Topic 7: Attachment Flashcards
Define Attachment
Attachment can be defined as an emotional bond between two people in which each seeks closeness and feels more secure when in the presence of the attachment figure.
Reciprocity
Reciprocity is a form of interaction between infant and caregiver involving mutual responsiveness, with both infant and mother responding to each other’s signals, and each elicits a response from the other. I.e. the caregiver picking the baby up and cuddling it when it cries.
Jaffe eh al demonstrated that infants coordinated their actions with caregivers in a kind of conversation. From birth babies move in a rhythm when interacting with adults almost as if they were taking in turns, as ppl do in conversations- one person leans forwards and speaks and then it is the other person’s turn. This is an example of reciprocity.
Reciprocal interactions are crucial for the development of communication skills and secure attachmen
Research for reciprocity
The Still-Face Experiment:
Tronick in the 1970s, explores how infants react when a caregiver suddenly becomes unresponsive and maintains a neutral, expressionless face.
Procedure:
A caregiver (typically a mother) engages in normal, interactive play with an infant.
The caregiver then abruptly stops responding to the infant’s cues, maintaining a still, expressionless face for a period of time.
Finally, the caregiver resumes normal interaction.
Key Findings:
Initially, infants attempt to re-engage the caregiver through various means like smiling, vocalizing, and reaching out.
When these attempts fail, infants become visibly distressed, showing signs of confusion, frustration, and even crying.
Infants may withdraw and lose postural control, indicating a sense of overwhelm and despair.
The experiment demonstrates that infants are not passive recipients of care but actively seek and expect reciprocal engagement.
Interactional synchrony
Interactional synchrony is when two people interact and tend to mirror what the other is doing in terms of their facial and body movements (emotions and behaviours).
For example, when two people move In time with each other.
Observational Research into interactional synchrony
Meltzoff and Moore
Aim: To investigate IS between infants and their caregivers.
Procedure: conducted a series of controlled observations and frame-by-frame video analysis using babies. The Babies were exposed to four different stimuli carried out by adult models; three facial gestures (e.g. mouth opening, tongue protrusion) and one manual gesture (e.g. waving fingers). The babies response to each of these gestures were observed and their actions were video recorded.
Findings: An association between the infant behaviour and the adult model was found even with infants only 3 days old.
Conclusion: Meltzoff & Moore (1983) demonstrated that interactional synchrony occurred with infants imitating facial expressions, tongue protrusions and mouth openings from an adult model when only three days old. This suggests the behaviour was innate rather than learned.
Reciprocity and Interactional Synchrony Evaluation
Weaknesses:
- Testing infant behaviour is difficult as their facial expressions are almost continuously changing. Behaviours observed in the Meltzoff & Moore study may lack validity as expressions involving sticking their tongue out, yawning, smiling, opening their mouths and movements of hands occur constantly in young babies. This makes it incredibly difficult to distinguish between general behaviour and actual interactional synchrony. Therefore such theories may lack internal validity due to not necessarily measuring interactional synchrony.
- Failure to replicate: For example, Koepke et al (1983) was unable to recreate the same findings as m&m although one weakness claimed by Meltzoff and Moore was their study lacked control and thus had validity.
- potential observer bias in the studies. Since behaviours of babies are hardv to interpret, researcher may interpret a babies actions in a way that fits their expectations.
Strengths:
- One practical application for such findings is mothers can be placed in the same rooms with their children instantly so they can begin to form attachment bonds unlike previous practice where they were kept separate.
- A strength is that controlled observationsoften capture fine details as they are generally well-controlled procedures. For example, both the mother and the infant are filmed, often from multiple angles, this ensures that fine details of behaviour can be recorded and later analysed. Videos can be replayed in detail for accurate analysis increasing reliability. Furthermore, babies are unaware that they are being observed so their behaviour does not change in response to controlled observations which is generally a problem for observational research. Increases internal validity
- Murray and Trevarthen research support: 2 month old infants shown video monitor of mother in real time and video monitor of mother not responding to the infant’s facial and body gestures. The result was acute distress, infant tried to attract mother’s interest but eventually gaining no response turned away. Infant = active and intentional partner in mother-infant interaction. Supports that behaviours are innate not learnt as baby is not displaying response that has been rewarded but rather a baby is actively eliciting a response.
