Lesson 7 - Strange Situation

Question 1

Strange Situation

-Ainsworth et al(1969)

Answer 1

• Ainsworth et al(1969)

• Observe infants
-9-18 months

• Stressful conditions observed

• stranger anxiety
• separation anxiety

Question 2

Strange Situation Procedure

Answer 2

• 9x9 foot square marked into 16 squares
-help recording infant’s movements

• 8 episodes

• designed to highlight certain behaviours
• 3 minutes duration each
• Controlled observation
• Data collected every 15 seconds

Question 3

Strange Situation Findings

Answer 3

• Total of 106 middle-class infants and mothers
• 3 different types of attachments formed
• Secure
• Insecure Avoidant
• Insecure Resistant

Question 4

Secure attachment findings

-type B

Answer 4

• Willingness to explore: high
• Stranger anxiety: high
• Separation anxiety: some easy to soothe
• Behaviour at reunion with caregiver: Enthusiastic
• Percentage of infants in category: 70%

Question 5

Insecure Avoidant findings

-type A

Answer 5

• Willingness to explore: high
• Stranger anxiety: low
• Separation anxiety: indifferent
• Behaviour at reunion with caregiver: Avoids contact
• Percentage of infants in category: 15%

Question 6

Insecure Resistant findings

-type C

Answer 6

• Willingness to explore: low
• Stranger anxiety: high
• Separation anxiety: Distressed
• Behaviour at reunion with caregiver: Seeks and rejects
• Percentage of infants in category: 15%

Question 7

Strange situation Strengths

Answer 7

• Reliability assessed using inter-rater reliability

• found .94 agreement between raters
• Bick et al(2012)
• looked at inter-rater reliability
• team of trained Strange Situation observers
• found agreement on attachment type for 94% of babies

-Strange situation to measure attachment type is still reliable

Question 8

Strange situation weaknesses

Answer 8

• Insecure-disorganised attachment type

-characterised by lack of consistent patterns of social behaviour

• Van Ijzendoorn et al(1999)
• meta analysis of 80 US studies

-62% secure (type B)
-15% type A
-9% type C
14% type D

• Measuring one relationship rather than child’s general attachment type

• children behaved differently depending on which parent with
• low validity

• Low ecological validity

• Lacks population validity
-not generalisable