Attachment studies / evaluation Flashcards
(24 cards)
Learning Theory of Attachment (Dollard & Miller, 1950) aim
To explain attachment as a learned behaviour acquired through classical and operant conditioning
Dollar and Miller (1950) procedure
Classical conditioning: The infant associates the caregiver (NS) with food (UCS) which produces pleasure (UCS). Over time, the caregiver becomes a CS eliciting pleasure (CR).
Operant conditioning: The infant’s crying is reinforced by the caregiver’s response (e.g., feeding), reducing discomfort and increasing the likelihood of attachment behaviours.
Dollar and Miller (1950) strengths
Emphasizes the role of learning and environment; explains some aspects of attachment.
Dollar and Miller (1950)
Contradicted by evidence showing attachment forms before feeding (e.g., Harlow’s monkeys); ignores innate biological factors and emotional aspects of attachment
Bowlby’s Monotropic Theory (1958, 1969) aim
To explain attachment as an innate, evolutionary process crucial for survival.
Bowlby’s Monotropic Theory (1958, 1969)
Bowlby proposed that infants have innate attachment behaviours (e.g., crying) that promote proximity to a primary caregiver . He introduced key concepts: monotropy, critical period and IWM.
Bowlby’s Monotropic Theory (1958, 1969) strengths
Supported by research on attachment continuity (e.g., Minnesota study) and internal working model effects on adult relationships (Hazan & Shaver). Explains the importance of early bonds
Bowlby’s Monotropic Theory (1958, 1969) limitations
Critical period may be less rigid than proposed; monotropy concept is debated as infants can form multiple attachments; some argue the theory is reductionist and culturally biased
Ainsworth’s Strange Situation (1971, 1978) aim
To identify different types of infant attachment by observing behaviour in a controlled setting.
Ainsworth’s Strange Situation (1971, 1978) procedure
Infants aged 12-18 months were observed through a series of episodes involving separations and reunions with the caregiver and introduction to a stranger. Behaviours such as proximity seeking, exploration, stranger anxiety, and reunion behaviour were recorded.
Ainsworth’s Strange Situation (1971, 1978) strengths
High predictive validity for later social and emotional outcomes; widely replicated.
Ainsworth’s Strange Situation (1971, 1978) limitations
May be culturally biased, some infants do not fit neatly into categories; ethical concerns about stress caused to infants
Lorenz (1935) aim
To investigate imprinting as a form of attachment in animals.
Lorenz (1935) procedure
Lorenz divided goose eggs; half hatched with their mother, half hatched in an incubator with Lorenz as the first moving object seen
Lorenz (1935) strengths
Demonstrated biological basis of attachment; critical period concept.
Lorenz (1935) limitations
Generalising from animals to humans is problematic; human attachment is more complex
Harlow (1958) aim
To investigate the importance of contact comfort in attachment
Harlow (1958) procedure
Infant rhesus monkeys were given a choice between a wire mother that provided food and a cloth mother that provided comfort.
Harlow (1958) strengths
Challenged learning theory; highlighted emotional basis of attachment
Harlow (1958) limitations
Ethical issues due to distress caused; animal study limits direct application to humans
Influence of early attachment on later relationships aim
To explore how early attachment affects childhood friendships and adult relationships.
Influence of early attachment on later relationships procedure
Longitudinal studies and correlational research (e.g., Hazan & Shaver’s love quiz) examined links between early attachment and later social competence or romantic relationships.
Influence of early attachment strengths
Supported by extensive research; explains continuity in behaviour.
Influence of early attachment limitations
Correlational data cannot prove causation, some securely attached individuals have poor later relationships and vice versa