- Predictive validity for IS: Isabella et al (1991)hypothesised that caregiver-baby pairs that developed secure attachment relationships would display more synchronous behaviour than babies with insecure relationships. Babies were observed using frame by frame video analysis at 3 and 9 months and the secure group interacted in a well-timed, reciprocal, and mutually rewarding manner. In contrast caregiver-baby pairs classed as insecure were characterized by interactions that were minimally involved, unresponsive and intrusive. Found a positive correlation between care-giver infant interaction and attachment strength.It was concluded that different interactional behaviours predicted attachment quality. However correlation doesn’t = causation.
- Support for reciprocity: The Still-Face Experiment - Tronick 1970s, explores how infants react when a caregiver suddenly becomes unresponsive and maintains a neutral, expressionless face.demonstrates that infants are not passive recipients of care but actively seek and expect reciprocal engagement.Feldman et al (2007) found that babies have “alert phases” and signal that they’re ready for interactions, and mothers pick up on and respond to infant alertness two-thirds of the time.
Outline and Evaluate Schaffer & Emerson’s observational Glasgow baby study
- Longitudinal study using a naturalistic observation. Measured indicators of separation anxiety and stranger distress of 60 infants from 5-23 weeks of age until 1 year by observing how the baby reacted to being separated form their parent and how it reacted to a new comer. Mothers were visited every 4 weeks and reported their baby’s response to separation in every day situations and stranger anxiety was measured by the infant’s response to the interviewer on each visit. They discovered that attachment types develop over time and correspond with age- the four stages of attachment.
87% of babies formed an attachment with two or more caregivers and the baby’s main attachment figure wasn’t always their maincaregiver. And the babies who formed the strongest attachments were the ones whose caregivers displayed the mostsensitive responsiveness
Evaluation:
- naturalistic observation means that the study likely has high ecological validity and babies behaviours are generalisable to everyday life. However it may still contain observer bias.
- Small and biased sample - From working class population in 1960s. Thus findings may only apply to that social group a time period.
- Their stages are inflexible & judgemental and lack cultural validity, particularly the idea of a primary attachment figure followed by multiple attachments, may not be universally applicable.In some collectivist cultures, multiple attachments may form earlier and play a more prominent role than in individualistic cultures.The study’s emphasis on separation anxiety and stranger anxiety as indicators of attachment might also not be universally applicable, as some cultures may have different norms and expectations regarding infant behavior in these situation
- Unreliable data - based on self report, could create systematic bias / conformity to social desirability.
- Sagi et al. - S&E only studied infants from 1 culture (an individualist culture) but other cultures are collectivist.Sagi compared attachments in Israeli kibbutzim (communal environment) to individualist family environment. Found closeness with mother twice as likely in family arrangements.These results suggest that attachments are culturally specific and the fact that Shaffer & Emersons study was only carried out in Individualist cultures creates an imposed epic to universally apply the stages of attachment formation to collectivist cultures
Schaffer and Emmerson’s four stages of attachment
1) Asocial Stage: 0-6 weeks. No discrimination between humans. Preference for humans over non-humans.
2) Indiscriminate Stage: From 6 weeks - 7 months. Can tell ppl apart, stronger bonds start to grow with familiar adults. No fear of strangers.
3) Specific Stage: Develops around 7 months old. Form specific attachment to one person, their primary attachment figure. Strong displays of separation anxiety. Distress in the company of strangers.
4) Multiple Attachments: From around 10 months old, children begin to attach to others and form multiple attachments.
The Role of the Father
- Schaffer and Emerson Found that fathers were far less likely to be primary attachment figure than mothers: in 3% of cases the father was the first sole object of attachment, in 27% of cases the father and mother were joint first object of attachment, and 75%of infants studied had formed an attachment with the father at 18 months
- men may be less psychological equipped to form an intense attached because they lack the emotional sensitivity that women offer. This could be due to biological factors (i.e. the female hormone oestrogen underlies caring behaviour) or social factors such as stereotypes. Some research has sown that single fathers and men in homosexual relationships with children have increased levels of oestrogen. Studies have shown thatfathers who spend more time playing, holding, and interacting with their infants exhibit elevated oxytocin levels (a hormone that facilitates parent-child bonding), suggesting that bonding and caregiving behaviours are not biologically exclusive to mothers but are shaped by active involvement (Gettler et al., 2011).
- Fathers as primary attachment figures: Tiffany Field filmed 4 month old babies in face-to-face interactions with primary caregiver mothers, secondary caregiver fathers, and primary caregiver fathers. Found that Primary caregiver fathers, like primary caregiver mothers, spent more time smiling, imitating and holding babies (examples of reciprocity and interactional synchrony), similar to traditional maternal behaviour. Suggests that fathers have the potential to be the more emotion-focused PAF but may only express this when given the role of primary caregiver.
