Developmental Psychology-Attachment Flashcards
(123 cards)
1
Q
What is developmental psychology?
A
The branch of psychology that focuses on how people grow and change over the course of a lifetime
2
Q
Attachment
A
An emotional bond between two people, usually a care giver and a care receiver
3
Q
To understand (Bowlby’s theory)
A
-Must know how to describe the theory AO1
-Apply to a scenario AO2
-Should identify the strengths and weaknesses of the theory AO3
4
Q
Harlows monkeys
A
Two wire monkey models
-One with feeding bottle
-Another one covered in cloth
He measured the amount of time the monkeys spend with each wire mother
5
Q
Harlow´s Monkey-findings (strength of Bowlby)
A
Findings:
Finding 1: Harlow had shown that attachment was not just about feeding. Contact conform is more important
Finding 2 He found that monkeys who grew up without a mom had abnormal behaviour later on in life (being shy,unpredictable with other monkeys,difficulty with mating)
6
Q
Bowlby´s background
A
-Raised mainly by a nanny
-Saw his mom for one hour a day
-When he was 8 years old his nanny left him and he was sent to boarding school,causing him further trauma
7
Q
Key concepts of Bowlby’s theory
A
-Monotropy (ONE ATTACHMENT)
-Critical period (6 month/5yr sensitive period)
-Internal working memory
-Maternal deprivation hypothesis
(Mother can’t interest me)
8
Q
1) Monotropy attachment
A
Bowlby believed that infants form one primary attachment, usually with the mother (based on who takes better care of the baby rather than who they spend more time with)
9
Q
2) Critical period
A
There is a limited window (6 months old) during which attachment must occur for healthy development. If not, that baby is not going to be able to form attachment later.
Up to 5 years the baby can still form some kind of attachment.Sensitive period
10
Q
3) Internal working model
A
That early interactions with caregivers create a mental model that shapes/influences future relationships and expectations of others. A child who experiences secure attachment will likely develop a positive internal working model
Consistent care →trust in relationship
Neglect →fear of abandonment
11
Q
Mindmap of internal working memory
A
Primary carer’s behaviour towards child →childs ´working model`of itself:
Positive and loved →secure
Rejected and unloved →avoidant
Angry and confused →resistant
12
Q
4) Maternal deprivation hypothesis
A
Continual disruption of the attachment between infant and primary caregiver during the critical period could lead to emotional and cognitive issues later in life if there is no adequate substitute of emotional care
13
Q
Short term effects of deprivation
A
Children experienced intense distress when seperated from their mothers (for a short period of time)
Three progressive stages of distress:
-Protest: The child cries and protests when the parent leaves and tries to get the caregiver back
-Despair: The child’s protesting begins to stop,they seem calmer but still upset
-Detachment: If the separation continues the child will start to engage with other people again. However, they still feel remote and apathetic
14
Q
Long term effects of deprivation
A
MDH suggests that continual attachment disruption (long period of time) between the infant and the primary caregiver could result in long-term cognitive and emotional difficulties for that infant if the deprivation occurs during the critical period and there is no adequate substitute emotional care the child will suffer from deprivation. This can create cognitive and emotional problems such as:
-Cognitive damage-reduced intelligence
-Emotional damage-depression,aggression
-Affectionless psychopathy-a lack of concern for others and the inability to form meaningful relationships
15
Q
Deprivation
A
The loss of emotional care that is normally provided by a primary caregiver (for an extended period of time)
16
Q
Examples of
1.privation
2.deprivation
3.separation
A
-Orphan baby who has grown up in an instutution
-A child’s mother falls ill and has to be hospitalised for a minimum of six months
-A child is left with their grandparents for a week while their parents attend a wedding in another city
17
Q
Deprivation vs privation
A
Losing something that a person once had vs never having something in the first place
18
Q
Attachment: nature vs nurture theories
A
Behavioural theories (nurture): babies learn to form attachments
Evolutionary theories (nature): babies are born with an innate instinct to form attachments (innate drive for survival)
19
Q
What did Bowlby’s theory suggest about nature versus nurture in developmental psychology?
A
These findings contradicted the dominant behavioural (nurture) theory of attachment which was shown to underestimate the child’s bond with their mother. The behavioural theory of attachment states the child becomes attached to the mother because she feeds the infant.
