Bowlby's monotropic theory

• Bowlby’s monotropic theory

  • emphasises a child’s attachment to one particular caregiver (primary attachment figure)
  • believed that the child’s attachment to this one caregiver is different and more important than others.​
  • Bowlby called this person the ‘mother’ but it was that it doesn’t need to be the biological mother.
  • believed that the more time a baby spent with this mother figure (primary attachment figure) the better. ​
• Bowlby proposed an evolutionary explanation for attachment: that attachment was an innate system that gave a survival advantage. Attachment evolved to protect infants from danger.
• Bowlby put forward two key principles to illustrate the importance of monotropy:​

  1. The law of continuity: states that the more constant and predictable a child’s care, the better the quality of their attachment.​
  2. The law of accumulated separation: stated that the effects of every separation from the mother add up ‘and the safest dose is therefore a zero dose’ (Bowlby, 1975).​
• Bowlby suggested that babies are born with innate 'cute' behaviours like smiling, cooing and gripping that grab the attention of the caregiver. He called them social releasers because their purpose is to activate the adult attachment system.
• Bowlby recognised that attachment was a reciprocal process. Both mother and baby have an innate predisposition to become attached and social releasers trigger that response in caregivers.​
• Bowlby proposed that there is a critical period around 2-2.5 years when the infant attachment system is active. He viewed this as more of a sensitive period where the child is maximally sensitive at the age of two. However, if an attachment doesn't form in this time, a child will find it much harder to form one later.
• Bowlby proposed that a child forms a mental representation (schema) of their relationship with their primary caregiver. This is called an internal working model because it serves as a model for what relationships are like.​ Therefore, if the infant has a positive, loving relationship with their caregiver, they will have a positive internal working model and then form positive relationships in the future.
• The internal working model affects the child’s later ability to be a parent themselves. People tend to base their parenting behaviour on their own experiences of being parented.
• A strength of Bowlby's theory is that there is support for the internal working model. For example, Bailey et al assessed 99 mothers with one-year-olds on the quality of their attachment to their mothers using a standard interview procedure. They also assessed the attachment of the infants to their mothers by observation. It was found that mothers who reported poor attachment to their own parents in interviews were more likely to have poorly attached infants. This strengthens the theory as it provides evidence that the internal working model affects an infant's later ability to be a parent.
• A strength of Bowlby's monotropic theory is the supporting evidence. For example, Lorenz's Gosling's study supports Bowlby's idea that attachment is an innate behaviour that is formed to one primary caregiver as the goslings imprinted immediately after birth to the first moving object they saw (Lorenz or Gosling's mother). Also, imprinting was irreversible and formed to only one animal/person. This strengthens Bowlby's theory as it underpins the idea that attachment is monotropic: the goslings who imprinted on Lorenz, could not imprint on their mother also even when the groups mixed.
• A weakness of Bowlby's monotropic theory is that there is contradictory evidence. For example, Schaffer and Emerson disagreed that attachment is monotropic. This is because, in their study of the stages of attachment, they found that some infants were able to form multiple attachments at the same time, though most babies did attach to one caregiver first. This weakness Bowlby's theory as it fails to explain why infants can form multiple attachments at one time so it lacks comprehension.
• A strength of Bowlby's theory is that there is evidence for 'social releasers'. Brazelton et al observed mothers and babies during their interactions and reported signs of interactional synchrony. The primary caregivers were instructed to ignore babies' signals (social releases). The infants showed great distress as a response and this extreme response strengthens Bowlby's theory as it highlights how attachment is a reciprocal process, where the adult responding to the infant's signals is significant in its development.
• A weakness of Bowlby's monotropic theory is that it is socially sensitive. Feminists like Burman have criticised how the monotropic theory places a great burden of responsibility on mothers, setting them to take up the blame for any wrongdoings in the child's life. This is because the law of accumulated separation states that having long periods of separation from a primary attachment figure risks a poor attachment, and therefore a poor internal working model. This limits this theory as it deters mothers from pursuing their work after childbirth to avoid these supposed negative outcomes.