Ross et al (1975) - investigated the impact of carrying out caretaking duties on parental attachment, using a correlational study measuring the number of nappies changed and strength of attachment. F: A positive correlation was found between the number of nappies changed and the strength of the father/child attachment, suggesting that the more time a father spends engaged in care giver activities, the stronger the attachment will be.
Secondary Attachment:
Geiger found that fathers tend to be more playful, physically active and generally better at providing challenging situations for their children (which encourages problem-solving), than mothers, who are more conventional. He suggests they make good secondary attachment figures.
Grossman et al carried out a longitudinal study on babies through to teens, studying the relationship between parents behavior and quality of their babies’ later attachments. Found that quality of baby’s attachment with mothers, but not fathers, was related to later attachment in adolescence. However, quality of fathers’ play with babies was related to the quality of adolescent attachments.
Evaluation/discussions:
- Real world applications: mothers may feel pressured to stay at home because of stereotypical; views of mothers’ and fathers’ roles and this may not be the best economical decision for the family. Research into ROF can offer reassuring advice to parents. Heterosexual parents can be informed that fathers are quite capable of become PAF’s.
- Relies on Heteronormative research which assumes all parents are in heterosexual relationships. enforces not only strict norms about sexuality but also reinforces strict gender roles within society, and ignores the roles of primary attachment in single parents or heterosexual relationships.
Lorenz (1935)
Lorenz (1935) imprinted goslings onto himself within a brief time period, which Bowlby incorporated into his idea of a critical period - a set time within which an attachment must form (13-16 hours after hatching/birth).
- The imprinted geese preferred him to the natural mother.
- Sexual imprinting: When adult the imprinted geese made sexual advancements upon Lorenz.
- Lorenz suggested imprinting was irreversible and long lasting.
Procedure:
Lorenz divided a clutch of goose eggs into two groups:
Group 1 (Natural Hatching):Eggs hatched naturally with the mother goose.
Group 2 (Incubator Hatching):Eggs hatched in an incubator, where Lorenz was the first moving object they saw.
Observation:
The goslings from the incubator group followed Lorenz everywhere, demonstrating imprinting on him.
The goslings from the natural hatching group followed their mother goose.
Results:
Lorenz’s research demonstrated that newly hatched goslings would imprint on the first moving object they saw, regardless of whether it was a human or another animal.
Sluckin (1966)
Imprinted ducklings outside of the critical period, thus it is instead a sensitive period - a best time for attachments.
Guiton (1966)
Research support for imprinting:
Guiton demonstrated that chicks exposed to yellow gloves while being fed during their first weeks became imprinted on the gloves. Also found that male chickens later tried to mate with the gloves.
CP: Guiton found that he could reverse the imprinting in chicken that had initially tried to mate with the rubber gloves after leaving them with their own species. Suggests imprinting may not be very different from any other kind of learning.
Imprinting
A form of attachment where offspring follow the first large moving object they see.
Harlow’s Monkeys (1959)
- Harlow raised baby monkeys in isolation with two surrogate mothers,
- Cupboard love theories predict baby monkeys would prefer a harsh, wire mother that provided food to a soft-towelling mother providing no food.
- Infant monkeys spent most time with the soft-towelling mother, using her as a safe base to explore from and went to her when scared.
- Harlow later raised baby monkeys in total isolation resulting in psychological disturbance. When placed with others they had no social skills, were psychologically disturbed and had no ability to engage in sexual courtship and made made terrible parents.
- Harlow and Suomi (1972) found that these effects were reversible if the damaged monkey was placed with a younger, opposite sex normal ‘therapist’ monkey, which seemed to act as a ‘template’ for normal behaviour to develop.
Evaluate Animal Studies
Strengths:
- Animal research let psychologists study attachment in ways not practically or ethically possible with human pps.
- Practical applications: Imprinting has helped reintroduce migratory birds to areas where they have become extinct. Farmers also use imprinting by putting an orphaned lamb wearing the skin of a dead lamb with the dead lamb’s mother so that she will accept it. Also has profound implications for childcare. Due to the importance of early experiences on long-term development , it is vital that all children’s needs are catered for; taking care of a child’s physical needs alone is not sufficient.
