Attachment Flashcards
(127 cards)
1
Q
[👶 Infancy] What is meant by ‘infancy’ in developmental psychology?
A
Infancy is the period before a child begins to speak, typically within the first year of life.
2
Q
[🎭 Synchrony] What is interactional synchrony?
A
When an infant mirrors the actions or emotions of another person in a coordinated way.
3
Q
[🔁 Reciprocity] What is reciprocity in caregiver-infant interaction?
A
Mutual exchange where both infant and caregiver respond to each other, creating turn-taking communication.
4
Q
[👂 Condon & Slater Aim] What was the aim of Condon and Slater (1974)?
A
To investigate if infants respond to adult conversation patterns through movement.
5
Q
[📽️ Condon & Slater Proc] What was the procedure of Condon and Slater’s study?
A
They analysed infant movements frame-by-frame while playing audio recordings of adult conversations.
6
Q
[🎼 Findings] What were the findings of Condon and Slater (1974)?
A
Infants moved in synchrony with the rhythm of adult speech, suggesting subtle turn-taking.
7
Q
[📡 Conclusion] What did Condon and Slater conclude?
A
Their results support interactional synchrony as a key aspect of infant-caregiver communication.
8
Q
[🧒 Meltzoff Aim] What was the aim of Meltzoff & Moore (1977)?
A
To investigate imitation of facial and manual gestures by young infants.
9
Q
[🧪 Meltzoff Proc] What was the procedure of Meltzoff & Moore’s study?
A
Infants (12–21 days old) saw adults perform gestures while a dummy prevented early responses. After removal, responses were recorded.
10
Q
[🔍 Findings] What did Meltzoff & Moore (1977) find?
A
Infants imitated both facial expressions and hand movements, suggesting imitation is innate.
11
Q
[🧠 Conclusion] What did Meltzoff & Moore conclude?
A
Imitation is a key feature of early social development, even at a very young age.
12
Q
[🧊 Murray Aim] What did Murray & Trevarthen’s (1985) study aim to investigate?
A
How infants respond when their caregiver becomes unresponsive.
13
Q
[🎥 Murray Proc] What was the procedure of Murray & Trevarthen (1985)?
A
Two-month-old infants interacted with their mother, who then adopted a ‘frozen face’ expression.
14
Q
[😢 Findings] What were the results of Murray & Trevarthen (1985)?
A
Infants showed visible distress and tried to gain attention when their mother stopped responding.
15
Q
[🧷 Conclusion] What did Murray & Trevarthen conclude?
A
Reciprocity is a critical feature of infant-caregiver communication.
16
Q
[🔬 Strength] ✅ What is one strength of research into caregiver-infant interaction?
A
Well-controlled observations (e.g., micro-sequence analysis) increase internal validity.
17
Q
[😕 Limitation] ❌ What is one limitation related to infant expressions?
A
Infants show frequent random movements, making it difficult to distinguish real imitation from coincidence.
18
Q
[🎬 Validity] ✅ How have researchers improved validity in these studies?
A
By using un-primed observers who judged infant responses via video recordings.
19
Q
[🍼 Practical Issue] ❌ What practical issue affects research into caregiver-infant interactions?
A
Infants sleep and feed unpredictably, limiting observation opportunities.
20
Q
[🧷 Definition] What is attachment?
A
A strong, lasting emotional bond formed between a baby and their main caregiver.
21
Q
[👩🍼 Figure] Who is the attachment figure?
A
The caregiver who looks after the baby for long periods, responds to needs, and makes them feel safe.
22
Q
[🏠 Safe Base] What is the ‘safe base’ in attachment?
A
When children treat their caregiver as someone they can return to when anxious or scared, allowing them to explore.
23
Q
[💔 Separation] What is separation anxiety?
A
When children become distressed when separated from their attachment figure.
24
Q
[😨 Stranger Anxiety] What is stranger anxiety?
A
Distress shown around unfamiliar people and preference for the attachment figure.
25
[🎥 Frame Analysis] What is frame-by-frame analysis in observational studies?
