Issues & Debates

Question 1

Practical issues- General

Answer 1

Child 
Vanizjendoorn
Li
Genie
Bowlby 44 thieves
Interviews & questionnaires with children
Observations
Cross-Cultural studies
Cross-Sectional studies

Question 2

Development over time- General

Answer 2

• Evolution/Darwin  Bowlby
• Ethologists  Bowlby
• Learning theories  Harlow refuted them
• Freud  Bowlby
• Bowlby Ainsworth
• Ainsworth Uganda  Strange situation  Cross cultural/vanizjendoorn
• NICHD  Li
• Autism explanations (are a development of understanding themselves)
• Learning  ABA
• Genie and all of the others helped develop our knowledge about privation
• Bowlby  Rutter
• Bowlby  Robertson & Robertson

Question 3

Nature/Nurture- General

Answer 3

• Bowlby focuses on evolution
• Ethologists show animals are similar with his due to biology
• Bowlby looks at relationships with parents and upbringing= nurture
• IWM is a nurture concept
• Ainsworth looks at the influence of parents on attachment type
• Kagan argues it is due to temperament so nature
• Cultural variations in attachment would suggest nurture
• However, Secure the most common therefore nature
• We see the same 3 attachment types worldwide so also nature
• Deprivation seems to be universal so could be nature
• Deprivation however is clearly caused by environmental factors
• Privation shows the effects of nurture
• Critical periods (Genie for language and Bowlby for attachment) nature- but needs nurture to develop those skills
• Overcoming privation like children in the studies is nurture
• The effects (positive and negative) of Daycare show nurture is importan
• Li- cognitive development effected by nurture
• Autism EMB is biological
• ToM isn’t really weighed in on during this debate…but ToM developing at a certain age suggests nature
• CBT and ABA both use nurture/learning to change the autism behaviours

Question 4

Reductionism- General

Answer 4

• Child considers both nature and nurture so not reductionist
• Bowlby ignored the quality of attachment focusing on it as a binary concept
• Over focus on the mother ignoring other relationships
• Bowlby talks about the sensitive period being in various stages which is a oversimplified view
• Bowlby however did acknowledge environmental, cognitive and biological factors in attachment
• Simplification of deprivation to PDD stages
• Ainsworth classified behaviour in one of three types
• Ainsworth did scientific research in a structured observation eliminating EVs
• Kagan suggests it is the child’s temperament which Ainsworth ignored
• Ainsworth only looked at parental responsiveness as a factor
• Main & Solomon suggests there is a 4th type (Ainsworth only using 3)
• Li Simplifying ‘quality’ of daycare down to easy measures (above or below 3 on a number of factors i.e. good responsiveness)- other factors could be important for different children
• EMB ignores other factors such as cognition, birth complications etc
• ToM ignores other factors such as biological
• Privation uses case studies which tend to be holistic research methods looking at factors and gaining qualitative data

Question 5

Psychology as a science- General

Answer 5

• Empirical- sometimes i.e. Ainsworth/Vanijzendoorn measuring behaviour (as is evidence of privation, evidence of social releasers, scores on Li’s tests) but people like Bowlby (IWM), mental structures, Autism thoughts i.e. ToM might not be, CBT for Autism. Vanijzendoorn used empirical statistics etc
• Objective- See the above, the same is true for measurements in studies i.e. Li- tests on children and ORCE however behaviours, effects of privation, IWM might be subjective
• Hypothesis testing- Li, Ainsworth and Van Ijz were all testing hypotheses/had IVs and DVs (though some were naturally occurring so don’t 100% get cause and effect)
• Falsifiable- All theories could be tested and proven wrong (Daycare could not have had an impact, parental sensitivity could not have had an impact etc)
• Reductionist- Ainsworth simplifies behaviour to a list of behaviours/types of attachment, Bowlby ignores other factors like other attachments, Li simplified daycare into good/bad (3.0) and looked at intelligence/cognitive ability using some measurements (ignoring other factors)
• Controls- Filters in Vanijz, artificial/controlled setting in Ainsworth i.e. EVs eliminated, Li had measures to eliminate Evs (or at least acknowledge them), Bowlby and Genie however had limited controls
• Reliable/replicable- Li was secondary data so could (but the NICHD it was based on was a massive study so might be difficult), Ainsworth was standardised…and repeated a lot, Vanijz could be repeated as it was a meta-analysis
• Internal Validity- DCs limited when studying children as they lack understanding (but you could argue it’d be higher as they’re easy to influence), eliminating EVs in Structured obs like Ainsworth, filtering EVs in Vanijz and Li…but plenty of examples where they are like Genie and Bowlby 44 thieves

