Attachment

Question 1

Asocial stage

Answer 1

-0 to 6 weeks
-no preference for any adult

Question 2

Multiple Attachment Stage

Answer 2

-form attachments to people other than primary attachment figure

-9 months onwards

Question 3

Specific Attachment stage

Answer 3

-form a primary attachment to main caregiver

-show separation anxiety and stranger anxiety

-7 to 9 months

Question 4

Indiscriminate Stage

Answer 4

-prefers humans over objects
-begins to show some preference for familiar people over others

-no stranger anxiety

-no primary attachment

-6 weeks to 6 months

Question 5

Stages of Attachment order

Answer 5

Stage 1: Asocial

Stage 2: Indiscriminate attachment

Stage 3: Specific attachment

Stage 4: Multiple Attachment

Question 6

Safe Base

Answer 6

is when children treat their caregiver as someone they can quickly return to whenever they’re scared or anxious.

Question 7

Schaffer and Emerson

Answer 7

-longitudinal observation of 60 working class babies from Glassgow.

-analysed interactions, interviewed carers and mothers had to record infant’s behaviours

-supported the existence of 4 stages of attachment

-multiple attachments were common, 87%

-found that the quality of caregiver-infant interactions influences the strength of attachment

Question 8

Shaffer and Emerson AO3

Answer 8

✔ Has ecological validity and can generalise to how babies and caregivers behave in everyday life

✔ Longitudinal Study has strong internal validity as there are no confounding variables from different ppts

✘ social desirability bias;
-ppts may have wanted to come across as perfect parents during interviews i.e say they spend more time or babies cry less etc

✘ May not be generalisable and lacks temporal validity as it only looked at a group of working-class mothers in 1960s Glasgow.

Question 9

Reciprocity

Answer 9

-when both the caregiver and the baby take turns in the interaction and respond to each others actions

Question 10

Interactional Synchrony

Answer 10

when caregivers and infants perform similar actions in time with one another

Question 11

Isabella et al

Answer 11

-video analysis of caregiver infant interactions

-babies and mothers observed a first time then again a few months later

-found more interactional synchrony and reciprocity= stronger attachment

-positive correlation between interactional synchrony and strength of attachment bond

Question 12

Isabella et al AO3

Answer 12

✔ Interactions were filmed and observed in a lab which allows the researchers to collect highly detailed , reliable observations

✘ Observer bias; babies movements may have been overinterpreted

✘ Correlational studies make it hard to infer a causal relationship between interactions and attachment

Question 13

Meltzoff and Moore

Answer 13

Observed babies as young as 2 weeks old
adults displayed facial gestures such as a sticking tongue out and opening mouth in shock to 12 to 21 day old infants. Found infants had the ability to observe and reciprocate

Question 14

Infant and Caregiver Interactions AO3

Answer 14

✔ Isabella et al

✔ Controlled observations are often filmed therefore better inter-rater reliability

✔ Doesn’t tell us the purpose of these interactions

✘ Observer bias; babies movements may have been overinterpreted

Question 15

Schaffer’s results and role of the father

Answer 15

found that at 18 months, 75% of infants had formed an attachment with their father and showed separation anxiety, suggesting fathers play an important role

Question 16

Field

Answer 16

filmed 4 month old babies and found that fathers can be primary caregivers and were seen to act in the same caring and intimate way as a mother would

Question 17

Role of the Father AO3

Question 18

Classical Conditioning in attachment

Answer 18

Baby learns to associate caregiver (NS) with food (UCS)

Food produces pleasure (UCR) → over time, caregiver alone produces pleasure

So the caregiver becomes a Conditioned Stimulus (CS) producing comfort (CR)
➡️ Baby becomes attached because the caregiver is now associated with pleasure and comfort

Question 19

Learning Theory of Attachment

Answer 19

Children ‘learn’ to attach to their mother by associating their mother with food, and the pleasure they receive from being fed. This is done through the process of classical and operant conditioning.

Question 20

Operant Conditioning

Answer 20

Learning through rewards and punishments

When baby cries and gets fed = positive reinforcement
→ Baby more likely to cry again

Caregiver is also negatively reinforced (crying stops = reward)
➡️ Attachment forms as a two-way reinforcement loop

Question 21

Drive Reduction

Answer 21

Hunger = a drive

Food reduces this unpleasant feeling

Caregiver becomes associated with drive reduction → attachment

Question 22

Positive Reinforcement

Answer 22

When we learn to repeat a behaviour to get a rewarding outcome.

Question 23

Negative Reinforcement

Answer 23

Is when we learn to repeat a behaviour to avoid an unrewarding outcome.

Question 24

Harlow’s Monkeys Aim

Answer 24

to test the learning theory of attachment by investigating whether monkeys choose comfort or food

Question 25

Harlow's Monkeys Procedure

Answer 25

-lab experiment -8 baby monkeys raised with a fake wire mother or cloth mother -4 fed by wire while other 4 fed by cloth

Question 26

Harlow's Monkeys findings and conclusion

Answer 26

Monkeys always spent more time with the cloth mother, even if they were fed by the wire mother. Therefore doesn't support learning theory of attachment. Instead attachment is driven by comfort.

