Explanations of attachment learning theory

Question 1

AO1 - classical and operant conditioning

Answer 1

Pavlov- process begins with an innate stimulus response, in the case of attachment this is food, which produces the innate stimulus of pleasure
Food is the UCS and pleasure is the UCR
In the early months of the infant, certain things become associated with food because they are present at the time the infant is fed e,g food chair, mother and certain noises. These are NS

NS is consistently associated with the UCS it takes on properties of the UCS and produces the same response. NS is now the CS and produces a CR,
A person who feeds the infant changes from being an NS to an CS, seeing this person gives baby a feeling of pleasure
UCS+UCR UCS+NS= CS+ CR
Operant-Skinner, based upon the idea there is a drive in order to escape an unpleasant feeling,behaviour that leads to being fed is often then repeated as it was rewarding ( negative reinforcement) Food becomes a primary reinforcer as it supplies reward, person who provides this food is then the SR, attachment happens as the infant craves reward

Question 2

AO3 oversimplification, lacks validity

Answer 2

-Often criticised as it is based on animal studies such as skinners piegons
- Suggests that animals are no different than no other animals in terms of how they learn, all behaviour patterns are constructed from the same building blocks of stimulus and response, implying it is legitimate to generalise animal study findings to human behaviour
- However this idea can be disproved by the idea that attachment also forms from innate predispositions and mental activity that cannot be explained by conditioning
- Behaviourist explanations= lack validity, oversimplification of human behaviours

Question 3

AO3 not based on food

Answer 3

• This explanation suggests food is the key element in attachment formation
• Strong evidence disproves this, Harlow 1959 study shows monkeys in his study were more attached to wire mother than provided contact comfort, not food
• Learning theory is oversimplified and ignores other factors such as contact