Question 6

Ethics- General

Answer 6

• UNCRC is a big issue which we could talk about (see the page on that in child book for more info on the relevant articles- which could be applied in a similar way
• Consent (informed)- All involved children who cannot consent (but often we get it from parents) whether about daycare, Ainsworth etc…some studies have extra issues i.e. Genie and studies about Autism where there may be difficulties in understanding
• Deception- No real issues with deception in main studies
• Confidentiality- Identities were protected i.e. Genie with a Pseudonym and no identifying factors in other studies i.e. Bowlby 44 theives
• Debrief- Not that they mentioned but likely in some cases like Ainsworth etc not likely in Vanijzendoorn because of secondary data (but we’re ok with that), Genie is unlikely, not possible in Li etc
• Withdrawal- Children clearly wanted to in Ainsworth (and Vanijzendoorn), Parents could withdraw them…not 100% possible in others like Genie, Bowlby (though this was retrospective interview so probably not too much of an issue)
• Protection from harm-Ainsworth and Vanijzendoorn would be upsetting to the children involved (parents could cut each section short in Ainsworth though), Genie’s research could have been stressful and upsetting for her, they were accused of putting research before her wellbeing, she was well cared for and fostered several times, Li was naturally occurring (as are all the privation studies so researcher isn’t responsible), children with Autism might be easily upset i.e. change in routine etc in the various studies and therefore this should be a concern
• Article 3: the child’s best interests should be top priority
• Article 9. States Parties shall ensure that a child shall not be separated from his or her parents against their will
• Article 12: Every child has the right to express their views, feelings and wishes
• Article 13. The child shall have the right to freedom of expression
• Article 16: Every child has a right to privacy
• Article 18. States Parties shall use their best efforts to ensure recognition of the principle that both parents have common responsibilities for the upbringing and development of the child
• Article 36: They should be protected from all forms of exploitation

Question 7

Social control- General

Answer 7

• Bowlby and Ainsworth both make judgements about what is good parenting and so socially controlling
• However, Ainsworth and Vanijz show that there is variation around world and within cultures so not so much social control
• However, it’s probably good to dissuade people from privating their children
• Deprivation research like Bowlby may suggest women shouldn’t work
• However, Rutter shows it not to be so important and therefore not socially controlling
• Treatment/help for those with autism can be seen as a form of social control though the intention is to help the individual in their functioning, so this type of ‘treatment’ can be said to be less ‘social control’ than other treatments (such as drug therapy).
• Research which touts the benefits of daycare like EPPE and Li may encourage parents to use it and work more
• Socially controlling research about the negatives of daycare might criticise parents who need to use it to work
• Day care and rules governing day care can be said to give power to society rather than to individuals or the children.
• ABA is socially controlling because it causes children to change their behaviour against their will (and discourages certain behaviours they may find comfortable)
• Diagnosis of Autism could be seen as socially controlling i.e. whether it is an actual condition or not
• Children can make choices in a day care setting (more perhaps now than in the past), so there is less social control perhaps though choices are limited to what is offered (what is offered is controlled).
• Fostering and adoption for children who have had problems with forming attachments can be seen to be about conforming to social norms.
• A child who does not conform is likely to be seen as a problem, and the care they are offered is likely to be affected by them not conforming.
• Universality of application of attachment theory creates a bias towards particular cultures and child care arrangements.
• In child psychology research into day care can show social control, such as advising about the staff-child ratio and what makes good day care for a society.
• Attachment theory dictates the “norm” as to the type of child care and behaviour of children with their caregivers.

Question 8

Usefullness- General

Answer 8

• Bowlby is useful because it can tell us about how to form better/stronger attachments with our children i.e. responding to social releasers, keeping proximity
• However social control/social sensitivity
• However Rutter disagrees with Bowlby’s focus on mothers and suggestion of deprivation not being reversable/able to overcome
• Harlow and Lorenz etc however use animals so might not be applicable to humans
• Useful for informing people about building good healthy relationships (the focus on IWM)
• However difficult to measure cognitive elements like IWM so not useful
• Deprivation research might not be useful because Bowlby suggests it is irreversible (you could argue its useful if it helps us avoid deprivation)
• Robertson and Robertson etc however show that it can be overcome with good quality care
• Privation research is useful because it tells us how easily it can be overcome/not (obviously ones which suggest it can be overcome are more useful)…they regardless tell us about the risk factors i.e. duration of privation
• However case studies
• There are also questions about how useful some are because they might be deprivation rather than privation
• Ainsworth useful because it tells us about the type of responsiveness needed for secure attachment (which linked to Bowlby leads to good quality relationships)
• However, ethnocentric bias
• However, might be more than 3 types
• However, might be temperament rather than parenting so not useful
• Vanijzendoorn- shows cultural variation and similarities so we know what is nature and nurture
• Daycare all of the little studies inform us about what makes a good quality daycare, whether we should send children and the negative effects etc
• Li- informs us about the important times to be giving high and low quality care for different effects/ what are the effects of low quality daycare to avoid it
• Autism explanations- Useful for providing support for parents, useful for providing tests for autism like Sally-Anne test and eyes task
• Enables people with autism to be helped in education and social interactions
• Autism treatments like ABA might be useful in ‘improving’ behaviour
• However social control
• Might not work beyond the therapy setting/after rewards are given
• CBT might be more effective long term
• CBT assists with reducing anxiety for those with autism and therefore useful

