreted
E: eg. baby cries when mother leaves room we presume that they are crying because they are attached to her but they make be crying because they are tired or hungry
L: problem- Schaffer + Emerson’s stages because it is difficult to determine from an observation alone whether behaviour shown is due to attachment figure or some other reasons
38
stages of attachment: limited sample (A03) (4)
P: there is small sample used
E +E: they used sample of 60 babies showing that there is lack of population validity
L: limitation bc can't be generalised to all babies
38
role of the father (A01)
Traditionally fathers have been seen to have played minor role in the parenting of their children eg. Bowlby believed that children have 1 specific bond + this is usually to the mother
but society has changed lot + researchers have begun to investigate importance of fathers in child’s development
eg. Karen Grossman carried out longitudinal study + found that quality of adolescent attachment to father is related to father's play with infants
suggests that fathers have different role in attachment - 1 that is more to do w/play + stimulation + less to do with nurturing
39
role of the father: father a primary carers (A01)
evidence to suggest when fathers do take on role of being main caregiver they adopt behaviours more typical of mothers
Field filmed 4-month babies in face-to-face interactions w/their fathers-found difference in interactions when father was primary rather than secondary caregiver they spent more time smiling, imitating + holding their babies than secondary caregivers
So it seems that fathers can be more nurturing attachment figure + key to attachment is level of responsiveness not gender of caregiver
39
role of father: children w/x fathers (A03) (1)
P: evidence about children w/x father
E + E: Many studies have found that children growing up w/x father do not develop any differently than those who grow up w/both father + mother
L: suggests that fathers do not have significant impact on children’s development
40
role of the father: why fathers don't fathers become primary caregivers (A03) (2)
P: evolutionary psychologists would argue that females-rather than males are biologically pre-disposed to be more nurturing
E+ E : eg. female hormone oestrogen leads to caring behaviours seen more frequently in females rather than males
L: study supports view that women are biologically predisposed to be primary caregiver + that men have lesser role to play in their children’s’ lives
40
role of father: fathers support role of mother (A03) (3)
P: fathers support role of mothers
E+ E: Fathers are important not just for children but mothers too supportive fathers provide mothers w/much needed time away from childcare
L: strength bc help reduce stress in mothers, improve self-esteem + ultimately, improve mother’s relationship w/her children
41
Ainsworth strange situation: procedure (A01)
study took place in an unfamiliar room w/1 way glass so behaviour of infants could be observed covertly
Infants were aged between 12 + 18 months- sample comprised of 100 middle-class American families
42
Ainsworth strange situation: behaviours recorded in study (A01)
1. Proximity seeking: an infant w/ secure attachment will stay fairly close to caregiver
2. Exploration: secure attachment enables child to feel confident to explore room using caregiver as secure base
3. Separation anxiety: does child protest when separated from caregiver?
4. Stranger anxiety: if attachment is secure you would expect child to display anxiety when approached by stranger
5. Reunion Response: this measures how child reacts when finally reunited w/caregiver
43
Ainsworth strange situation: procedure steps (A01)
children + caregiver enter an unfamiliar playroom
1. child encouraged to explore= tests exploration + secure base
2. stranger comes in + ties to interact w/child=test stranger anxiety
3. caregiver leaves child + stranger together=test separation + stranger anxiety
4. caregiver returns + stranger leaves=test reunion behaviour + secure base
5. caregiver leaves child alone= test separation anxiety
6. stranger returns=test stranger anxiety
7. caregiver returns + returned w/child=test reunion behaviour
44
Ainsworth strange situation: findings INSECURE AVOIDANT (A01)
20-25% of infants
child does not seek contact from mother
child seems unconcerned when mother leaves
child shows few signs of distress + ignored or avoided stranger
child ignores mother on her return
45
Ainsworth strange situation: findings SECURE (A01)
60-75% of infants
Mother is seen as safe base from which child can explore
child cries shortly after mother leaves
child is wary of stranger + maintains closeness to its mother
child seeks contact when mother returns + is easy to comfort
45
Ainsworth strange situation: findings INSECURE RESISTANT (A01)
less than 10% of infants
child is wary of their mother + they don’t explore their environment
child shows intense distress when mother has left
child is extremely distressed when left w/stranger
child is AMBIVALENT- seeking + rejecting mother
46
Ainsworth strange situation: reliable measures (A03) (1)
P: Strange Situation is reliable measure of attachment it takes place under controlled conditions + behavioural categories are easy to observe
E + E: Bick looked at inter-rater reliability in team of trained Strange Situation observers + found agreement on attachment type of 94% of tested babies
L: means we can be confident that attachment type of an infant identified in Strange Situation does not just depend on who is observing them
47
Ainsworth strange situation: lacks ecological validity (A03) (2)
P: Critics argue findings are inaccurate as Strange Situation is an unrealistic situation for both infant + caregiver