Question 27

Harlow's Monkeys AO3

Answer 27

✔ well controlled + internal validity due to being a lab experiment ✘ the different mothers had different faces which could be a confounding variable ✘ hard to generalise animal studies so it might not represent how humans form attachments ✘ unethical study; babies raised in social isolation causing emotional distress

Question 28

Learning Theory of Attachment AO3

Answer 28

✔ Dollard+Miller found that babies are fed over 2000 times in the first year of their life which gives them opportunities to form attachments through the association in L.T. Therefore it is believable ✘ isn't supported by the Harlow's monkey study ✘ isn't supported by the findings of Metapelets in Israel; babies attach to their mothers who produce love and comfort despite being fed by Metapelets ✘Ignores interactional synchrony / reciprocity Learning theory doesn’t explain sensitive communication between caregiver and baby (like Meltzoff & Moore showed)

Question 29

Bowlby's Monotropic Theory

Answer 29

Attachments are innate in both babies and their caregivers. Attachments in caregivers ae driven by a need to protect babies from danger Programmed through evolution since babies who spent more time with caregivers were more likely to survive longer

Question 30

Social Releasers

Answer 30

Innate behaviours that babies perform to attract the attention of caregivers.

Question 31

Monotropic Attachment

Answer 31

babies can only form one special attachments usually the person who is the closest emotionally to the baby

Question 32

Critical Period

Answer 32

time window during which babies can form an attachment and only lasts the first 2.5 years of a babies' life

Question 33

Internal Working Model

Answer 33

The schema that we develop from our attachment to our main caregiver. Attachment between children and their caregivers are crucial so that the children can go on to have positive relationships in the future`

Question 34

Lorenz's Goslings Aim

Answer 34

to see if baby geese only attach to their mother AND how quickly do they form attachment (slow = through XP, fast = biological)

Question 35

Lorenz's Goslings Procedure

Answer 35

one group of unhatched eggs left to hatch normally with mother second group hatched in an incubator and Lorenz was the first thing they saw

Question 36

Lorenz Goslings FIndings and Conclusion

Answer 36

-baby geese formed attachments immediately to the first person or object they saw -even if geese in experimental group were reunited with their mother, they still wouldn't form an attachment with her Baby geese form attachments immediately after birth suggesting attachment was innate. Lorenz called this imprinting. This supports Bowlby's theory of monotropy and the crit period

Question 37

Lorenz Goslings AO3

Answer 37

✘ the results could not be replicated with a study on chicks by Guiton where the initial attachment could be reversed back to the mother so the results aren't completely reliable ✘ results cannot be generalised because baby geese are very different to humans

Question 38

Monotropic Theory AO3

Answer 38

✘ Shaffer and Emerson shows that attachments aren't monotropic ; 87% of the babies formed multiple attachments ✘ Socially sensitive- It places a great deal of pressure on the primary attachment figure (usually the mother) to form sensitive, loving, nurturing attachments with their children, otherwise the rest of the child's life may be negatively affected ✔ Lorenz's Goslings ✔Bailey et al observed 99 mothers using SS and found that mothers who reported having poor attachments with their own mums were more likely to have poor attachments with their babies Therefore supports IWM

Question 39

Bowlby's Theory of Maternal Deprivation

Answer 39

when children are deprived of an attachment figure during the crit period they suffer long lasting and irreversible psychological damage

Question 40

Consequences of Maternal Deprivation

Answer 40

- impaired cognitive development (e.g low iq) - impaired emotional development (e.g affectionless psychopathy) - impaired behavioural development (e.g delinquency)

Question 41

PDD model

Answer 41

-for short term deprivation Protest; childern become angry about being abandoned by the main caregiver Despair; children become sad, withdrawn and refuse to be comforted Detachment; children reject their main caregiver when they are reunited

Question 42

Little John Case study

Answer 42

by Robertson and Bowlby - case study of a young boy called Little John - Little John was separated from his mother for 9 days whilst she was in hospital FIndings: John experienced the 3 stages of the PDD model and wouldn't show affection to his mother for months after Conclusion: separation has long lasting and irreversible effects and supports the PDD model

Question 43

Little John AO3

Answer 43

✘ results may not generalise to other ppl because of such a small sample size meaning it is hard to tell if Little John's experiences are representative of how other children might behave ✘ cannot control confounding variable i.e behaviour of other children or nursery staff therefore a causal relationship cannot be established between being separated and his distress

Question 44

44 thieves study Bowlby

Answer 44

44 juvenile thieves vs. 44 non-criminal controls. conducted a set of interviews with children in his clinic. 14/44- affection-less psychopaths 12/14- maternally deprived 5/30- maternally deprived non affection-less psychopaths therefore suggests that maternal deprivation in childhood leads to delinquency and affectionless psychopathy

Question 45

44 thieves study AO3

Answer 45

✘ interviews may have been unreliable as their recall from memories may not be accurate or objective ✘ ppts may have been influenced by investigator effects that could have led to demand characteristics ✘ lacked control over extraneous variables that could also have led the teenagers into a life of crime due to being a natural experiment