Question 9

Socially Sensitive- General

Answer 9

• Bowlby and Ainsworth both make judgements about what is good parenting and so socially sensitive
• However, Ainsworth and Vanijz show that there is variation around world and within cultures so not so much social sensitive
• Ainsworth’s labels and beliefs about attachment however are socially sensitive because they might be ethnocentric
• However, it’s probably good to dissuade people from privating their children- this probably isn’t socially sensitive
• Deprivation research like Bowlby may suggest women shouldn’t work- socially sensitive
• However, Rutter shows it not to be so important and therefore not socially sensitive
• Treatment/help for those with autism can be seen as a form of social control though the intention is to help the individual in their functioning, so this type of ‘treatment’ can be said to be less ‘social control’ than other treatments (such as drug therapy).- if it is socially controlling you can definitely argue it being socially sensitive
• Research which touts the benefits of daycare like EPPE and Li may encourage parents to use it and work more- socially sensitive
• Research about the negatives of daycare might criticise parents who need to use it to work- this could be socially sensitive
• ABA is socially controlling because it causes children to change their behaviour against their will (and discourages certain behaviours they may find comfortable)-therefore socially sensitive
• Diagnosis of Autism could be seen as socially controlling i.e. whether it is an actual condition or not- therefore socially sensitive
• Universality of application of attachment theory creates a bias towards particular cultures and child care arrangements.
• Attachment theory dictates the “norm” as to the type of child care and behaviour of children with their caregivers.

Question 10

Culture and gender- General

Answer 10

• Bowlby doesn’t talk about gender differences so might show beta-bias
• Attachment being based on evolution (social releasers etc) means it should be universal and not influenced by culture
• Bowlby 44 thieves and Robertson and Robertson both used males and females….but didn’t look for gender differences
• Ainsworth used both gender of babies-not gender biased
• Only used mother and baby pairs though so might apply differently to father relationships (same in Vanijzendoorn)
• Procedure might not apply to other cultures equally (who are less used to be left with strangers/more used to it)
• Ainsworth’s labels and ideas about parental sensitivity might be culture bound i.e. ‘avoidant’ could be labelled differently in Germany
• We see some cultural differences in attachment types (Vanijz and other studies) which we need to acknowledge
• Cross-Cultural studies are good because they obviously show influence of culture
• Vanijzendoorn showed that procedure might not work equally in all cultures i.e. SS in Japan
• However, there was more differences within culture than across so might not be a cultural issue
• Vanijzendoorn used both collectivist and individualistic cultures so no culture bias
• However, many more individualistic cultures than collectivist (18 were from USA particularly)
• Privation research has been done with both males and females (Genie and Czech twins) so shows the effects impact on both (we could argue about gender differences but it’s more an individual thing i.e. Genie didn’t recover but the girls in Freud & Dann did)
• Li was only in the US so its findings might not apply to daycare situations in other cultures
• Daycare in general is different from culture to culture so we have to acknowledge that before making judgements about the effects of it
• Autism effects males more than females and so that needs to be acknowledged when researching…or perhaps females are underdiagnosed and we see that in the research
• ToM explanation doesn’t really explain gender differences
• EMB does acknowledge and explain gender differences (males more likely to be exposed to testosterone in womb)
• ABA and CBT shouldn’t see a difference in gender and culture differences

Question 11

Comparison of Themes- General

Answer 11

• Bowlby looks at evolution which is a shared theme with aggression
• Bowlby’s IWM is linked to schemas which is a concept shared with reconstructive memory
• Bowlby demonstrates a critical period (which is a biological concept) which is shared with language development/privation
• Bowlby and Ainsworth have the shared concept of attachment (but Ainsworth goes into more detail with different types of attachment)
• Cross-Culture/Vanijzendoorn looks at culture as a factor a theme shared with clinical diagnosis and social psychology
• Bowlby and Ainsworth share the idea of responsiveness/sensitivity with Daycare and with Psychodynamic approach
• Importance of early relationships is a theme of both Psychodynamic and Bowlby
• Daycare research like Li looks at cognitive development (including memory)- this one is also a bit of a stretch
• Autism looks at hormone/brain structure as an explanation which is linked to the biological explanation
• Autism looks at cognitive explanations (ToM) therefore links to other examples of ‘faulty cognition’ like Depression and Schizophrenia
• CBT is a shared theme or concept (correcting faulty thinking) with Schizophrenia and Depression
• ABA uses operant conditioning/learning/reinforcement/nurture which is a shared theme with aggression, phobias etc in the Learning approach