20
Q
Evolutionary perspective-Nature
A
Basic principle of the theory:
-Innate drive of infants to seek proximity and safety, the role of the caregiver as a secure base from which the child explores the world
21
Q
Bowlby’s theory-nature approach
A
Bowlby suggested children come into the world biologically pre-programmed to form attachment with others because this will help them survive. Attachment behaviour evolved because it serves an important survival function
A baby who is not attached is less well protected-feeding is not the basis for attachment
22
Q
Internal working model
A
A mental model/cognitive framework comprising mental representations for our understanding of the world, ourself and others (+our relationship with our primary caregiver) that shapes our future relationships
23
Q
Adaptive
A
Behaviour used by children to cope with their environment and adjust to new situations,people and experiences
24
Q
Monotropy
A
A unique and close attachment to one person
25
Social releasers
Behaviours that babies are biologically pre-programed to do, which attract the attention of the caregivers
26
Bowlby’s study-aim
To investigate the long-term effects of maternal deprivation on the likelihood of developing a delinquent character (criminal behaviour) and affectionless psychopathy (emotional problems)
Correlation: Early attachment deprivation → criminal behaviour
27
Bowlby’s study- sample+sampling technique
88 children:
44 juvenile thieves, 31 boys, 13 girls
44 control group, 34 boys, 10 girls (gender bias?)
Sample technique: opportunity sample
28
Bowlby’s study:
1) Experimental design
2) Research method
3) Experimental method
1) Matched pairs design→age,IQ
2) Correlational research
3) Field experiment
29
Bowlby’s study: how do they test the hypothesis?
-The children and their parents were interviewed to record details of their early life by a psychiatrist (Bowlby), a psychologist and a social worker
Discover: 1) Deprivation or not?
2) Affectionless psychopathy or not?
30
Bowlby’s study-how were the extreneous variables controlled?
-IQ tested by a psychologist who assessed their emotional attitudes toward the test
-Two groups were matched for age and IQ
-The psychiatrist, psychologist and social worker made separate reports
31
Findings of Bowlby’s study
44 Thieves-14 (32%) affectionless psychopaths
→12 (86%) experienced deprivation
(Result:86% of affectionless psychopaths suffered deprivation)
Control-0% affectionless psychopaths,41 no deprivation (only 7% of the control group experienced deprivation)
32
Conclusions of Bowlby’s study
Concluded that maternal deprivation in the child’s early life caused permanent emotional damage and could lead to criminal behaviours
33
Bowlby’s study-Reliability
• + **RELIABILITY**→
Standardized procedure-give examples e.g. same IQ test and interview
The psychologist, social worker and Bowlby made separate reports and made conclusions collectively, therefore the study could be evaluated for having **inter-rater reliability**
- Interviews are difficult to replicate
34
Bowlby’s study-Generalisability
+ GENERALISABILITY →large sample,more males are criminals so representative of real life
-This cannot be generalized to other groups of children,only considered children with emotional issues.Gender bias.Age bias.
35
Bowbly’s study weaknesses-Validity
• VALIDITY→INTERVIEWS
The interviewer may influence the data (e.g. gender, tone dress)
**Researcher bias**: Bowlby conducted the psychiatric assessments himself and made the diagnosis of Affectionless Psychopathy. He knew whether the children were in the ‘theft group’ or the control group. The researchers may hold personal beliefs about who is an affectionless psychopath and who is not (**subjective**)
**Retrospective data**: not accurate data
**Correlation study**: Cannot establish a cause-effect relationship between separation and development of affectionless psychopathy. Other factors could have affected that as the role of the father or the child ́s temperament (EV) Because…
**Field experiment**
**Internal validity**: lack of distinction between privation and deprivation
**Opportunity sample** → could be biased,only those available
**Reductionist**→other factors can influence criminal delinquency e.g.conformity to the majority
Valets rarely reach criminals for interviews on risk
36
Privation
Child’s attachment bond had never formed-absence of an attachment figure
37
Separation
Describes the absence of a caregiver for shorter periods of time
38
The PDD model
model to demonstrate the short term effects of separation and deprivation.
Protest – intense and panicked
Despair – loss of hope/apathetic
Detachment – less distressed/more anger
39
Bowlby’s theory-credibility
Bowlby’s theory is credible as it is supported by evidence from other studies,for example…
**Mary Main (1984)** interviewed participants about their childhood and later relationships and found that childhood attachment styles affect adult attachment styles. This adds credibility to the internal working model of Bowlby’s theory of attachment, as it demonstrates that the mental model of our childhood experiences shapes our future relationships
**Monotropic attachment: Isabella (1993).** Observed mothers and their babies interacting at one, four and nine months of age, and then assessed the quality of attachment at one year. He found that most strongly attached babies had mothers who were more sensitively responsive.
