Effects of Institutionalisation

Question 1

What did Rutter say about Bowlby’s theory of maternal deprivation?

Answer 1

Rutter criticized Bowlby for confusing ‘deprivation’ and ‘privation’. He claimed that the long-term damage that Bowlby discussed was actually an effect of privation, not deprivation.

Question 2

Deprivation

Answer 2

The loss of the primary attachment figure after attachment has formed.

Question 3

Privation

Answer 3

The failure to form any attachment in the first place.

Question 4

Institutionalisation

Answer 4

The effects of living in an institutional setting.

Question 5

Institution

Answer 5

A place, like a hospital or orphanage, where children live for a long, continuous period of time, where there is often little emotional care provided.

Question 6

What are some key aspects of family care?

Answer 6

Strong emotional attachment, more sociable, cared for well, more opportunities, more resources, more interaction, privacy.

Question 7

What are some key aspects of institutional care?

Answer 7

No attachment figure, bored, less sociable, not cared for well, less toys, less opportunities, less interaction, lack of privacy.

Question 8

What was taking place in Romania from 1966-1990?

Answer 8

Communist leader, Ceaucescu, banned abortions and contraception, and women were required to have five children. There were severe energy and food shortages. Families couldn’t afford to look after this many children, so thousands were left abandoned in under-funded, state-run orphanages.

Question 9

What happened to Romanian orphans after the revolution?

Answer 9

In 1989, many orphans were adopted, some into British and American families.

Question 10

Rutter et al. (2011) - Aim

Answer 10

To see if good quality care could make up for the early poor quality care.

Question 11

Rutter et al. (2011) - Procedure

Answer 11

Studied 165 Romanian orphans who were placed in orphanages at 1-2 weeks old, and were adopted in Britain. Longitudinal study and natural experiment. Children were assessed at ages 4, 6, 11, and 15 on physical, cognitive, and emotional development. 52 British children, who were adopted around the same time, were assessed as a control group.

Question 12

Rutter et al. (2011) - Conclusion

Answer 12

Showed that there is not a critical period, but a sensitive period, as children could form attachments with adopted families, and could recover from any developmental issues.

Question 12

Rutter et al. (2011) - Findings

Answer 12

Half the Romanian adoptees had delayed intellectual development, and most were severely malnourished. At age 11, some had recovered, but this was based on their time of adoption. Those adopted after 6 months had more developmental delays, included mental retardation and a disinhibited attachment style. These significant differences remained at age 16.

Question 13

Disinhibited Attachment

Answer 13

Children are equally friendly and affectionate to people they know well and complete strangers. They show little stranger anxiety. The child seeks comfort and attention from anyone, without distinction.

Question 14

What did Rutter suggest about disinhibited attachment?

Answer 14

In 2006, Rutter said that disinhibited attachment is an adaption to having multiple caregivers during the sensitive period.

Question 15

What was Zeanah et al’s study called?

Answer 15

Bucharest Early Intervention Project.

Question 16

Zeanah et al. (2005) - Aim

Answer 16

To examine the effects of early institutionalisation on development and attachment. Also, to investigate the impact of high quality foster care as an intervention for children who were institutionalised.

Question 17

Zeanah et al. (2005) - Procedure

Answer 17

Assessed 95 children, aged 12-31 months, who spent around 90% of their lives in institutional care. Compared with a control group of 50 children who were not institutionalised. Their attachment types were measured using the Strange Situation procedure. Their carers were also asked about unusual social behaviours.

Question 18

Zeanah et al. (2005) - Findings

Answer 18

74% of the control group were securely attached, and 20% had a disinhibited attachment type. Of those who were institutionalised, 19% were secure, 44% had a disinhibited attachment type, and 65% disorganised.

Question 19

Zeanah et al. (2005) - Conclusion

Answer 19

The earlier a child is placed into foster care, the better their recovery. Placement before the age of 2 years is key.

Question 20

What other two effects can institutionalisation have?

Answer 20

Mental retardation and deprivation dwarfism.

Question 21

Mental Retardation

Answer 21

An incomplete development of the mind.

Question 22

What happened to the Romanian orphan’s mental retardation?

Answer 22

Most children showed mental retardation when arriving in the UK. However, those adopted before being 6 months old caught up with the control group by age 4.

Question 23

Deprivation Dwarfism

Answer 23

Physical effect (being physically shorter) due to underdeveloped growth hormones.

Question 24

What did Gardner say about dwarfism?

Answer 24

Gardner said that a lack of emotional care could effect growth hormones causing underdevelopment.

Question 25

Gardner (1972) - Summary

Answer 25

Studied an 8 month old girl who was fed through a tube, so her mother never cuddled her (as she didn’t want to dislodge the tube). The girl was withdrawn, physically stunted, and admitted to hospital. She thrived off the attention of the hospital staff, and was able to physically develop in a healthy manner.

Question 26

Strengths of the Effects of Institutionalisation

Answer 26

• Research has enhanced our understanding of the effects of instiutionalisation, leading to improved care for children in institutions. For example, homes now avoid having large numbers of staff, to allow the children to form attachments to a key worker.
• Romanian orphan studies tend to involve less extraneous variables than other orphan studies (which may include loss or trauma, etc.), increasing internal validity.
• Zeanah et al.’s procedure used random allocation of orphans, removing the confounding variable of children being chosen, increasing validity.
• Supporting evidence from Chugani et al. (2001), who showed neurological evidence for effects of deprivation. They used PET scans on 10 Romanian orphans, who were found to have mild neurocognitive impairment, impulsivity, and attention and social decifits compared to 17 normal adults.
• Hodges and Tizard (1989) - followed development of 65 children from nurseries at a few months, 4, 8, and 16. 24 were adopted, 15 in their natural home, 26 in institutions. When assessed for emotional and social competence with interviews, it was found that those adopted had good attachments, restored children had weak attachments, and all had social difficulties, being attention-seeking.

Question 27

Limitations of the Effects of Institutionalisation

Answer 27

• Research may be ungeneralisable. Conditions in Romanian institutions were so extreme and awful that they may not be generalised to institutions with better quality care.
• In Rutter’s ERA project, orphans were not randomly assigned to conditioms, the adoption process happened naturally. This may have been psychologically harmful for the children (not to be picked) and children may be more likely to be selected due to a sociable disposition - this is a confounding variable.
• It is too soon to conclude that institutions have any long-term effects, as the orphans were only followed until 15, and those involved are still not entirely developed now.
• Studies may be unethical as the orphans were emotionally, intellectually and socially challenged, and researchers could only observe, and not interfere.