Attachment Flashcards
(31 cards)
Define attachment
Close emotional relationship between two entities.
Characterized by mutual affection and desire to maintain close proximity.
Describe the history of attachment theory
- Love was not seen as appropriate for study.
- Love as a byproduct of primary drives.
Bowlby and Harlow sought to change this.
Harlow (1958) Love or Hunger
- Study using monkeys who were raised with two mothers 1 wire, 1 cloth.
- Half fed from wire monkey, other half from cloth
- Regardless of who dispensed the food, stayed with the cloth mother. Psychological comfort most preferred.
- Sensitive response and security of caregiver more important than food.
Harlow (1958) Monster Mother
- Removed physical comfort by the mother shaking, blasting air, buckaroo or spiked.
- Clung tight to mother
Attachment formed because love is a primary drive. Resistant.
Harlow (1958) Isolation Experiment
- Isolation showed psychological disturbance behaviours such as blank staring and self-mutilation.
- Less than 6m of isolation - Some recovery
- More than 6m of recovery - Not reversible
- Critical period
- Suffering from social deprivation rather than maternal deprivation
What are the stages of stress defined by Bowlby
Short-term separation from an attachment figure leads to distress.
Protest Phase - Crying, resist strangers
Phase of Despair - Unresponsive to toys and caregivers. Withdraw. Mourning loss.
Detachment Phase - Has processed loss. Renewed interest in other caregivers. Reject caregiver on return.
Extremely prolonged contact can lead to a permanent withdrawal from relationships.
Ainsworth & Bell (1970) Strange Situation
- Less extreme, natural.
- 1-2 yr olds
- Parent and baby play. Stranger enters and tries to interact. Parent then leaves. Parent returns and offers comfort if upset, then stranger leaves and parent. Stranger enters again and then parent.
Problems
- Culture - Situation may not be strange in all cultures
- Ethics
What were the attachment types that Ainsworth and Bell (1970) developed?
Secure Attachment: 60% Explores. Upset when parent leaves, happy to see return.
Resistant Attachment: 10% Wary of stranger. Very upset when parent leaves. Angry when returns, resists comfort.
Avoidant Attachment: 20% Shows little distress when parent leaves and little reaction when returns
Problem - % don’t add up
- Differs culturally
Main & Solomon (1990)
Accounted for remaining 10& in Ainsworth’s attachment types.
Disorganised attachment - Mixture of insecure attachment, showing distress at loss of comfort and fear on return.
Schaffer & Emerson (1964)
- Study reaction to separation to find out what age attachment occurs
- Measured strength of attachment by separation anxiety and stranger anxiety.
Asocial Phase - 0-6 weeks. Crying not directed. Attachments made with anyone.
Indiscriminate Attachments - 6 weeks to 7m. Seeks attachment from everyone, but preference for regular caregivers.
Specific Attachment - 7-9m. Wary of strangers. Primarily attached to caregiver. Distress is separated.
Multiple Attachment. Weeks after first attachment. Show protests.
De Wolff & Van Ijzendoor (1997)
- Meta-analysis
- Aspects of caregiving that predict secure attachment include sensitivity, positive attitude, synchrony, mutuality, support, and stimulation
- Need to treat infant as communicative partner.
Isabella & Belsky (1991)
- Studied different synchrony levels between attachment types (3-9m)
- High attachment = High synchronous behaviour
- Resistant = Sometimes positive and sometimes negative, asynchronous exchanges
- Avoidant = Asynchronous. Mother uninvolved.
Teti et al. (1995)
- Depressed mothers
- Clinical disturbances in communication associated with clinical disturbances in attachment.
- 20% secure attachments in depressed mothers. More signs of insecure attachment.
Thomas & Chess (1977)
- Diff types of temperament might change how infants react in strange situation.
- Easy Temp: 40%
- Difficult: 10% Neg responses
- Slow to warm up: 15% Mild responses
- 35% a mixture
- Match up with attachment styles?
Kochanska (1998)
- 13-15m
- High and Low fearfulness temperament may contribute to how children react to sensitive or unresponsive caregiving
- Maternal responsiveness and quality of caregiving predicted attachment style
- Fearfulness predicted insecure attachment
Van den Boom (1994)
- 6m irritable infants
- Sensitivity training to parents
- Those who received training had infants who were securely attached at 12m.
Van Izendoorn & Kroonenberg (1988)
- Comparing cultures and attachment styles. USA and Japan. Using strange situation at 12m.
- Similar levels of secure attachment (71%, 68%)
- Different insecure attachment.
- USA resistant = 12%
- USA avoidant = 17%
- Japan resistant = 32%
- Japan avoidant = 0%
- Could be bc SS not strange in US.
Schmitt et al. (2004)
- Questionnaires distributed across diff cultures
- National rates of resistant attachment correlated negatively with national rates of individualism
- Depending on culture, attachment styles are coping styles.
- Self independent - Remove self from relationships for self-esteem
- Self-interdependent - Work at relationships more
Verschueren, Marcoen & Schoefs (1996)
- 4-5yr olds puppets measure self-esteem
- Story completion task
- Positive models of relationships = positive/high self-esstem
Schneider et al. (2001)
Attachment security is associated with social withdrawal, aggression, and leadership
Szewczyk-Sokolowski et al. (2005)
- Mothers ratings of popularity and temperament
- Attachment security and temperament are positively and independently correlated with peer popularity
Belsky et al. (1996)
- Measured attachment at 12m using SS and 3yrs using puppet show.
- Securely attached children are more likely to recall more positive events
- Insecurely attached children are more likely to recall more negative events
Kochanska (2001)
- Assessed attachment at 14m and 3yrs.
- Securely attached show less fear and anger. More joy. Emotional bias for positive events/
- Avoidant show anger the most
- Resistant show fear.
Simpson et al. (2007)
- Longitudinal study from infancy to 20yrs
- Secure attachment predicts social competence, secure friendships, positive daily experiences in adult romantic relationship