➢ **Maternal Deprivation Hypothesis: Bifulco et al. (1992).** They studied 250 women who had lost mothers, through separation or death, before they were 17. They found that the loss of their mother through separation or death doubles the risk of depressive and anxiety disorders in adult women. The rate of depression was the highest in women whose mothers had died before the child reached 6 years. AND Harlow (1958).
➢**Internal Working Memory: Ainsworth (1978)**. A secure child will develop a positive internal working model because it has received sensitive, emotional care from its primary attachment figure.
40
Bowlby’s theory-objections
➢Reductionist: there are alternative explanations for the strength of the attachment relationship. Kagan (1984) proposed the temperament hypothesis- they baby innate personality has an important influence on the attachment relationships. Individual differences.
➢ Not monotropic attachment: Schaffer & Emerson (1964) noted that specific attachments started at about eight months, and very shortly thereafter, the infants became attached to other people. By 18 months, very few (13%) were attached to only one person; some had five or more attachments
➢Critical Period: Rutter et al. (1998) carried out research on orphans who did not form an attachment during the critical period. Rutter found that when the children were adopted into UK or US families they were still able to form an attachment, but it took them longer to do so. He claimed that the idea of a critical period was wrong and therefore it should be called a ‘sensitive period’.
41
Applications of Bowlby’s theory
➢To hospital care
➢Feminists like Erica Burman (1994) have pointed out that this places a terrible burden of responsibility on mothers, setting them up to take the blame for anything that goes wrong for the rest of the child’s life. It also pushes mothers into particular lifestyle choices like not returning to work when a child is born. This was not Bowlby’s intention – he saw himself as boosting the status of mothers by emphasising the importance of their role.
42
Ainsworth’s study→strange situation procedure (1970)
Ainsworth based on Bowlby-wanted to assess attachment of the baby
**Sample**: 106 middle-class babies
**Lab Experiment** using a two-way mirror which Ainsworth used to make her observations.
**Structured Observation**:
Structure observation (list of things we want to achieve) which took place in a room that was new to the baby, a 9x9 foot space marked into 16 squares to help monitoring of the babies 'movements.
It was a controlled observation in which the child and the mother were observed interacting in 8 different scenarios (episodes). They note what the baby is doing every 15 seconds using behavioural categories, Scale of 1 to 7.
Two observers narrated continuous accounts into a two-channel tape recorder that also captured a timer’s click every 15 seconds.
43
Behavioural categories-Ainsworth
- Separation from the caregiver
- Reunion with the caregiver
- Response to a stranger
44
Re-ordering the strange situation (1-4)
1. Mum+baby+researcher together in the room-whether child is confident to explore envirionment,mother as secure base
2. Experimenter leaves, mother and infant alone for 3 minutes. Mother sits, child placed on floor and free to explore-is the child confident to explore (secure base)
3. Stranger joins mother+baby. Researcher sees how baby reacts (stranger anxiety)
4. Mother leaves the room, baby alone with stranger. Stanger tries to comfort baby and if they get upset, tries to play with them (separation anxiety)
45
Re-ordering the strange situation (5-8)
5. Mother returns to the room and stranger leaves-reunion behabiour
6. Mother leaves the room and infant is alone-separation anxiety
7. Stanger returns to room and tries to comfort and play with the baby-stranger anxiety
8. Mother re-enters the room and stranger leaves-reunion behaviour
46
Ainsworth’s strange situation-findings
Type A: Insecure-avoidant attachment (22%)
Type B: Secure attachment (66%)
Type C: Insecure-resistant (12%)
47
Ainsworth’s strange situation-conclusions
-Ainsworth’s research showed that how caregivers respond to a child’s needs can have a lasting impact on their emotional development.
-The experiment provided a reliable way to measure attachment styles, which has helped researchers and clinicians better understand how attachment influences a
person’s relationships throughout their life.
48
Secure attachment behaviour:
1. Stranger anxiety
2. Separation anxiety
3. Reunion behaviour
1. Some avoidant of stranger when alone, but friendly when the mother is present
2. Low
3. Enthusiastic (focus on this reunion behaviour)
49
Insecure-avoidant attachment behaviour:
1. Stranger anxiety
2. Separation anxiety
3. Reunion behaviour
1. Low
2. Low
3. Indifferent
50
Insecure-resistant attachment behaviour:
1. Stranger anxiety
2. Separation anxiety
3. Reunion behaviour
1. High
2. High
3. Angry
51
Insecure-avoidant attachment
These babies showed a high willingness to explore but **low stranger anxiety, indifferent separation anxiety** and they were **indifferent to the departure or return of the caregiver**. This could be because of the lack of sensitivity from the caregiver which leads to a quiet baby.