Researchers record behaviours with a camera and observe each frame in detail for reliability.
26
[📆 Longitudinal] What is a longitudinal study?
A study that investigates the same participants over time to see how they change.
27
[👍 Strength] Give one strength of longitudinal studies.
They provide insight into behaviour changes and how early experiences shape later behaviour.
28
[🚪 Attrition] What is attrition in longitudinal studies?
Losing participants from the study sample over time.
29
[🧪 Quasi/Natural] Why do attachment researchers often use natural or quasi experiments?
Because manipulating IVs is unethical, so they use less controlled methods to study attachment.
30
[⚠️ Limitation] What is a limitation of using natural or quasi experiments in attachment research?
They can’t control all extraneous variables, making cause-and-effect difficult to establish.
31
[🐵 Animal Research] Why are animal studies used in attachment research?
To test variables that can't be ethically manipulated in humans, allowing for cause-effect conclusions.
32
[✅ Validity] Give a strength of using animals in attachment studies.
Animal genes and behaviours are similar enough to humans to make findings valid.
33
[❌ Ethics] Give a limitation of using animals in attachment studies.
Animals may not generalise to humans, and causing distress is unethical.
34
[👶 Asocial] What happens in the asocial/pre-attachment stage?
From 0–6 weeks, babies show no preference for any adult.
35
[🧍♂️ Indiscriminate] What is the indiscriminate attachment stage?
From 6 weeks–7 months, babies prefer familiar people but don’t form strong attachments to one person.
36
[💞 Specific] What is the specific/discriminate attachment stage?
From 7–9 months, babies form a strong attachment to one caregiver and show separation anxiety.
37
[👨👩👧 Multiple] What is the multiple attachment stage?
From 9 months onward, babies form attachments with people other than their primary caregiver.
38
[🎯 Aim] What was the aim of Schaffer and Emerson’s (1964) study?
To investigate how babies develop attachments to their parents over time.
39
[🔬 Procedure] What was the procedure of Schaffer and Emerson’s study?
A longitudinal, naturalistic observation of 60 babies and families from birth to 18 months.
40
[📊 Findings] What were the findings of Schaffer and Emerson’s (1964) study?
87% had multiple attachments, and the primary figure wasn’t always the main caregiver. High responsiveness led to stronger attachment.
41
[🌿 Strength] What is one strength of Schaffer and Emerson’s research?
It was a naturalistic observation, making the results ecologically valid and generalisable.
42
[👁️🗨️ Weakness] What is one weakness of Schaffer and Emerson’s research?
It may be prone to observer bias and social desirability bias in interviews.
43
[🐥 Lorenz Aim] What was the aim of Lorenz’s (1935) study?
To investigate imprinting in geese and its effect on later attachment behaviour.
44
[🥚 Procedure] What was the procedure of Lorenz’s study?
Lorenz divided goose eggs into two groups: one hatched with the mother, the other in an incubator with Lorenz as the first moving object.
45
[👣 Findings] What did Lorenz (1935) find?
The incubator group followed Lorenz, the others followed the mother. This process occurred during a critical period.
46
[🔒 Conclusion] What did Lorenz conclude about imprinting?
Imprinting is a form of attachment occurring during a critical period and is irreversible.
47
[⏱️ Strength] ✅ What is one strength of Lorenz’s research?
Influential for understanding the concept of critical periods in attachment.
48
[🚫 Limitation] ❌ What is one limitation of Lorenz’s study?
Findings may not generalise to humans as geese have very different attachment systems.
49
[🐒 Harlow Aim] What was the aim of Harlow’s (1958) study?
To investigate whether food or comfort is more important in forming attachments in monkeys.
50
[🧪 Procedure] What was the procedure of Harlow’s monkey study?
Infant monkeys were reared with two wire mothers: one with milk and one covered in soft cloth without milk.
51
[🤗 Findings] What did Harlow find?
Monkeys spent more time with the cloth mother even without milk, seeking comfort when frightened.
52
[💡 Conclusion] What did Harlow conclude about attachment?
Comfort and security are more important than food in forming attachment bonds.
