Attachments - mark scheme Flashcards
(17 cards)
Caregiver-infant interactions: Evaluations Advangtages
- Meltzoff and Moore (1977)
- Condon and Sander (1974)
‐ Many studies use multiple observers, blind to the true aims of the experiment to provide inter-rater reliability or use complex canara systems to document and slow own micro-sequences of interactions between caregivers and infants, indicating high internal validity.
Meltzoff and Moore study
An experimented displayed facial gestures such as sticking their tongue out to 12-21 day old infants. Recordings of the infants responses were rated by people blind to the experiment. It was found that infants responses matched the experimenters facial expressions, suggesting the ability to observe and reciprocate through imitation is present from an early age
Condon and Sander experiment
They video taped interactions between adults and neonates focusing on the movements of the neonates in response to adult speech. Using a detailed frame by frame analysis of the videos, they found evidence of interaction al synchrony between the neonates movements and the rhythmic patterns of the adults speech. These results suggest even from birth, humans have an innate ability for social interaction
Caregiver interactions Strength
The use of controlled observations with frame-by-frame analysis and independent observers reduced researcher bias and increased objectivity. This improved the reliability and internal validity of the findings, allowing strong conclusions about reciprocity and interactional synchrony.
Caregiver interactions limitation
It is difficult to interpret babies’ behaviour because they cannot communicate verbally. Researchers must infer whether movements are intentional, which lowers the validity of the findings since there is no concrete proof that reciprocity or interactional synchrony actually occurred.
Schaffer and emersion limitations
Attachment was measured using mothers’ reports, which may be biased or inaccurate. This reliance on self-report reduces the internal validity because mothers might underreport or misremember behaviours like separation anxiety.
Schaffer and Emerson strength
The study was conducted in participants’ own homes, meaning infants behaved naturally. This increased ecological validity because behaviours observed were more likely to reflect real-life attachments.
Lorenz Strength
Lorenz’s research showed imprinting happens in a critical period, supporting the idea that attachment is biologically programmed and evolved for survival, which aligns with Bowlby’s evolutionary theory.
Lorenz limitation
Lorenz’s findings from geese cannot be easily generalised to humans because human attachment is more complex. This reduces the external validity of the study when applied to human behaviour.
Harlow strength
Harlow’s study demonstrated the importance of comfort over food in forming attachments, influencing childcare practices by highlighting the need for emotional care, especially in foster and orphaned children.
Harlow limitation
The study was unethical because the monkeys experienced long-term emotional harm and distress. They could not consent or withdraw, raising serious ethical concerns about the treatment of animals in research.
Strange situation strength
The Strange Situation is a controlled and standardised procedure, which increases reliability. It allows researchers to observe specific attachment behaviours and classify attachment types consistently across infants.
Strange Situation limitation
The Strange Situation may lack ecological validity because it is an artificial lab setting that may not reflect how children behave in everyday situations, so the results might not generalise well to real-world attachment behaviour.
Bowlbys monotropy theory strength
Bowlby’s theory is supported by research showing the importance of a primary attachment figure for healthy emotional development, highlighting the critical period and long-term consequences of attachment disruption.
Bowlbys monotropy theory limitation
Bowlby’s emphasis on one primary attachment figure ignores evidence that infants can form multiple attachments, which are also important for development. This oversimplifies attachment and reduces the theory’s validity.
Cultural variations in attachments strength
Research shows some consistency in attachment types across cultures, supporting the idea that attachment behaviours have universal elements, which increases the cross-cultural validity of attachment theory.
Cultural variation in attachments limitation
Attachment behaviours and their meanings can vary across cultures, so Western-based measures like the Strange Situation may misinterpret behaviours in non-Western cultures, reducing the theory’s cultural validity.