- Harlow ‘Comfort love’: Schaffer and Emerson Glasgow study supports the idea that responsiveness may be more important than food as the baby’s main attachment figure wasn’t always their maincaregiver. And the babies who formed the strongest attachments were the ones whose caregivers displayed the mostsensitive responsiveness.
Limitations:
- Problems with generalisation/extrapolation: What is true for animals is not necessarily true for humans.
- Ethics: Harlow’s study created lasting emotional harm as the monkeys later found it difficult to form relationships with their peers.
- Lorenz’s membership of the Nazi party has led to accusations that his belief in genetically inherited characteristics contaminated his work with researcher bias.
- Confounding Variable: The heads of the monkeys in Harlow’s study were also different, decreases internal validity.
Learning Theory
- The first attachment theory.
- A behaviourist theory.
- Also known as a cupboard love theory (we attach due to feeding).
- Children attach to those who feed them by the process of association (either through classical or operant conditioning)
Classical Condition = attachment
Babies learn to associate caregivers with food
Before Learning:
Food (UCS) = Pleasure (UCR)
During Learning:
Food (UCS) + Caregiver (CS) = Pleasure (UCR)
After Learning:
Caregiver (CS) = Pleasure (CR)
Operant Conditioning as an explanation for attachment
Caregivers are a source of negative reinforcement as they become associated with reducing the unpleasant feelings of hunger.
Evaluation of Learning Theory
Strengths:
- Dollard & Miller (1950) calculate babies are fed over 2,000 times in their first year by the main carer, easily enough for an association between caregiver and feeding to be formed.
- May be useful in explaining when attachment goes wrong, i.e. because of neglect, and therefore suggests better solutions.
Limitations:
- Sometimes human’s actively seek negative stimuli i.e. nerves, fear and adrenaline during extreme/dangerous sport, or alcohol and smoking. Human’s don’t always look to reduce negative feelings. OC may not be the best explanation as human behaviour contradicts it.
- Based on animals research i.e. Pavlov’s dogs and Skinner’s rats. Extrapolation. Cannot necessarily be generalised to human’s who are much more complex.
- Environmentally reductionist: Ignores biological factors (Bowlby’s monotropic theory or Lorenz).
- Harlow found baby monkeys separated from their mother preferred a soft-towelling surrogate mother with no food, to a harsh wire mother that did provide food. This goes against learning theory and suggests babies only need food occasionally, but need emotional security all the time.
- Attachments develop with carers who don’t feed babies.
- Conditioning best explains how simple behaviours are learned, but attachments are complex behaviours with an intense emotional component.
- Little research support compared to Bowlby’s theory.
Primary Reinforcer
food
Secondary Reinforcer
Person who supplies the food (carer)
Bowlby’s theory of Maternal Deprivation
Bowlby’s ‘maternal deprivation’ theory suggested that a separation from the mother or substitute mother can have negative psychological consequences.
Critical Period: Attachment must form before 2.5 years but a continued risk up to age 5.
Deprivation refers to the lack of emotional care usually a primary caregiver provides over an extended period of time, in the case of maternal deprivation, the mother. whereas separation is the absence of a caregiver for shorter periods and is less likely to cause psychological harm to the child unless it happens regularly. If a child experiences the loss of their primary caregiver after establishing an attachment, this deprivation can lead to developmental problems later in life.
Effects of maternal deprivation on Development:
Intellectual Development is delayed. Results in abnormally low IQ. William Goldfarb found lower IQ in children who remained in institutions than those who were fostered and thus had a higher standard of emotional care.
Emotional Development: Prevents development of normal relationships and is associated with criminality. Can result in affectionless psychopathy.
PDD model
Robertson and Bowlby (1952) suggested that the effects of short-term separation may be the same as the effects of deprivation. They developed the protest-despair-detachment (PDD) model:
Stage One: Protest
Immediate reactions involved crying, kicking, screaming, and attempting to stop the caregiver from leaving.
Stage Two: Despair
Children displayed signs of acceptance of the situation or helplessness. They appeared to be in mourning. They comforted themselves through thumb-sucking or rocking and withdrew.
Stage Three: Detachment
Children began engaging with others and appeared sociable. When the caregivers returned, the children showed indifference or anger at the caregiver for leaving.
Affectionless Psychopathy
Bowlby defined affectionless psychopathy as the inability to experience guilt or strong emotion towards others.
Bowlby’s 44 thieves study concluded that prolonged early separation/deprivation caused affectionless psychopathy.
14/44 thieves, who were interviewed, could be described as affectionless psychopaths. 12 of these experienced prolonged separations from their mother during the critical period.