53
[🏥 Strength] ✅ What is one strength of Harlow’s research?
Practical applications for understanding the effects of neglect and improving childcare practices.
54
[⚖️ Ethics] ❌ What is one ethical criticism of Harlow’s study?
Caused long-term distress and emotional harm to the monkeys, raising serious ethical concerns.
55
[🔔 Classical Conditioning] How does classical conditioning explain attachment?
Attachment forms when a neutral stimulus (caregiver) becomes associated with pleasure (food), making the caregiver a conditioned stimulus that brings comfort.
56
[🍬 Operant Conditioning] How does operant conditioning explain attachment?
Attachment forms through reinforcement: when babies cry, caregivers provide food and comfort, acting as negative reinforcement by removing discomfort.
57
[🍼 Negative Reinforcement] In operant conditioning, how is the baby’s crying reinforced?
The baby learns that crying brings food or attention, which reduces discomfort (negative reinforcement).
58
[🎁 Positive Reinforcement] How is the caregiver reinforced in operant conditioning?
The caregiver feels rewarded (positive reinforcement) when the baby's distress stops after caregiving.
59
[⚡ Drive Reduction] What is drive reduction theory in attachment?
Hunger creates discomfort, which the caregiver removes by feeding the baby, reducing the drive and reinforcing attachment.
60
[📉 Overfeeding Criticism] ❌ Why is the learning theory of attachment criticised?
It overemphasises feeding as the basis of attachment, but research (e.g. Harlow) shows comfort is more important.
61
[🚫 Feeding ≠ Attachment] ❌ What did Schaffer & Emerson find that contradicts learning theory?
Babies often formed attachments with caregivers who were not the feeders but were most responsive.
62
[👍 Behaviourist Value] ✅ What is a strength of learning theory?
It has face validity and is supported by behaviourist principles used in other areas of learning.
63
[🐒 Harlow Rebuttal] ❌ Why does Harlow’s study challenge learning theory?
Monkeys preferred cloth mothers without food, showing comfort > feeding in attachment.
64
[🧲 Monotropy] What is Bowlby’s monotropic theory of attachment?
Bowlby argued that infants have an innate tendency to form a primary attachment with one main caregiver for survival.
65
[👩 Monotropy Focus] What does monotropy mean?
The idea that one relationship (usually with the mother) is more important than all others.
66
[⏳ Critical Period] What is the critical period in Bowlby’s theory?
The first 2.5 years of life when an attachment must form or it will be more difficult to form one later.
67
[🧠 IWM] What is the internal working model?
A mental blueprint of relationships based on early attachment that influences future emotional bonds.
68
[🔗 Continuity] What is the continuity hypothesis?
Bowlby’s belief that early attachments form the basis for emotional and social development later in life.
69
[🧬 Evolutionary Basis] ✅ What biological support exists for Bowlby’s theory?
New-borns show social releasers like crying and smiling, which cause caregiving responses.
70
[👨👩👧👦 Multiple Attachments] ❌ What is a criticism of monotropy?
Some research (e.g. Schaffer & Emerson) shows multiple attachments form, not just one primary bond.
71
[❤️ IWM Evidence] ✅ What is a strength of the internal working model?
Studies (e.g. Hazan & Shaver) found that childhood attachment patterns predict adult romantic behaviour.
72
[⚖️ Mother Blame] ❌ Why is Bowlby’s theory seen as socially sensitive?
It pressures mothers to stay at home, potentially making them feel guilty for working or separating.
73
[🎯 Aim] What was the aim of Ainsworth’s Strange Situation?
To assess the quality of attachment between infants and caregivers in a controlled observation.
74
[🔬 Procedure] What was the procedure of Ainsworth’s Strange Situation?
Infants (12–18 months) were observed in a lab through 8 episodes involving separation, reunion, and the presence of a stranger.
75
[🔒 Attachment Types] What are the three attachment types identified by Ainsworth?
Secure, Insecure-Avoidant, Insecure-Resistant.
76
[✅ Secure] What characterises secure attachment?
