Evaluations grave and studies

• A01

  Samples

  Sample: 100 middle class American mothers with male and female babies aged 9-18 months.
• A03

  Gender diversity 

  The sample is diverse as they use both male and female babies. Therefore the sample is representative of the target population which is a strength as it gives the findings on attachment high generalisability
• Slapback

  Cultural bias

  The sample consisted of boys and girls only from America. This means that the findings on types of attachment may only be representative of children and mothers in America and not the wider population. This could cause implications when generalising attachment to other countries as different cultures may behave in different ways. If we cant generalize to people who aren’t from America its limited to how useful the findings will be and improving or reducing attachment in other cultures.
• A01 

  Procedure reliability 

  Procedure - Used a structured observation to film the interaction. Used a 2-way mirror to watch this. There were 8 stages and each lasted 3 minutes, key parts included: stranger entering the room, parent leaves infant with stranger, parent returns, infant left completely alone, parent returns. The main thing researchers were measuring was infant’s response upon parent reunion determing their attachment type, separation anxiety, exploration and stranger anxiety were also measured to determine this. time sampling every 15 seconds of the filmed situation.
• A03 

  Standardised procedure

  The procedure was standardized as it was a structured observation and there were 8 steps that were followed in order for every study. E.g mother reuniting with the child. Noting on observations was time sampled every 15 seconds. Having this standardized procedure increases the reliability of the results as each of the 106 study’s followed the same procedure,

  Having reliability is a strength as it makes the findings on child attachment more valid and a reliable study that we can use to consistently asses child attachments.
• Slapback Mother having control of duration

  Though there was standardization in 8 procedural steps, the duration of time before parent returned was dependent on the mother and her anxiety about her child’s distress levels. Due to this lack of consistency in each procedure with unstandardised duration of the steps, Ainsworths SS study lacks reliability. Having weakness in reliability due to inconsistency of the duration of the procedural steps means that there could be inconsistency in results potentially effecting findings on attachment
• A01

  Procedure validity 

  Ainsworth did a controlled observation with 8 parts that lasted about 3 mins each. It was in a lab. Firstly the child and caregiver enters an unfamiliar room. The caregiver sits on a chair and the infant is encouraged to explore. A stranger then enters the room and tries to interact with the infant, the caregiver then leaves. The caregiver then returns and the stranger leaves. The caregiver leaves the child again and the stranger returns and tried to interact with the child. The caregiver then returns and is reunited with the child.
• A03

  High task validity

  As a baby, being introduced to an unfamiliar setting and unfamiliar people is an almost everyday occurrence and being apart from their mother is also not unusual for example, being dropped off at daycare. Due to this, the study and procedure have high task validity.

  This is a strength because it increases the validity of the results and the procedure can be used to identify attachment types in others accurately.
• Slapback

  Low ecological validity

  setting was a laboratory, so there may be possible issues of low ecological validity. Due to artificial setting the mother may be under stress which may reflect on her natural behaviours. social desirability bias of wanting to come across as a good parent could also effect this. This is a weakness as mother’s unnatural behavior may affect how baby reacts. If behaviors do not reflect the everyday scenario, results of which attachment style the baby is may be unrepresentative of their normal relationship lowing validity of the findings.
• A01 Aim results conclusion

  Aim was to measure security of attachment a child shows towards caregiver. found three patterns of attachment: Secure (66%), Insecure-avoidant (22%), Insecure – resistant (12%), Conclusion: was suggested attachment type was determined by caregiver's behaviour; sensitive caregivers who notice needs of baby caused baby to be securely attached, Inattentive caregivers who didnt respond to baby’s needs making the baby could lead to the baby being insecure-avoidant caregiver causing baby to feel angry/confused can cause baby to become insecure-resistant.
• A03

  Real life application 

  Conclusion found child’s attachments to mothers can be categorised to three types. Ainworths attachment types are still used today.This is a strength as it means Ainsworth result have high real life applicationto help assess and guide the growth of children as they develop through later life. Particularly picking up on those with insecure attachments to support them through building secure relationships in the future. We can help support children through school through implication to help them by noticing and aiding them based on attachments types.
• Conclusion 

  Conclusion: The SSP continues to be a very useful procedure for assessing attachment.  Without it, we could not gain insights into the experiences that reduce or increase healthy attachments.  It is a sufficiently open-ended idea to allow developments, for example, identifying other attachment types .  However, it may be flawed as it is difficult to apply in all cultural settings which lowers its validity and usefulness.
• Strength Ainsworth theory

