Attachment Flashcards
(41 cards)
1
Q
Attachment
A
An emotional bond between two people usually a primary caregiver and child
2
Q
Reciprocal Relationship
A
A shared relationship- goes two ways, mutual
3
Q
Reciprocity
A
When infant responds to actions of another person + adult responds to actions of infant
This strengthens bond
4
Q
Interactional Synchrony (IS)
A
Infant mirrors and imitates another person
Sustains communication, is innate + strengthens bond
5
Q
Meltzoff + Moore: caregiver-infant interactions
A
- aim: examine IS
- method: controlled observation, dummy placed in infants mouth (prevents response) followed by display of adult model who did 1 of 3 gestures/expressions
- then dummy removed + reaction filmed > independent researcher had to match child actions to adult
- results: correlation between infant behaviour+adult actions > interactional synchrony
- Interactional synchrony strengthens attachment + is innate as children as young as 3 days could imitate so could not have been learnt.
6
Q
Evaluation of caregiver infant interactions
A
- obs may not mean much, infants move around all the time this doesnt necessarily exhibit a special bond as they may not be consciously or deliberately trying to imitate.
- Isabella et Al observed 30 mothers + infants > assessed level of synchrony + quality of attachment > found high synchrony was associated with quality attachment. Suggests not all infants are as involved in IS so may not be innate.
- may lack inter observer reliability as obs can be interpreted differently by different observers. Improve by getting several observers to oversee + behaviour cat
- controlled obs wont be impacted by demand characteristics bc infants are unable to display them, they’re too young.
7
Q
Schaffers stages
A
Asocial(0-6weeks):forms bonds. Behaviour to human and inanimate objects are similar, has preferences to some Indiscriminate(2-7mnths):Prefers ppl over objects, no stranger+separation anx, treats everyone same but prefers familiar adults. Specific attach(7+mnths):Begins separation+stranger anx specific attachments to who interacts most (primary attachment figure) Multiple att(1yr):Multiple att after first one, shows att behaviour to everyone + forms secondary attachments.
8
Q
Key Study: Schaffer+Emerson
A
-aim:examine formation of early attachments
-method:60 babies from glasgow working class fam aged 5-23 weeks. Researcher observed babies in their home every month for first year+again at 18mnths. Also interviewed mother about anxiety
-Results:at 50% of 5-7 months old showed sep anx > specific attachment + indiscriminate in other 50%
by 9 months, 80% had specific attachments+ 30% had multiple attachment
-Conc:supports schaffers stages
9
Q
Evaluation of Schaffer+Emerson
A
- Culture bias as only in glasgow, limited sample and cannot be generalised to wider variations
- Good external validity as carried out in homes, presence of researcher is less impactful, reduces researcher bias.
- Longitudinal design: High internal validity because the same children were used over a long period + avoided confounding + participant variables.
10
Q
Evaluation of Schaffer stages
A
- Asocial stage cant be observed:Infants are immobile and make general hand gestures, this cant be seen as meaningful + relied on as evidence
- Conflicting ideas:Ppl who work in cultural contexts where multiple attachment is the norm argue multiple attach can happen at the start. Mainly in collectivist cultures because families work together to raise kids eg child rearing and feeding. (ijzhendoorn)
- Multiple attachments are hard to assess:Bc an infant cries when someone leaves a room doesn’t mean they’re bonded to that person.
11
Q
Role of the father
A
- Men cant attach as they lack oestrogen thus dont have the caring nature to attach like women(biologically unable + deterministic)
- Fathers are more of a playmate than a carer
- Fathers can show sensitive responsiveness and attach if willing
12
Q
Evaluation on role of father
A
- Geigers observation showed fathers interactions are more fun+exciting and mothers more caring + nurturing. This suggests father’s have a role as a playmate rather than a carer.
- Hardy found males were less able to detect infant distress as they’re biologically unable due to lack of oestrogen.
- Belsky et al says men who have more marital intimacy are more likely to attach if willing as males who reported higher marital intimacy had secure father-infant attachment.
13
Q
Learning Theory
A
- suggest that attachment is a set of learnt behaviors.
- Learns to attach through the provision of food. Infant attach to whoever feeds them. Supports nurture argument
- Learns to attach through reinforcement
14
Q
Classical conditioning
A
-Learns to attach through the provision of food. Infant attach to who feeds it, evolution.
-Associates food with feeder and feels same comfort from the feeder as the comfort food gives.
-UCS=food, UCR=comfort,NS-caregiver.