E: researchers suggests attachment types tend to be stronger in this controlled setting rather than in child’s own home
E: eg. they may cry less when in familiar environment
L: reduces ecological validity of procedure + limits its applicability
48
Ainsworth strange situation: culturally bias (A03) (3)
P: Strange Situation is based on American attachment behaviours + ignores how child rearing practices in other cultures may affect behaviour in strange situation
E: eg. Japanese infants are rarely separated from their parents
E: can result in child being wrongly classified as being insecure resistant
L: reduces external validity of procedure + limits its applicability
49
Van Ijzendoorn + Kroonenberg cultural variation: procedure (A01)
1. Results from 32 studies on attachment that had used Strange Situation were examined-18 of these were from USA
2. These studies were conducted in 8 countries w/total sample size of 1,990 infants
3. Data for these studies were meta-analysed
50
Van Ijzendoorn + Kroonenberg cultural variation: findings (A01)
all countries secure attachment was the most common but proportion varied from 75% in Britain to 50% in China
Insecure-resistant was overall least common type although proportions ranged from 3% in Britain to around 30% in Israel
Insecure-avoidant was observed most commonly in Germany + least commonly in Japan
interesting finding was that variations between results of studies w/in same country were actually 150% greater than those between countries
USA 1 study found only 46% securely attached compared to 1 sample as high as 90%
51
Simonella et al cultural variation: findings (A01)
76 12-month olds using Strange Situation- in Italy
found 50% secure 36% insecure-avoidant lower rate of secure attachment than found in many studies
researchers suggest this is because increasing numbers of mothers of very young children work long hours + use professional childcare
52
Simonella et al cultural variation: conclusion (A01)
Secure attachment seems to be norm in wide range of cultures
but research also clearly shows that cultural practices have an influence on attachment type
53
cultural variation: large sample (A03) (1)
P: strength of Van Ijzendoorn’ meta-analysis is large sample that was generated
E: Nearly 2000 mothers + babies were used in this study
E: sample size is strength as it reduces impact of poor methodology
L: being able to generalise findings to larger population
but criticism of Van Ijzendoorn’s study is limited no. of studies in some countries eg. only 1 study was conducted in China whereas 18 studies were conducted in USA- problem because we are unable to generalise from such limited sample to entire country
53
Takahashi cultural variation: findings (A01)
0% insecure avoidant
32% insecure resistant
68% secure
54
Bowlbys theory of maternal deprivation: effects on intellectual development (A01)
Cognitive Delays + Low IQ - Goldfarb 1947 found maternally deprived children in orphanages had lower IQ than those who were fostered
55
cultural variation: culturally biased (A03) (2)
P: Strange Situation was designed by Ainsworth + is based on British theory- test has been used worldwide to judge infants in other cultures eg. of imposed ethic
E: eg. strange situation lack of separation anxiety indicates an insecure avoidant attachment but Germany independent behaviour is encouraged + therefore lack of separation anxiety is not sign of insecurity
E: greater frequency of insecure resistant in Japan may result from fact that Japanese infants are rarely separated from their mothers so would find situation more distressing than children from other cultures
L: problem as it suggests that cross cultural comparisons using ‘strange situation’ may lack validity
56
Bowlbys theory of maternal deprivation: effects on emotional development (A01)
Affectionless Psychopathy - Bowlby suggested these children would develop an inability to show affection or concern for others acting on impulse w/ittle regard for consequence of their actions
57
Bowlbys theory of maternal deprivation: aim (A01)
links between affectionless psychopathy + maternal deprivation
58
Bowlbys theory of maternal deprivation: procedure (A01)
sample consisted of 44 criminal teenagers accused of stealing ‘thieves’ were interviewed for signs of affectionless psychopathy
Their families were also interviewed in order to establish whether ‘thieves’ had suffered prolonged early separation from their mothers
control group of 44 non-criminal but emotionally disturbed teenagers was set up to see how often maternal deprivation occurred in children who were not delinquent
59
Bowlbys theory of maternal deprivation: findings (A01)
Thieves: 14/44 were described as affectionless psychopaths- this 14, 12 had experienced prolonged separation in first 2 years of life
Control group: 2/44 had suffered maternal separation but 0/44 were categorised as affectionless psychopaths
60
Bowlbys theory of maternal deprivation: supporting evidence (A03) (1)
P: supporting evidence
E: Harlow’s study on rhesus monkeys could also be used to support Bowlby’s theory
E: monkeys suffered maternal deprivation as they were removed from their real mothers-adults these monkeys were abusive to their offspring even killing them in some cases
L: monkeys were also more aggressive + less sociable than other monkeys supporting view that maternal deprivation has detrimental effect on development
61
Bowlbys theory of maternal deprivation: conclusion (A01)
Prolonged separation caused affectionless psychopathy
62
Bowlbys theory of maternal deprivation: contradictory evidence (A03) (2)
P: Critics argue that findings from cross-cultural research clearly contradict maternal deprivation hypothesis