52
Secure attachment
These babies showed **low separation anxiety** and **some stranger anxiety**. **Behaviour on reunion was enthusiastic** and they used the caregiver as a secure base from which to explore, and they were quite independent
53
Insecure-resistant attachment
On reunion, they **angrily resisted** being picked up while at the same time trying other means to maintain proximity. They showed **high stranger anxiety, high separation anxiety** and low willingness to explore
54
Attachment types-AO2 application
Justify why using key terminology
55
Evaluation of the SSP study of Ainsworth-Reliability
• **Reliability**: Standardised procedure↑reliability
Structured observation,same 8 stages
**Inter-rater reliability**: There was a panel of experienced observers which meant that inter-observer reliability could be calculated. The researchers found perfect agreement when rating exploratory behaviour. The observations can be trusted. For example,
**Test-retest**: a study conducted in Germany found 78% of the children were classified in the same way at ages 1 and 6 years (Wartner et al., 1994).
56
Evaluation of the SSP study of Ainsworth-Validity
• **Internal validity**:
**Social Desirability bias**: The mother may alter her behaviour to appear like a good parent, which could in turn affect the infant’s response and therefore affect the validity of the findings.
- **Subjective** interpretation of findings-American culture (**researcher bias**)
**Low internal validity**: SSP aims to measure the attachment type of a child – but it actually measures the quality of one particular relationship rather than a personal characteristic lodged in the individual. (Mary Main and Donna Weston (19819).
**Low ecological validity**: lab experiment so the setup is artificial. The child is placed in a strange and artificial environment, and the procedure of the mother and stranger entering and leaving the room follows a predetermined script of eight stages that would be unlikely to happen in real life.
+ **Lab experiment**: high internal validity,can manipulate variables and control EV→**cause and effect** relationship can be established
**Structured observation**-don’t know they are being observed
57
Caregiver sensitivity hypothesis
-A child’s attachment style depends on their **mother’s behavior towards them**.
→ **‘Sensitive’ mothers** are responsive to the child’s needs and respond to their moods and feelings correctly. Sensitive mothers are more likely to **have securely attached children.**
→Mothers who are **less sensitive towards their child** e.g. who respond to their child’s needs incorrectly or who are impatient or ignore the child are likely to **have insecurely attached children**
3 types of attachment
58
Caregiver sensitivity hypothesis- how the different types of attachment form
**Securely attached infants**→ are associated with sensitive and responsive primary care.
**Insecure resistant attachment**→is associated with inconsistent primary care. Sometimes, the child’s needs and met, and sometimes they are ignored by the caregiver.
**Insecure-avoidant attachment**→is associated with unresponsive primary care. The child comes to believe that communication of needs has no influence on the mother/father.
59
Evaluation of Ainsworth’s theory-strengths
**Caregiver sensitivity**→ Wolff and Van Ijzendoorn (1997) conducted a meta-analysis (a review) of research into attachment types. They found that there is a relatively weak correlation of **0.24** between **parental sensitivity and attachment type** – generally more sensitive parents had securely attached children (same result as Ainsworth). However, in evaluation, critics of this theory argue that the correlation between parental sensitivity and the child’s attachment type is only weak.
**Bowlby’s research**→ Monotropic attachment, internal working model-care and attention from mother/caregiver
Applications → It is useful for situations where disordered patterns of attachment develop between a baby and caregiver because we can use strategies to change those situations. (Working mothers,daycare)
60
Evaluation of Ainsworth’s theory-objections
• **Reductionist**→ Other reasons which may better explain why children develop different attachment types. Kagan (1984) suggests that the **temperament** of the child is actually what leads to the different attachment types. Children with different innate (inborn) temperaments will have different attachment types.
• Belsky and Rovine (1987) propose an interactionist theory to explain the different attachment types. They argue that the child’s attachment type is a result of both the child’s **innate temperament and also how the parent responds to them.**
61
If a child is rarely seperated from their mother, what type of attachment are they likely to display?
Insecure resistant
Likely to show high seperation anxiety
62
If the culture values distance between a child and their mother,proximity and seeking behaviours are discouraged and the ideal baby is independent and non-clinging and does not make demands on the parent, what type of attachment are they likely to display?