  Strange situation procedure 

  • Ainsworth’s strange situation study found that there were three types of attachment, and that children in each type reacted differently to the strange situation so giving the theory validity.
• Weakness Ainsworth theory

  • Main and Solomon found a 4th attachment type; type D insecure-disorganised. This is a weakness in Ainsworths study and is suggests that Ainsworths conclusions are incomplete which can cause questioning about the validity of the entire study due to the lack of precision in the analysis of the behaviour observed
• A01

  Ainsworth identified three types of attachment. Secure, Insecure avoidant and Insecure Resistant. For example, Type B securely attached children will be distressed when left with a stranger and go to their mother for comfort when she returns. 
• Type B securely attached children will be distressed when left with a stranger and go to their mother for comfort when she returns. They use the mother as a safe base from which to explore.  Mothers of securely attached (Type B) children respond sensitively to their child’s needs.
• Type A Insecure-avoidant leads to children not being upset when left alone, and they are indifferent or avoids the mother when the mother returns. They show low stranger anxiety.Children who are insecure-avoidant often do not have their needs met by their caregiver.
• Type C insecure-resistant children tend to stay close to their mother rather than explore their surroundings.  Type C Insecure-resistant children get very upset when the mother leaves but resist any comfort from her when she returns. High stranger anxiety. A parent who causes their baby to feel angry and confused can cause the baby to become insecure-resistant
• Ainsworth’s strange situation study found that there were 3 different types of attachment and that each child reacted differently to the strange situation.

  This research supports Ainsworth’s theory that there are 3 types of attachment: secure, insecure avoid and insecure resistant.

  Having this supporting research is a strength as it shows  Aimsowrth’s theory has  high accuracy , increasing thr validity of Aimsowrth’s theory on attachment types.
• Slapback 

  Main and Solomon replicated Ainsworth’s work using over 200 strange situation procedure videotapes and found a fourth type of attachment called insecure-disorganized which is characterized by lack of consistent patterns in social behaviour, evidence of a fourth attachment type is a weakness in Ainsworth's strange situation procedure as it makes Ainsworth’s study incomplete, as she concluded that there were only three attachment types, this therefore invalidates the results due to her failure to further analyze her study creating issues in further lack of precession.
• A01 

  Ainsworth believed that attachment types not learned but affected by innate adaptive behaviours of the child and parent which she observed in Uganda and the USA.
• A03

  Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonberg (1988) found three types of attachment were represented in a variety of cultures including non-western cultures. Shows universality of secure attachment. This shows that attachment is innate as it is seen across many cultures that may differ in parenting styles and religions ect. But the child’s attachment still has the same 3 types showing that it could be down to nature rather than nurture of the child.This is a strength to Ainsworths theory that attachment types are innate as it shows the same three types of attachment in multiple culture.
• A01

  Ainsworth believed that attachment type was caused by caregiver – the Caregiver sensitivity Hypothesis. Secure attachment due to sensitive carer etc.
• A03

  Research to support this is the Koluchová twins. The two Czech boys lived locked up in the basement for 5 and 1/2 years and were physically small for their age afterwards and they were unable to talk. They were then adopted by a loving, sensitive family and went on to have good relationships with adoptive parents and their own kids in later life.This supports the theory that a sensitive caregiver that is responsive to the child’s needs can determine the child’s attatchment type.
• Application 

  Cooper et al (2005)

  There is real life application by Cooper et al (2005) who’s Circle of Security project teaches caregivers to understand their babies’ signals of distress better and to increase their understanding of what it feels like to be anxious. The project showed a decrease in the number of caregivers classified as disordered form (60% to 15%) and an increase in babies classed as securely attached (from 32% to 40%).
• Societal control

  There are issues with social control as results that do not fit under secure attachment mean parents may have to alter their parenting and change the way they think and feel to adjust their child’s attachment.

  This is an implication as the parents might be resistant with this and do not want to comply, The application might cause issues with attachment that fall into the category or Type A and Type C and lead to social control, forcing parents to think a certain way.
• Conclusion

  Conclusion: Attachment types are useful way of assessing children’s attachments.  Have predictive validity, as per IWM many studies show that attachment type is consistent over time – attachment as a child affects adult relationships, both with own children and other adults.  Being able to assess attachment types is useful as has huge real life application to improve outcomes for children in Circle of sensitivity interventions. However, attachment types can be culture biased and there are individual differences such as temperament which are not taken into account. 
• Slapback

  Ainsworth’s finidngs on attachment May have been influenced by differing personality typed not caused by caregiver.