After conditioning, CS= caregiver and CR= same comfort when just seeing the feeder = attachment
15
Q
Operant conditioning
A
- Certain behaviours (e.g., crying, smiling) bring desirable responses from others (e.g., attention, comfort)
- Learn to repeat to get positive/negative reinforcement
16
Q
Evaluation of learning theory
A
- Schaffer+Emersons study (glasgow babies), showed babies attached depending on responsiveness not food
- Harlow+Harlow (rhesus monkeys) found monkeys preferred cloth mother over wired mother with food, so comfort is more significant (against)
- Lorenz found geese maintained attachment with those who they imprinted on regardless of who fed them.
- Learning theory has support that classical cond is real, little albert was conditioned with a phobia, suggests infants can attach through association
- Bowlbys nature theory is more credible and scientific thus in line with psychology more than learning theory.
17
Q
Key Study: Lorenz
A
-Aim:see whether imprinting is innate or learnt+impacts
-Procedure:Randomly divided goose eggs, half hatched with mother in natural environment(followed mother)
Other half hatched in incubator+first image seen was lorenz(followed lorenz). Mixed them up and geese naturally gravitated towards first object seen
-Findings: experimental group=Lorenz, control group=mother, identified imprinting, must attach in critical period which could be a few hours after birth or would not attach.
-Conc: suggests attachment in innate.
-Sexual imprinting: whoever the geese imprinted on would impact who they would mate with. The geese who imprinted on Lorenz would prefer humans to other birds.
18
Q
Imprinting
A
Imprinting is an inherited tendency that newborn animals exhibit to respond to their environment.
19
Q
Evaluation of Lorenz
A
- Issue of animal extrapolation:cant be generalised to humans, mammalian system differs to birds, eg mammalian mothers show more emotional attachment to infants than birds. Study can support innate attachment but needs more research for humans
- Reliable:supporting evidence from Guilton, found chicks imprint on rubber gloves that fed them, tried to mate with them but as they grew they mated with other species, the impact of imprinting on mating behaviour is not as permanent as Lorenz believed.
- Lorenz’s study has provided a basis for others like Bowlby to do further research on innate attachment and critical period, this has been applied to real life
20
Q
Key study: Harlow+Harlow
A
- Aim:can newborn rhesus monkeys survive in a cage alone if given soft toy, eg cloth, to attach to
- Procedure: Reared 16 babies with 2 wire mothers, 1, plain wire mother dispersed milk, 2 wire mother in cloth which did not disperse milk.
- Findings:Monkeys preferred soft wire mother rather than the wire mother which gave food because it gave contact comfort when frightened.
- Maternally deprived of real mothers: impact > with wire mother=most dysfunctional, more aggressive, emotionless, bred less.Reared with soft toy didnt develop normally either but better than those w/ wire. Some were unskilled as mothers + even attacked and killed their young in cases.
- Conc: Criticial period is 90 days, no attachment leads to irreversible effects of deprivation and attachment cant be formed after. Have innate drive for contact comfort, emotional needs more important than food
21
Q
Evaluation of Harlow
A
- High internal validity: lab condition controlled all aspects measured what he aimed to measure but lab condition means it lacks ecological validity + cant be generalised alongside issue of animal extrapolation
- Theoretical value: This research provided a basis for development of other research + theory of attachment on humans, eg Bowlby. Important in showing attachment isnt due to being fed + attachment impacts social development in later life. (bowlby builds on this)
- Real life app: Howe found this helped social workers understand risk factors in child abuse+neglect so interventions are in place to prevent it. Also improved treatment of captive monkeys so breeding programmes have been made.
- Unethical: High distress caused to monkeys+ damaged for life, had an inability to mate and neglected offspring even killing them.Fails to protect monkeys from harm
22
Q
Bowlby’s Montropic Theory
A
- Attachment is innate+must occur in critical period of 2 yrs or else negative effects
- Monotropy- attach to one person in a unique way, diff to others (usually the mother)
- Law of accumulated sep-sep adds up+effects child negatively (safest dose is zero dose)
- Law of continuity-Care must be predictable and constant for good quality attachment
- Internal working model-mental representation of relationship with caregiver which effects future relationships because it is a model for how those relationships will be. Can impact their parenting ability.
- Social releasers-innate cute behaviours (eg: smiling, cooing) to trigger+ activate adult attachment system so loving + caring response given
23
Q
Bowlby Monotropic theory evaluation
A
- Real life app:parents can stay with kids in hospitals + skin to skin when born but is socially sensitive research + monotropy encourages mothers to stay home + justifies discrimination, this is an ethical implication.
- Hazen+Shaver love quiz: supports IWM as strong correlation between attachment type+later relationships
- Monotrop ev: Schaffer+Emerson dont support Bowlby. Found that some babies could form multiple attachments at the same time. Suess et al found that although attachment to the mother is important in showing sequence in later relationships, it does not mean it is unique or of different quality, it is just stronger att.
- Social releasers ev: Brazelton et Al supports Bowlby. Brazelton did an experiment where primary caregivers were told to ignore the infants social releasers, this led to a distress for a short time but then they would lie motionless. Shows that social releasers elicit responses to help attachment.