Insecure-avoidant
Likely to show low seperation anxiety and not concerned when they are left alone,as they are encouraged to be independent
63
If a child is raised in a collective community of children with a nanny to take care of their everyday needs,and spend around 3 hours a day with their parents after they work, what type of attachment are they likely to display?
Secure
You might expect them to show low separation anxiety, as they are away from their parents. However, the children may form an attachment to their nanny.
64
Cross cultural research into attachment-Germany
**Grossman et al. (1985)**
More **insecure-avoidant** attachment children (Type A). Child- rearing practices were influenced by German culture as German culture promotes interpersonal space between children and parents. More cultural value is placed on independence (**individualistic culture**) and early weaning and therefore it would be incorrect to classify German infants as insecurely attached using the SSP classification.
65
Cross cultural research into attachment-Israel
**Sagi et al. (1985)** High proportion of **insecure-resistant attachment (Type C)**. Infant characteristics in the sample as they are a collective community **(collectivist culture)** where child-rearing is shared and children are often raised by a non-biological community member, but never exposed to strangers,not left alone.This lack of exposure can explain why infants from this sample group were intensely inconsolably distressed when subjected to the strange situation procedure.
66
Cross cultural research into attachment-Japan
**Miyake et al. (1985)**-Although majority of the Japanese infants showed secure attachment, they found that Japanese infants had more **insecure-resistant** attachment compared to American as there were only 10% - 20% anxious-resistant attachment type in the American sample but 32% in Japanese samples. This difference too can be understood in terms of cultural differences as Japanese mother and infant relationship is typically charecterised by constant close physical contact **(collectivist culture)** and by the infrequency of separation from the mother (not left alone)
67
Cross-cultural research into attachment styles by van IJzendoor and Kroonenberg (1988)-Aim
To look at intercultural differences and intracultural differences related to how attachments work
68
Cross-cultural research into attachment styles by van IJzendoor and Kroonenberg (1988)-procedure
**Sample**→ Collected a total of 32 studies of strange situation classification data from 8 different countries (UK, US, Sweden, Japan, China, Holland, Germany and Israel) were included involving **1990 strange situations** sample size.
**Control EV** → any special groups (studies with samples size was less than 35 or the ones that use Down ́s Syndrome children)
69
Cross-cultural research into attachment styles by van IJzendoor and Kroonenberg (1988)-meta analysis
They analysed data from other studies using meta-analysis. The selected studies had all:
• Used the SSP to classify mother/infant attachment. ABC
• Observed only mother-infant pairs
• Classified infants into one of the attachment types
They calculated the average percentage for the different attachment styles in each country
70
Cross-cultural research into attachment styles by van IJzendoor and Kroonenberg (1988)-meta analysis
They analysed data from other studies using meta-analysis. The selected studies had all:
• Used the SSP to classify mother/infant attachment. ABC
• Observed only mother-infant pairs
• Classified infants into one of the attachment types
They calculated the average percentage for the different attachment styles in each country
If same in all counties-**nature** create relationships for survival
71
What is meta-analysis?
**Meta-analysis**→ a statistical technique which combines the findings from a number of studies to look for patterns/trends. Secondary data
72
Intercultural results-main findings
•**Secure attachment **is the most common attachment type in all countries examined
•Japan is a **collectivist culture**. Japanese children are very rarely left by their mother. So, the distress they show when their mother’s leave could be the result of shock and not an ‘insecure attachment’ **(insecure resistant)**.The distress they show when left alone with a stranger is also likely to be due to absence of the mother.
•The German studies highlights a high percentage of **avoidant behaviour**, typical of independent children. This is not surprising given that Grossmann et al (1985) say that German parents seek ‘independent, non-clingy infants, who do not make demands on their parents, but obey their commands
73
Findings of the cross cultural research+analysis
•**Type B**→the modal classification in all of the sample, lowest in China and highest in the UK
•**Type C**→ Least common attachment style (14%)
• **Type A**→Most common in Germany as they value independece (21%)
Most common→secure attachment,so more based on nature
74
What is the difference between individualistic and collectivist cultures?
Which countries examined by the research were individualistic and collectivist and does this difference account for the findings?
An **individualistic** culture is one which emphasises personal **independence and achievement**.
e.g. UK,the US and Germany
A **collectivist culture** is one which emphasises the importance of **family and shared goals** above individual needs and desires.
e.g. China or Japan
75
Intracultural results
Intra-cultural variation was nearly 1.5x more that of the inter- cultural variation. In other words, there were **bigger differences within cultures** than between them.