Child is distressed when caregiver leaves, comforted on return, explores freely with safe base behaviour.
77
[❌ Avoidant] What characterises insecure-avoidant attachment?
Child avoids caregiver, shows little distress on separation, does not seek comfort upon return.
78
[⚠️ Resistant] What characterises insecure-resistant attachment?
Child is very distressed at separation, resists comfort at reunion, and shows clingy behaviour.
79
[🧪 Reliability] ✅ What is one strength of Ainsworth’s Strange Situation?
High reliability and replicability due to controlled lab setting and standardised procedure.
80
[🏠 Ecological Validity] ❌ What is a limitation of the Strange Situation in terms of validity?
Lacks ecological validity as it is an artificial lab environment and may not reflect real-life behaviour.
81
[🌍 Cultural Bias] ❌ What is a cultural limitation of Ainsworth’s research?
It may be culturally biased toward Western norms, as behaviour may differ in collectivist societies.
82
[👶 Practical App] ✅ How has Ainsworth’s work contributed to childcare?
It improved understanding of secure attachment, helping to inform parenting and childcare practices.
83
[🌍 Aim] What was the aim of Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg (1988)?
To investigate cultural variations in attachment using meta-analysis of studies using the Strange Situation.
84
[📊 Procedure] What was the procedure of Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg’s study?
They conducted a meta-analysis of 32 studies across 8 countries involving over 2,000 children.
85
[🔎 Findings] What were the findings of Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg (1988)?
Secure attachment was the most common in all countries; Japan had high resistant, Germany had high avoidant types.
86
[🧠 Conclusion] What did Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg conclude?
There are universal attachment patterns, but cultural practices can influence attachment type distribution.
87
[🇮🇹 Aim] What was the aim of Simonelli et al. (2006)?
To investigate attachment types in Italian children to see if they matched previous studies.
88
[🔍 Procedure] What was the procedure of Simonelli’s study?
Used the Strange Situation on 76 Italian 1-year-olds from varied backgrounds.
89
[📉 Findings] What were Simonelli’s findings?
50% were secure, 36% avoidant—lower secure rates than expected, possibly due to more working mothers.
90
[💬 Conclusion] What did Simonelli et al. conclude?
Attachment types vary with changing cultural and social norms, such as increased use of childcare.
91
[🧮 Strength] ✅ What is a strength of cultural research in attachment?
Large sample sizes increase internal validity and generalisability.
92
[⚖️ Ethnocentrism] ❌ What is a criticism of using the Strange Situation cross-culturally?
It is ethnocentric—based on Western norms, which may not be suitable for other cultures.
93
[🚫 Misinterpretation] ❌ Why might cultural attachment research lack validity?
Different parenting practices in each country mean behaviours may be misinterpreted.
94
[💔 Core Theory] What is Bowlby’s theory of maternal deprivation?
It suggests that prolonged separation from a mother figure in early life can cause long-term cognitive, emotional, and social damage.
95
[⏳ Critical Period] What is the critical period in Bowlby’s maternal deprivation theory?
The first 2.5 years of life, during which deprivation is most harmful.
96
[⚠️ Effects] What are the possible effects of maternal deprivation?
Low IQ, affectionless psychopathy, and poor relationships later in life.
97
[🔍 Aim] What was the aim of Bowlby’s 44 thieves study?
To examine the link between maternal deprivation and affectionless psychopathy.
98
[🧪 Procedure] What was the procedure of the 44 thieves study?
Bowlby interviewed 44 delinquent teens and their families to assess signs of affectionless psychopathy and early separation.
99
[📉 Findings] What did Bowlby find in the 44 thieves study?
14 of the 44 were affectionless psychopaths, 12 of whom had experienced prolonged separation from mothers.
100
[🧠 Conclusion] What did Bowlby conclude from the 44 thieves study?
There is a strong link between maternal deprivation and affectionless psychopathy.
101
[🏥 Application] ✅ What is one strength of Bowlby’s theory?
Real-world applications in improving childcare and adoption policies.
102
[🕰️ Memory Bias] ❌ What is one limitation of the 44 thieves study?