- IWM ev: Bailey et Al tested 99 mothers w/ 1 yr old children based on relationships with their own mother + observed interactions. Found that mothers who had a poor attachment to their own mother were classed as having a poor att with their child > supports IWM.
24
Q
Ainsworth Strange Situation
A
- Experiment to find out attachment type as secure, insecure avoidant or insecure resistant > shows quality of attachment.
-9-16 month olds used + controlled obs using 2 way mirror.
Procedure: 7 parts each 3 mins.
1.Child encouraged to explore > test exploration
2.Stranger enters+interacts with child/stranger anx
3.Caregiver leaves/Sep anx + stranger anx
4.Caregiver returns+stranger leaves/reunion
5.Caregiver leaves/sep anx
6.Stranger returns/stranger anx
7.Caregiver returns/Reunion
Findings: Secure 66%, insecure avoidant 12% insecure resistant 22%
25
3 types of attachment SS:
Secure/TypeB: Slight stranger+sep anx, readily comforted by parent when reunited, are proximity seekng and explores using mother as safe base> most common
Insecure resistant/TypeC: Low exploration, high stranger+sep anx, upset with mum when reunited and more proximity seeking than others.
Insecure avoidant/TypeA:Unbothered of stranger+when mum leaves+ explores freely without safe base + are not proximity seeking.
26
Proximity seeking
- Helps show attachment type
| - Is when child seeks comfort+care from caregiver
27
Exploration+safe base
Secure- explores using mother as safe base
Insecure A- explores without safe base
Insecure R- doesnt explore much
28
Evaluation of strange situation
High predictive validity: secure att babies are predicted to go on to have greater success + successful relationships while insecure r are likely to be bullied in later life + adult mental health issues.
- High inter rater reliability- The att type of a child is not just based on who observes them but is there actual att type as it universally agreed often by observers. Bick et Al used trained observers in strange sit who found 94% agreement which shows theres not much bias in observation due to behaviour cat.
- Sample was middle class+white american mothers as they were free to do the study as they didnt work. This cant be generalised to others who may not be included in the categories suggested
- Test is imposed etic as Ainsworth tried to generalise it to other cultures but evidence suggests att sequences differ in other collectivist cultures.
29
Cultural Variations Ijzendoorn
-Ijzendoorn conducted meta analysis on 32 studies conducted in 8 countries on type A,B,C att
-1,990 children studies > pop validity
Findings: Wide variations between att types in studies
-All countries, secure att was most common 75% in uk to 50% in china, Insecure R least common 3% in UK +30% in Israel
-Insecure A most common in germany+least in Japan
-Variations between results of studies in same countries=greater than between different countries
-Secure att is most common globally, however patterns are impacted by cultural practices.
30
Cultural variations Korea
-Jin et al conducted study to compare result to other countries
-87 children used in strange situation.
Findings:Overall secure+insecure babies were similar to most countries.
-Most insecurely attached kids were resistant with only one being avoidant. This is like Japan bc their child rearing is similar. The way you raise ur child impacts attachment type.
31
Evaluation of cultural variation
- Samples are unrepresentative- comparisons made between countries + not cultures within country, theres several cultures so causes wider variation. Within each country, there are many cultures which impact att due to different child rearing practices. Ijzendoorn + Sagi found in Tokyo that distribution of att type were similar to western cultures. But more rural areas in tokyo over represented insecure resistant. > comparison between countries arent as meaningful, cultural characteristics are
- Assessment method biased: Ainsworth (american) developed SS based on bowlbys theory(british), this may be an imposed etic as it came from individualist culture.eg lack of sep anx is seen bad in UK but Germany see it as independant+good thus not insecure att.
- Lacks internal validity as Kagen suggests she measures temperament not att. Rather than measuring level of att she measures anxiety in kids.
- Large samples = population validity.
32
Bowlbys theory of maternal deprivation
-If a child doesn't have continual presence of mother they will be effected emotionally+intellectually. This can be caused by separation
-Maternal dep- child is deprived of element of care.
Brief separation is insignificant for development.
-If separated + has no suitable substitute carer in critical period of 2 years, psychological damage is inevitable because the child will be emotionally deprived.
-Intellectual development: maternal dep leads lower IQ due to delayed intellectual dev eg Goldfarb found lower IQ in kids in institutions compared to the fostered
-Emotional development: maternal dep can lead to affectionless psychopathy which is characterised by lack of guilt or lack of strong emotion for others, preventing growth of relationships+criminality is likely because they dont feel remorse for victims.