E + E: Kagan studied Guatemalan Indians + found that although children experienced deprivation due to being kept in windowless hut w/little contact w/their primary caregiver they did not experience any social + intellectual impairment demonstrating that maternal deprivation does not produce irreversible negative consequences
L: suggests that other factors may influence outcomes for children who suffer early deprivation
63
Bowlbys theory of maternal deprivation: sensitive rather than critical period (A03) (3)
P: Bowlby used term ‘critical period’ because he believed prolonged separation inevitably caused damage if it took place w/in that period
E: but later research has shown some cases of very severe deprivation have had good outcomes eg. Koluchova 1976 did a case study of Czech twin boys isolated from 18 months by being locked in cupboard- later looked after by 2 loving adults + appeared to fully recover
E: shows severe deprivation can have positive outcomes provided child has some social interaction + good aftercare
L: Cases like this demonstrate that period identified by Bowlby may be 'sensitive' 1 but cannot be critical
64
Bowlbys theory of maternal deprivation: unreliable data (A03) (4)
P: research has been criticised because it uses retrospective data
E: eg. family members were asked to recall events from early life of young teenagers in order to determine whether they had suffered prolonged separation
E: problem because family members may deliberately exclude certain events or may simply just forget some minor details
L: matters bc it casts doubt on interval validity of Bowlby’s findings
65
Romanian Orphan Studies: effects of institutionalisation (A01)
institute is place where someone lives outside family home eg. children’s home
institutionalisation causes harmful effects such as apathy loss of personal identity + independence
tragic opportunity to look at effects of institutionalisation arose in Romania in 1990s- due to government requirements for women to have large families many Romanian parents could not afford to keep their children + many ended up in huge orphanages in very poor conditions
in 1989 government was overthrown + world became aware of poor state of these orphanages-children from these institutions were eventually adopted by British parents
66
effects of institutionalisation RUTTER ET AL: aim (A01)
investigate if good care could make up for poor early experiences in an institution
67
effects of institutionalisation RUTTER ET AL: procedure (A01)
Michael Rutter + colleagues followed group of 165 Romanian orphans adopted in Britain
Physical, cognitive + emotional development was assessed at ages 4,6,11 + 15 years
group of 52 British children adopted around same served as control group
68
effects of institutionalisation RUTTER ET AL: findings (A01)
When they first arrived in UK half adoptees lagged behind their British counterparts on all 3 measures of development
age 11 recovery depended on child’s age when adopted:
Impaired social skills: Those adopted after 6 months showed signs of disinhibited attachment
when child shows equal affection to strangers as they do people they know well
Attention seeking + clinginess were also more common in late adopted group
mean IQ score decrease longer it took for child to get adopted
69
effects of institutionalisation Bucharest Early Intervention Project: findings (A01)
found 74% of control group were identified as being securely attached compared to only 19% of institutionalised group
institutionalised group 65% were classed as having disorganised attachment
children were also more likely to have been described as having disinhibited attachment style
70
effects of institutionalisation Bucharest Early Intervention Project: procedure (A01)
Zeanah et al assessed 95 children aged 12-31 months old who had spent on average 90% of their lives in Romanian orphanages
children were compared to control group of 50 children who had never lived in an institution
used strange situation to measure their attachment type + also asked their caregivers to describe any unusual behaviours
71
effects of institutionalisation: real life applications (A03) (1)
P: important practical applications which have arisen as result of research conducted on Romanian orphans
E + E: orphanages + children’s care homes now avoid having large numbers of caregivers + try to ensure that each child is assigned key worker
L: means that children have chance to develop normal attachments + helps avoid disinhibited attachment
72
effects of institutionalisation: fewer extraneous variables (A03) (2)
P: research in Romanian orphans allowed psychologists to have unique opportunity to study effects of institutionalisation
E: Due to it having less extraneous variables than previous orphan studies which had used samples of children who were neglected
abused or suffered loss of their parents
E: therefore hard to identify which specific factors were affecting their emotional + intellectual development
L: Romanian orphanages there weren’t as many confounding variables so research has higher internal validity
73
effects of institutionalisation: Romanian orphanages weren't typical (A03) (3)
P: Although data gained from Romanian orphanages has been useful it is possible that conditions were so bad that results cannot be applied to children in other types of institutional care
E + E: Romanian orphanages had particularly poor standards of care + extremely low levels of intellectual stimulation
L: limitation of Romanian orphanage studies bc unusual situational variables that exist in these studies may prevent this research from being generalised to other groups of adopted children
74
effects of institutionalisation: long term effects not known (A03) (4)
