Explanations of Attachment (booklet 3) Flashcards
(19 cards)
Two explanations of attachment
- Learning theory (based on classical conditioning)
- Bowlby’s monotropic theory
Describe learning theory of attachment
Dollard and Miller (1950)
Suggests we become attached due to classical conditioning
Argues babies attach to their mothers as they learn to associate them with food
Learning theory of attachment flow chart
Before learning:
NS (mother) -> no response
UCS (food) -> UCR (contentment)
During learning:
NS (mother) + UCS (food) -> UCR (contentment)
After learning:
CS (mother) -> CR (contentment)
Learning theory of attachment research evidence - Dollard and Miller (1950)
State that by baby’s first birthday have been fed around 2000 times, usually mostly by mother
Therefore great deal of opportunity for infant to associate carer with food
Learning theory of attachment research evidence- Schaffer and Emerson (1964)
In 39% of cases mother was main carer (giver of food) but not infant’s PAF
Suggests feeding is not main explanation of attachment
Attachment as a secondary drive
Hunger can be thought of as a primary drive as it is innate
We eat to reduce the hunger drive
Sears et al (1957) suggested the primary drive of hunger becomes generalised to the caregiver
Attachment is therefore a secondary drive
Operant conditioning in forming attachment
When the baby cries the caregiver responds (eg by feeding the infant) - acts as positive reinforcement
As long as caregiver provides correct response, crying is reinforced
Two way process
Caregiver receives negative reinforcement as crying stops
Mutual reinforcement strengthens attachment
Evaluate learning theory as an explanation of attachment- counter evidence from animal studies
Lack of support from studies conducted on animals
Lorenz’s geese imprinted on first thing they saw before food was given/ regardless of food
Harlows monkeys spent more time with cloth monkey even though wire monkey provided food
Shows factors other than association with food are importantly when forming attachment
Evaluate learning theory as an explanation of attachment- counter evidence from studies on humans
Lack of support from studies on human babies
Schaffer and Emerson (1964) found babies formed main attachment to mother regardless of if she normally fed them
Isabella et al (1989) found high levels of interactional synchrony predicted quality of attachment- not related to feeding
Suggests food is not main factor in formation of human attachments
Evaluate learning theory as an explanation for attachment- some conditioning may be involved
Strength is conditioning may be involved in some elements of attachment
Baby may associate feeling warm and comfortable with presence of a particular adult
So learning may still be useful in developing attachment
Describe the ideas Bowlby took from animal studies when developing his monotropic theory of attachment
Lorenz argued imprinting in hatchlings was an innate response in a critical period after birth
Bowlby agreed attachment was instinctive and suggested critical period was from birth to 2.5 years
Harlow demonstrated attachment was influenced by contact comfort and attachment is important for development and later relationships
Bowlby agreed need for close contact is innate and needed for survival and comfort
Also believed a lack of an emotional bond may have an adverse effect for human infants
Describe the internal working model
The quality of the infant’s first attachment forms a template for future relationships
Develops the child’s perception of what relationships should be like
Continuity hypothesis
Proposed by Bowlby
Believed the quality of early attachment would influence future relationships
Can predict relationships in adult life
IWM supporting study
Hazan and Shaver (1987)
Findings showed relationships between notion of love (IWM) and attachment type
Concluded securely attached people tended to have a positive IWM
Social releasers
Behaviours which promote infant caregiver interaction eg smiling, cooing, eye contact
Behaviours are innate within infant to maintain close contact with parents- proximity seeking
Encourages adults to attach to babies as they elicit caring, nurturing behaviours in adults
Sensitive responsiveness
Parents’ ability to be aware of and respond appropriately to the infants needs
According to Bowlby adults are ‘programmed’ to attach to infants to ensure their genes are passed on (reproductive success)
Evaluate Bowlby’s monotropic theory of attachment- monotropy is universal
Need for monotropy appears to be universal
Ainsworth (1967) observed Ganda tribe of Uganda and found infants formed one primary attachment even when reared by multiple carers
Suggests instinct to form a monotropic attachment must be innate as it is seen by infants of many cultures regardless of child rearing practices, supporting Bowlby’s theory
Evaluate Bowlby’s monotropic theory of attachment- important contribution
Bowlby’s theory has developed our knowledge and understanding of the importance of early attachment
More awareness of importance of an early monotropic attachment for a child’s emotional and social development
Evaluate Bowlby’s monotropic theory of attachment- gender bias
Implies mothers are ‘special’ in the way they are biologically predisposed to attach to babies
Also continuity hypothesis places responsibility on mother for anything that goes wrong in the future
Theory ignores role of father too and lacks temporal validity as child rearing practices have changed