33
Affectionless Psychopathy
-People who cant show remorse, concern or caring behaviours for others
34
Bowlby 44 thieves study
-Examined links between affectionless psychopathy+maternal dep
-sample was 44 teen delinquents accused of stealing+control group of 44 teens with emotional prob to see how often maternal dep occurs to those who arent thieves
-Interviewed for signs of affectionless psych+families interviewed to see if there was prolonged sep from mother.
Results:14/44 thieves were affectionless psych, 12 of them had prolonged sep. In control group 2/44 had maternal dep but 0/44 were affectionless psych
-Conc:Deprivation is linked to affectionless psych
35
Evaluation Bowlby's Theory of maternal deprivation
- Supporting evidence may be poor+lack internal validity:suggests maternal deprivation leads to affectionless psych based on prior research, many of which were WW2 orphans but may have actually been caused by other traumatic instances as they were deprived of many aspects of care. Their poor development may not have been due to mat dep but other things. Researcher bias is likely because Bowlby carried out the 44 thieves exp + may have interpreted it in a way to prove his theory.
- Counter-evidence:Lewis found on her larger scale partial study of 500 young ppl, those with maternal dep didnt suffer criminality or difficulty in relationships. Poor intellectual and emotional dev may be due to other factors.
- Critical period=sensitive period: Bowlby believed critical period meant no att in that time would leave irreversible damage. But Koluchova proved this wrong as found in twins who were deprived till 7 by being locked in a cupboard were recovered with good care after by two loving parents. > effects aren't irreversible.
36
2 effects of institutionalisation
- Disinhibited attachment:equally as friendly to strangers + to carers. Rutter says this is bc they adapt to having lots of carers+struggle to make secure att
- Mental retardation:Impact on intellectual development.showed in Rutters study. If adopted before 6 months, kids can catch up to others
37
Romanian Orphanage Study, Rutter
Aim:to what extent can good care recover early experience in institutions
Proc:Natural exp, leader in Romania made women have 5 kids each but often couldnt afford it so they were institutionalised in poor conditions (mat dep)
followed 165 romanian orphans who were adopted in uk. Phys,cog+emotional dev assessed at ages 4,6,11,15. Control group observed, 52 brit adoptees
Findings:Rom orphans showed delayed intellectual dev at first+majority undernourished. By 11 they showed diff signs of recovery depending on time of adoption, mean IQ of those adopted before 6 months old had (102) higher IQ than, those between 6 months+2 years was 86+after 2 was 77. Difference remained at 16
Adopted after 6 months were clingy+attention seeking
38
Evaluation Romanian Orphanage study
- Real life app: Research has brought to light improvements needed in childrens care in institutions which are now used. Eg: only give key workers (1/2) carers to avoid disinhibited att + have normal att so they develop like others.
- Could be imposed etic: The way romanian orphanages provide care differs to the UK so it cant be generalised(care was worse). Situational variables were particularly different to any other so may not be generalised overall as conditions were so bad with minimal intellectual stimulation.
- High internal validity compared to other studies where there were confounding variables of several traumas impacting development like bereavement, but rutters study doesnt have this as their issues in development were due to institutionalisation solely in most cases.
39
Influence of early attachment on adult relationships
- Internal Working Model:Bowlby says the child forms a mental representation of relationship acting as a template for other relationships.
- Adult relationship: Secure='normal' relationship, insecure A=doesn't need rel, insecure r=needs high intensity rel (clingy) > Hazen + Shaver love quiz.
- Later child relationships: Myron-Wilson + Smith found in questionaires of 196 kids in London that insecure A are likely to be victims of bullying+insecure R are the bullies, secure had good friendships
40
Hazen+Shaver Love Quiz study
Aim:to see if early attachment+type impacts later relationships
Proc:Published love quiz in American newspaper receiving 620 replies. 3 sections in quiz; tested current/important relationships, general love experiences+statements which describe their feelings
Findings:56%secure, 25% insecure A, 19% insecure R
Secure att had loving long lasting relationships, insecure A had jealous traits+fear of intimacy
Conc: Patterns of att reflected in romantic relationships
41
Evaluation of influence of early attachment
-Evidence on continuity is mixed: McCarthy supports IWM+continuity (studied 40 women found att type effects adult relationship) BUT Zimmerman assessed infant att type + adolescent att to parents which had low correlation, suggesting att in childhood doesnt reflect later relationships. We cannot be sure what evidence to rely on.
-Lack of validity: most studying infant-parent att use interviews+questionnaires as a means to understand impact of early att on later life, but this is inaccurate as they rely on honesty of ppt who may have bad recollection or show social desirability > results may not be entirely true.
-Att type doesnt CAUSE impact: alternative approaches say third factors such as parenting style+temperament impact adult relationships
-Influence of early att is probalistic: Bowlby exaggerates
significance of the influence of early att, clarke+clarke say its probalistic, bowlby is too negative, they arent doomed just at higher risk of having issues in relationships but can still form good relationships