P: Although research on institutionalisation followed up adopted orphans throughout childhood it may be that children who spent longer in institutions + currently lag behind or display attachment difficulties will eventually ‘catch-up’ as adults
E+ E: Equally early-adopted children who appear to have no issues may experience emotional problems as adults
L: Suggesting that long term effects of early institutionalisation are unknown
75
adult relationships: IWM (A01)
Bowlby suggested that monotropic bond acts as template for all later relationships
template known as IWM has powerful effect on nature of child’s future relationships
child whose first experience is of loving relationship w/reliable caregiver will assume that this is how relationships are meant to be + will thus seek out fulfilling relationships in future
but if first experience of loving relationship is of an unreliable insensitive caregiver then child may seek out dysfunctional relationships
76
adult relationships: insecure avoidant ADULT BEHAVIOURS (A01)
somewhat uncomfortable being close to others
nervous when anyone gets too close
Romantic partners want me to be more intimate
77
adult relationships: securely attached ADULT BEHAVIOURS (A01)
find it relatively easy to get close to others
comfortable depending on them + having them depend on me
78
adult relationships: insecure resistant ADULT BEHAVIOURS (A01)
Others are reluctant to get as close as I like
want to merge completely w/ another person + this can scare them away
worry my partner does not really love me
79
adult relationships YOUNGBLADE + BELSKY: supporting evidence (A03) (4)
Attachment type is associated w/ quality of peer relationships in childhood
found that 3-5 year-old securely attached children were more self-confident got along better w/other children + were more likely to form close friendships
Myron-Wilson + Smith assessed attachment type + bullying using questionnaires in 196 children aged 7-11 from London
Secure children were unlikely to be involved in bullying
Insecure avoidant children were more likely to be victims
insecure resistant children were more likely to be bullies
Securely attached babies tend to go on to form best quality childhood friendships whereas insecurely attached babies later have friendship difficulties
80
adult relationships HAZEN+ SHAVER: Relationships in adulthood w/Romantic Partners aim (A01)
find out if type of attachment that person had in infancy has an effect on type of romantic relationships they would form in future
81
adult relationships HAZEN+ SHAVER: Relationships in adulthood w/Romantic Partners procedure (A01)
analysed 620 replies to ‘love quiz’ printed in an American local newspaper
quiz had three sections:
Section 1: Assessment of their current or most significant relationship
Section 2: Assessment of their love life e.g. number of partners
Section 3: Assessment of their attachment type
82
adult relationships HAZEN+ SHAVER: Relationships in adulthood w/Romantic Partners findings (A01)
Secure (56%) Happy, friendly + trusting relationship experience Happy being close to others
average length 10 years
Avoidant (25%) Jealousy + fear of intimacy relationship experience uncomfortable depending on or being close to others average length 6 years
Resistant (19%) Obsessive in romantic relationships desire for intense closeness average length 5 years
83
adult relationships: Relationships in adulthood w/as a parent (A01)
IWM also affects child’s ability to parent their own children
Research shows that attachment types tend to be passed on through generations of family eg. Bailey assessed the attachments of 99 mothers to their babies and their own mothers
majority of women had same attachment classification both to their babies + their own mothers support importance of early relationships in one’s ability to parent successfully
84
adult relationships: link decreases w/age (A03) (1)
P: link decreases w/age
E: Insecurely attached children do not always become insecurely attached adults- link tends to decrease w/ age seems to be because average person will participate in several different relationships which may alter their IWM- other words successful relationships may alter IWM of an adult who had been previously insecurely attached to their parents
E: further limitation is that most of research is purely correlational means that there has no control over extraneous variables such as negative life events which may influence future relationships
L: means that it cannot be concluded from this research alone that early attachment types form adult attachment styles
85
adult relationships: methodological issues (A03) (2)
P: limitation of research into early attachment types + adult relationships is that it is often based on self-report measures
E: interviews or surveys which assess attachment styles + relationships w/parents
E: retrospective so rely on memory of P which we know from studying ‘Memory’ unit can be unreliable due to forgetting or other factors eg. social desirability bias when people report themselves in favourable light to look like they have better relationships w/their parents
L: this lowers internal validity of results
86
adult relationships: free will vs determinism (A03) (3)
P: fair to say that all children who experience poor attachments w/ their parents are ‘doomed’ to experience unhealthy relationships as adults
E: Although relationship has been found this has never been 100% determined so there must be other factors which contribute to formation of our adult relationships
E: theory is suggesting that the effects of poor attachments as children will be long-lasting but as adults we have cognitive ability to reflect on our past + recognise what unhealthy relationships look like can choose to avoid these in future
L: Suggesting we have free will w/ forming adult relationships