Question 46

Maternal Deprivation Theory AO3

Answer 46

✘ Contradictory evidence – Lewis (1954) Replicated Bowlby’s study with larger sample (500+) and found no link between prolonged separation and criminality. Suggests maternal deprivation alone isn’t a strong predictor of negative outcomes. ✘ Ignores other factors that could cause their psychological damage such as malnourishment, poverty etc. These confounding variables make it hard to establish a casual relationship between deprivation and psychological damage ✘ Confuses privation with deprivation. Rutter argues that privation would have much more significant effects compared to deprivation ✘Methodological flaws in the 44 Thieves Study Retrospective interviews = recall bias Bowlby himself conducted the assessments = researcher bias

Question 47

Secure Attachment

Answer 47

Happy to explore with caregiver as safe base Moderate separation & stranger anxiety Easily comforted upon reunion

Question 48

Insecure Avoidant Attachment

Answer 48

Independent → little proximity seeking Little/no separation or stranger anxiety Avoids contact on reunion

Question 49

Insecure Resistant Attachment

Answer 49

Clingy & less exploration Very distressed when separated Resists comfort on reunion (angry/ambivalent)

Question 50

Ainsworth Strange Situation Procedure

Answer 50

-controlled observation -9 to 18 months babies + mothers -8 scripted episodes to observe: 1. safe base behaviour 2. degree of stranger anxiety 3. degree of separation anxiety 4. reunion behaviour

Question 51

Strange Situation Findings

Answer 51

identified 3 main types of attachment 65%= Secure 20%= Insecure Avoidant 3%= Insecure Resistant

Question 52

Strange Situation AO3

Answer 52

✔ High reliability – controlled setting, standardised procedure → high inter-observer reliability ✔ Useful application – understanding attachment helps improve parenting & early childcare ✘ may be culturally biased towards the social norms expected in Western countries ✘ demand characteristics from mother

Question 53

Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg

Answer 53

-Investigated the cultural differences in attachment types -meta analysis of 32 countries across 8 in the strange situation

Question 54

Van IJzendoorn and Kroonenberg key findingss

Answer 54

- secure attachment was the most common globally (highest in UK & Sweeden) - Avoidant found more in Germany (they encourage independence) * Resistant found more in Japan, Israel (collectivist cultures are rarely separated from mother)

Question 55

Simonella et al

Answer 55

found that proportion of secure attached children in Italy was only 50%. Therefore suggests that changes may be due to changing cultural and social expectations of mothers. More are working and reduces the chances of a secure attachment from forming

Question 56

Van IJzendoorn AO3

Answer 56

✅ Large Sample size increases population validity ❌ Imposed etic Strange Situation was designed in USA = Western bias Behaviours like independence (seen as secure in West) may mean insecurity in collectivist cultures ❌ Country ≠ Culture E.g. USA is culturally diverse (Texas ≠ New York) So saying “America is avoidant” is oversimplified — need to consider subculturesau

Question 57

Continuity Effect

Answer 57

We use the internal working model we form from early attachments with our caregivers to shape our expectations and beliefs about future relationships. Our attachment style in relationships reflects the attachment stye to our parents

Question 58

Hazan and Shaver

Answer 58

formed a love quiz to see if people's romantic relationships are shaped by their attachment style to their parents Results showed that people who had secure relationships believed in true love and had successful relationships whereas those with insecure had less successful relationships and felt more lonely

Question 59

Mary Main Adult Attachment Interview

Answer 59

-interview based study -ppts asked questions about their relationships to their parents and their relationships with their own children -found that ppts attachment styles with their parents correlated with those with their children

Question 60

Hazan and Shaver AO3

Answer 60

✘ Results may not be representative of the wider pop due to being volunteers ✘ Ppts answers may not have been accurate and objective Either unable to remember childhood attachment or displayed social desirability bias ✘ Can't establish a cause and effect relationship

Question 61

Main's adult attachment interview AO3

Answer 61

✘ ppts responses may have been inaccurate ✘ ppts may have displayed social desirability bias ✘ ppts may have been influenced by investigator effects ✔Bailey et al observed 99 mothers using SS and found that mothers who reported having poor attachments with their own mums were more likely to have poor attachments with their babies Therefore supports IWM

Question 62

Hodges and Tizard

Answer 62

-natural experiment -65 institutionalised children Findings: -children who stayed in the institution or who returned to their biological parents experienced impaired emotional development -however those who were adopted early experienced no psychological damage Suggests effects of privation can be reversed

Question 63

Rutter procedure and findings

Answer 63

-longitudinal, natural experiment -compared Romanian orphans to British orphans all of whom had been adopted by British families Findings: -British orphans showed good emotional and cognitive development even if adopted after 6 months old -Same with Romanian orphans if they were adopted before 6 months old -Romanian orphans adopted after 6 months old showed long term emotional and cognitive impairment

Question 64

Rutter's conclusion

Answer 64

The negative effects of privation can be reversed as long as children are introduced introduced into loving homes from a young age. However, the longer the children experience severe privation, the worse the longer effects will be.