They conclude that it is **wrong to think everyone in a culture has the same practices**. Within a culture, there are many sub- cultures, all with their own way of rearing children.
76
Conclusion of the cross cultural research by —
Van IJzendoor and Kroonenberg (1988)
• The key cross-cultural similarity was that **Type B,share the same modal attachment** which supports the view that attachment is an innate and biological process (attachment based on nature).The overall consistency in secure attachment types leads to the conclusion that there may be **universal (innate) characteristics** that underpin infant and caregiver interactions.
• However, the significant variations of insecure attachments demonstrate that **universality is limited**.Environmental
factors (parenting styles, cultural norms and societal expectations)
Even though supports nature,ideal to conclude the **interactionist** approach in developmental psychology
77
Cross cultural research-Generalisability
+ **Generalizability**: Large sample across many different countries
→ Competing argument: some countries were barely represented and in fact in three of the eight countries there was just one sample and in two other countries just two samples. This makes intercultural comparisons somewhat meaningless.
(Sample may not be representative of wider population if only one study)
78
Cross cultural research-Applications
+ **Applicability**: Our knowledge about cultural differences in attachment are important for day care. If there are differences, then it is important for people working in day-care facilities to shape their behaviors to the child ́s expectations of how a parent should behave. For example, whether to encourage dependence or independence. The wrong kind of behavior might be very confusing for a young child because they are used to other kinds of attachment behavior at home.
Knowledge of different cultures make it easier for teachers to adapt to different students
79
Learning theory of attachment
Dollard and Miller Study: The learning theory of attachment suggests that attachment is a set of **learned behaviors** instead of innate biological behavior. The basis for the learning of attachments is the provision of food.
80
The two types of learning-theory of attachment
**Classical conditioning** is where an infant learns to associate the caregiver with comfort and eventually forms an attachment.
**Operant conditioning** on the other hand, assumes that infants are in a drive state of internal tension or discomfort, and their actions focus on removing this discomfort. Punishment and reinforcement.
81
Theory concepts: classical and operant conditioning
**Classical conditioning:** The child gains pleasure in being fed and they will associate the caregiver with the food which makes them happy when see the caregiver. The caregiver also gives comfort to the child when they are distressed and the reduction of distress that child experiences over time can also be associated with the caregiver, results in attachment
**Operant conditioning:** If the caregiver smiles at the child when the child tries to talk, the child will be reinforced to continue to talk to the caregiver, enabling a connection to be formed. The caregiver is also rewarded by gaining pleasure when they see the child talk. Reciprocal reinforcment strengthens the attachment between the caregiver and child
82
What is classical conditioning and what does it explain?
It is the formation of **associations** between different events and stimuli.
This process explains how an **emotional bond** is formed through associations with comfort and security, contributing to the infant’s attachment to their mother.
Classical conditioning, as explained in the context of attachment theory, posits that infants learn to associate their caregivers (usually the mother) with satisfying their needs and the subsequent pleasure.
83
Before,during and after conditioning
**Before:**
Food=unconditioned stimulus
Happy baby=unconditioned response
**During:**
Mother=neutral stimulus
Food=unconditioned stimulus
Happy baby=unconditioned response
**After:**
Mother=conditioned stimulus
Happy baby=conditioned response
84
Classical conditioning: steps
**UCS**→**Food**. The infant’s biological needs, such as hunger, create discomfort
**UCR** →The infant feels **pleasure** when their needs are satisfied
**NS** →Initially the **mother** is the neutral stimulus, as she is not innately associated with satisfying the infant’s needs
Association→ Over time, the infant begins associating the mother (NS) with satisfying their needs (UCS). The mother is present when feeding results in the infant associating the comfort and pleasure of feeding with her.
**CS**→The mother becomes the conditioned stimulus…
**CR** → This means that her presence alone is enough to trigger a sense of security and pleasure in the infant (now a conditioned response), even without the original unconditioned stimulus (feeding)
85
Operant conditioning-drive
something that motivates behavior e.g the infant is hungry and there is a drive to reduce the discomfort
86
Operant conditioning
Drive for something, when the infant is fed the drive is reduced and they are rewarded through negative reinforcement
Food is seen as the primary reinforcer. Through the process of operant conditioning the person supplying the food becomes associated with avoiding discomfort(secondary reinforcer)
Attachment occurs because the child seeks the person who can supply the reward
87
Credibility of learning theories as an explanation of attachment
**O’Connor et al (2013)** examined the extent to which a SLT based treatment promoted change in quality of parent – child attachment
He found that parents in the intervention group showed increase in positive behavioural counts and sensitive responding, suggesting that a standard SLT based parenting intervention can change parent – child relationship quality
88
Objections of learning theories as an explanation of attachment
• **Reductionist**→its overemphasis on the role of food in attachment. **Harlow’s study of monkeys**. His research indicated that the monkeys formed stronger attachments to the soft, comforting surrogate mother than the one providing food.