It relies on retrospective data, which may be inaccurate and biased.
103
[📊 Contradiction] ❌ How did Lewis challenge Bowlby’s findings?
She replicated the study with 500 children and found no link between separation and criminality.
104
[🔄 Deprivation vs Privation] ❌ How can we criticise the maternal deprivation theory in terms of deprivation vs. privation?
Rutter argued Bowlby confused deprivation (loss of attachment) with privation (never formed one).
105
[🏚️ Institutionalisation] What is institutionalisation in the context of attachment?
The effects of growing up in an institution like an orphanage, often involving delayed emotional and social development.
106
[🎯 ERA Aim] What was the aim of Rutter’s ERA study?
To investigate the long-term effects of institutionalisation and whether good care can make up for early privation.
107
[🧪 ERA Procedure] What was the procedure of Rutter’s study?
165 Romanian orphans adopted in the UK were assessed at ages 4, 6, 11, and 15. They were compared to a control group of UK adoptees.
108
[📉 ERA Findings] What were the findings of Rutter’s ERA study?
Children adopted before 6 months showed normal development. Those adopted after 6 months had low IQs and showed disinhibited attachment.
109
[🧠 ERA Conclusion] What did Rutter conclude?
Early institutionalisation can cause long-term effects, but effects are less severe if adoption occurs early.
110
[🧭 Zeanah Aim] What was the aim of Zeanah et al.’s study?
To investigate attachment in children who had spent most of their lives in institutions.
111
[🧬 Zeanah Procedure] What was the procedure of Zeanah’s study?
Assessed 95 institutionalised children aged 12–31 months using the Strange Situation. Compared to a control group.
112
[📊 Zeanah Findings] What were the findings of Zeanah’s study?
Only 19% of the institutional group were securely attached; 65% were disorganised. Control group had 74% secure.
113
[🧾 Zeanah Conclusion] What did Zeanah conclude?
Institutional care is linked with disorganised and insecure attachment styles.
114
[🏥 Real-world Use] ✅ What is one strength of Romanian orphan studies?
Practical applications have improved orphanage care (e.g. key workers).
115
[📆 High Validity] ✅ Why are these studies considered highly valid?
They involve longitudinal and well-controlled research.
116
[⚠️ Low Generalisability] ❌ What is a limitation of Romanian orphan studies?
The conditions were unusually poor, so findings may not generalise to all institutions.
117
[🚪 Attrition Risk] ❌ Why is there a risk of attrition in longitudinal orphan studies?
Participants may drop out over time, affecting the validity of long-term conclusions.
118
[🧠 IWM] What is the internal working model?
A mental framework formed from early attachments, guiding future relationships and expectations.
119
[👧 Childhood Relationships] How do early attachments influence childhood relationships?
Securely attached children tend to have better peer relationships; insecurely attached children may struggle socially.
120
[❤️ Adult Relationships] How do early attachments influence adult relationships?
Early attachments shape adult romantic patterns, with secure types having trusting relationships and insecure types facing issues.
121
[💌 Aim] What was the aim of Hazan and Shaver’s study?
To explore the link between childhood attachment type and adult romantic relationships.
122
[📰 Procedure] What was the procedure of Hazan and Shaver’s Love Quiz?
A questionnaire in a newspaper assessed childhood attachment, current love experiences, and attitudes toward love.
123
[📊 Findings] What did Hazan and Shaver find?
Securely attached adults were more likely to have long-lasting, trusting relationships. Avoidant types feared intimacy.
124
[🧠 Conclusion] What did they conclude?
Childhood attachment types predict adult romantic behaviour, supporting the internal working model theory.
125
[🧰 Practical Application] ✅ What is one strength of this research?
It highlights the importance of early emotional care and provides insight into relationship counselling.
126
[🕰️ Recall Bias] ❌ What is one limitation of Hazan & Shaver’s study?
It uses self-report and retrospective data, which may be inaccurate or biased.
127
[🧬 Other Influences] ❌ Why might early attachment not fully determine later relationships?
Other factors like life experiences and personality also affect relationships.