• **Reductionist**→The learning theory of attachment does not explain why there is a **critical period** in most animals and humans, after which infants cannot form attachment, or attachment might be more difficult. It does not explain why infants seem to go through the same stages at about the same age in the formation of attachment
• **Bowlby + Ainsworth**
89
What was the supernanny study called?
O’ Connor et al (2013)
90
Aim supernanny
To investigate the extent to which a social learning theory-based intervention promoted change in quality of parent child relationships derived from attachment theory
91
O’Connor procedure:
1) Sample
2) Sample technique
3) Ethics
4) Type of experiment
5) Experimental group
6) Control group
1) 174 four- to six-year-olds selected from a high-need urban area (London)
2) Random sampling from 24 classes in 4 primary schools
3) Informed consent from parents
4) Longitudinal (3 years)
5) Intervention (88)
6) No intervention (86)
92
O’Connor procedure:
1) Sample
2) Sample technique
3) Ethics
4) Type of experiment
5) Experimental group
6) Control group
1) 174 four- to six-year-olds selected from a high-need urban area (London)
2) Random sampling from 24 classes in 4 primary schools
3) Informed consent from parents
4) Longitudinal (3 years)
5) Intervention (88)
6) No intervention (86)
93
O’Connor procedure-intervention
• **Intervention**→12 weeks **parenting program**
Observation and group discussion
Parents were taught new parenting techniques and asked to practice the skills at home.
• **Intervention** → 6 weeks reading intervention
Encourage parents to learn techniques such as “pause-prompt-praise” when children learn new words while reading.
94
Procedure-observations
**Carry out of the observation (pre-post)**→
2 trained developmental researchers who did not know which condition the family was in
-Observations videotaped
-3 tasks during observation:
❑**10 minute free**- play session during which no instructions were given by the observers.
❑**10-minute instructed challenge**. Lego construction
❑**Tidy-up session for 5 minutes** where minimal instructions were given to parents by the observers
95
Procedure-coding system
**Coding system** →Observers rated each of the 3 tasks, and the ratings showed whether there was a positive or negative parenting style.
• **Positive style** was when ‘sensitive responding’ was used which was behaviours such as parent shows awareness of the child’s needs and sensitivity to his or her signals, promotes the child’s autonomy / adopts the child’s psychological point of view and physically or verbally expresses warmth toward the child.
• **Mutuality** was measured as the degree to which each member seems to willingly accept and seek the other’s involvement in a joint activity, build on each other’s input and coordinate their efforts/actions while conducting a task together, maintain shared attention and fluid conversation, reciprocate positive affectionate behaviours and keep physical proximity/closeness when interacting with one another
96
Procedure-steps
Features,intervention,observation,coding system
97
Procedure-steps
Features,intervention,observation,coding system
98
Results-O’Connor
Parents in the intervention condition showed **higher number of positive behavioural changes** and **increased sensitive responding** compared to the non-intervention group
99
Conclusions O’Connor
Standard social learning theory based interventions can change aspects of parent–child relationship quality
100
What is O’Connors approach to attachment?
They take a more holistic approach bringing together social learning and evolutionary attachment theory because they think the practical use of parent training, based on SLT, can have a positive effect on the innate attachment relationship.
101
What did O'Connor (2013) find out about whether parenting intervention promotes attachment?
Parents who took part in a parenting programme showed greater increases in positive parenting behaviour and sensitive responding, suggesting SLT based parent programmes can improve the attachment relationship.
102
What parenting program was used by O’Connor?
A 12 week group treatment program led by a training psychologist where observation and discussion
draws out positive parental behaviours, and these are then practised through role play and at home
103
How did O'Connor et al. (2013) code the parenting behaviours they observed?
They used both attachment-related coding, including sensitive responding and mutuality and social-learning based coding, including child- centred and child-directive behaviours
104
O connor-reliability
+**Reliability**→ the used standardized procedures, all participants were assessed in the same way (free-play, instructed challenge, tidying up
**Inter-rater reliability**→ two researchers carrying out the in-home observations which will reduce the bias of experimenter effects
105
O’Connor-applicability
+ **Applicability**→ parents are more informed about attachment theory and therefore could change their parenting style towards a more sensitive one
106
O’Connor-generalisability
- It only consisted of children from a high need urban area in London. They could have also allowed grandparents or close family to take part in the experiment since they influenced the attachment as well that the child could have.
+ However, large sample
107
O’Connor-validity
+ Classes randomly allocated
- Social desirability bias coming from the two researchers observing the families playing
108
Bowlby’s hypothesis-attachment
The quality of early attachment between an child and their caregiver establish the child’s ability to form healthy relationships later in life
109
Bowlby’s study-Ethics
- ETHICS →Statements implying that children who are brought up in institutions or who suffer other forms of serious privation and deprivation in early life commonly develop criminal or affectionless characters are seen to be mistaken and could be damaging to society
Informed consent (opportunity sample-volunteers)
Interview-emotional distress,bringing up past traumas
110
Bowlby’s study-Ethics
- ETHICS →Statements implying that children who are brought up in institutions or who suffer other forms of serious privation and deprivation in early life commonly develop criminal or affectionless characters are seen to be mistaken and could be damaging to society
Informed consent (opportunity sample-volunteers)
Interview-emotional distress,bringing up past traumas
111
Bowlby’s study strength-Validity
+ **VALIDITY**→INTERVIEWS
Questions can be explained and enlarged upon, so good method when in depth and detailed data is required. makes the assessments a valid form of measurement.
-**External/ecological validity**: Field experiment
112
Bowlby’s study-Applications strengths
• **APPLICABILITY**→
To working mothers: Bowlby ́s highlight how the separation will not have long-term effect, and it is more important the quality of time than the quantity of time.By showing that maternal deprivation can lead to criminal behaviour, we can use this to educate parents/caregivers on looking after the child to prevent criminal behaviour and emotional issues (affectionless psychopathy).
113
Bowlby’s theory-objections
- Validity →looking back and recalling information in **retrospect** is innaccurate
- Reductionist → situational/other factors effect,cannot establish cause and effect
114
Bowlby’s theory applications
Parents and origin of thieves
115
Attachment-main studies
Bowlby,Einsworth (nature)
O’Connor (nurture)
→can ask you to evaluate/compare
116
Evaluation of SSP study by Ainsworth-Applications
+ **Applications**: It is really useful for situations where disordered patterns of attachment develop between a baby and caregiver because we can use strategies to change those situations.
117
Secure base-SSP
How the baby reacts when the mother is present
118
How do the different type of attachments form?
How caregiver (mother) acts with the baby affects the baby later on
Secure-right amount of care but not always with the baby
Insecure-avoidant-no attention from caregiver
Insecure-resistant-too much attention/on and off
119
Evaluation of SSP study of Ainsworth-Generalisability
- **Generalisability**: cultural bias 100 middle class Americans & their infants-ethnocentric
+ large sample of children
120
Evaluation of the SSP study of Ainsworth→Ethics
- **Unethical**: The observation was stressful for the child, caused emotional distress
121
Example of improvements that can be made to Bolwby’s study
Ethical problems/internal validity (focus on weaknesses of the study+ways you can improve them)
122
Cross cultural research-Validity
+ EV controlled-special groups e.g.children with down syndrome,>2 years old,sample sizes less than 35 ↑validity
- **Secondary data** (used **meta-analysis**,different studies that have the same objectives)→Too old,not strictly related to aim ↓validity
❑Applying Strange Situation procedures and behavioral categories is **ethnocentric** – Cross-cultural research using the Strange Situation judges and categorises infant behaviour according to behavioural categories that were developed following observations of middle-class American infants. This means that when researchers **(researcher bias)** interpret non-American infant behaviour, it is being judged against an **American standard (cultural bias)**,applying American standards to the wider population
Eg. an infant exploring the playroom by themselves would be classed as avoidant based on American standards but is valued as reflecting independence in Germany.
❑Researchers should be cautious about **treating individual samples, especially outliers, as representative of an entire culture.**
123
Cross cultural research-Reliability
+ **Replicability**: Comparison is aided by the standardised procedure (give examples). The use of the strange situation as a procedure means that a comparison can be made across cultures, and the reliability is therefore high.Easy to carry out (so can be replicated)
Inter-rater reliability,test-retest reliability
-Technique used is meta-analysis →no way of checking/being certain studies followed a standardised procedure and were conducted reliably by the original researchers
