Institutionalisation: Romanian orphan studies

• What is an institution?

  Organisation established for specific religious, social, professional or educational purpose

  • In this context: an orphanage/care home founded to give parentless children a place to stay long-term
• Why would children in institutions suffer from emotional deprivation?

  • Understaffed/high turnover of staff + oversaturated with orphans
  • Often provide good physical care but rarely good emotional care
• What is institutionalisation?

  Effect that living in a group home for a long period of time has on children living in these institutions/orphanages

  • Behaviour shaped to fit norms of institution
• Whose regime implemented orphanages in Romania?

  Ceaușescu
• What are the effects of institutionalisation?

  • Disinhibited attachment
  • Cognitive impairment
  • Poor parenting
  • Difficulty with relationships
  • Physical underdevelopment
• What does disinhibited attachment look like?

  • Type of insecure attachment -> children treat strangers the same way as well-known carers (indiscriminate)
  • Unusual -> most children develop stranger anxiety in 3rd stage of attachment
  • Approach strangers with familiarity (e.g. holding hands, hugging, etc) + react with distress when the strangers leave, as if going through a separation protest
  • Attention seeking = common
  • Rutter (2006): this could be an adaptive result of children having multiple carers rather than one to whom they can attach
• Which studies note the effects of disinhibited attachment?

  • Hodges + Tizard (1984 + 1989)
  • Rutter et al. ERA study (2011)
  • Zeanah et al. (2005)
• What does cognitive impairment look like?

  • Emotional deprivation affects cognitive processing
  • Institutionalised children tend to have lower IQ scores than control groups who were raised by their parents
• Which study notes the effects of cognitive impairment?

  • Rutter et al. ERA study (2011)
• What does poor parenting look like?

  • Institutionalised women have more difficulty raising children than individuals who were not institutionalised
  • They struggle with infants' upbringing
  • Greater percentage of institutionalised women's children end up in care than those of women who grew up with their families
• Which studies note the effects of institutionalisation leading to poor parenting?

  • Quinton et al. (1984)
  • Harlow (1959)
• What does difficulty with relationships look like?

  • Children have been shown to 'make up' for most of the emotional maladjustment caused by emotional deprivation in institutions through forming good relationships with adopted parents
  • Only possible if they are young enough!!
  • However, these children often still struggle in relationships with their peers, e.g. friends + siblings
• Which study notes the effects of institutionalisation causing difficulty with relationships?

  • Hodges + Tizard (1984 + 1989)
• What does physical underdevelopment look like?

  • Even when institutions provide for children's physical needs, their emotional deprivation still has a negative impact on physical development (Gardner, 1972)
  • Institutionalised children tend to be small in comparison to other children their age
• Which studies note the effects of physical underdevelopment?

  • Gardner (1972)
  • Rutter et al. ERA study (2011)
• What was the aim of Zeanah et al.'s 2005 'Bucharest Early Intervention' study into the effects institutionalisation?


  To determine the effects of institutionalisation
• What was the sample of Zeanah et al.'s 2005 'Bucharest Early Intervention' study into the effects institutionalisation?


  • 95 children
  • 12-31 months old
  • Spent average of 90% of their lives in care
• What was the method of Zeanah et al.'s 2005 'Bucharest Early Intervention' study into the effects institutionalisation?


  • Quasi experiment
  • Independent groups design
  • Observational technique to collect data on attachment type
• What was the procedure of Zeanah et al.'s 2005 'Bucharest Early Intervention' study into the effects institutionalisation?


  • IV = whether or not children had spent time in an institution
  • DV = attachment type (classified by exhibited behaviours)
  • Children's attachment types assessed using Ainsworth's Strange Situation -> results compared to control group of 50 Romanian children who had never been in an institution
  • Control group also assessed using SS
• What were the findings of Zeanah et al.'s 2005 'Bucharest Early Intervention' study into the effects institutionalisation?


  • 74% of control group = securely attached
  • 19% of institutionalised group = securely attached
  • <20% of control group = disinhibited attachment
  • 44% of institutionalised group = disinhibited attachment
• What were the conclusions of Zeanah et al.'s 2005 'Bucharest Early Intervention' study into the effects institutionalisation?



  • Institutionalisation = negative impact on children's emotional + social development
  • Fewer institutionalised children develop secure attachments than non-institutionalised children
  • High chance of institutionalised children developing disinhibited attachment
• What was the aim of Rutter et al.'s 2011 'English and Romanian Adoption (ERA) Study' into the effects of institutionalisation?


  To determine whether the effects of institutionalisation can be reversed
• What was the sample of Rutter et al.'s 2011 'English and Romanian Adoption (ERA) Study' into the effects of institutionalisation?



  • 165 Romanian orphans adopted by British parents
  • 58 adopted pre-6 months
  • 59 adopted at 6 months to 2 years
  • 54 adopted at 2-4 years
• What was the method of Rutter et al.'s 2011 'English and Romanian Adoption (ERA) Study' into the effects of institutionalisation?



  • Natural experiment
  • Standardised testing
  • Interview + observation techniques
  • Longitudinal study
• What was the procedure of Rutter et al.'s 2011 'English and Romanian Adoption (ERA) Study' into the effects of institutionalisation?



  • IV = age of adoption
  • DV = rate of physical, cognitive + social development
  • Institutionalised children raised naturally by loving families who adopted them
  • Adoptees tested for physical, cognitive + social development at ages 4, 6, 11 + 15
  • Qualitative info gathered by interviewing parents + teachers
  • All info compared with control group of 52 British children adopted before age 2
• What were the findings of Rutter et al.'s 2011 'English and Romanian Adoption (ERA) Study' into the effects of institutionalisation?
(1/2)


  • Romanian children were behind British children in every aspect
  • Physical: >50% malnourished + physically smaller = bottom 1/3 of population for weight + head size
  • Cognitive: longer time spent in institution = lower mean IQ
  • At time of adoption, mean IQ =
  • Pre-6 months = 102
  • 6 months to 2 years = 86
  • 2-4 years = 77
  • Children did make some progress to 'catch up' but effects remained at 16 years old (Beckett et al. 2010)
• What were the findings of Rutter et al.'s 2011 'English and Romanian Adoption (ERA) Study' into the effects of institutionalisation?
(2/2)


  • Social: variation in extent of children's recovery -> correlated to age of adoption
  • Infants adopted pre-6 months rarely showed disinhibited attachment (8.9%)
  • Infants adopted post-6 months often showed disinhibited attachment (26.1%) + difficulty with peer relationships
  • 54% of Romanian children showing disinhibition at age 6 still showed this attachment style at age 11
• What were the conclusions of Rutter et al.'s 2011 'English and Romanian Adoption (ERA) Study' into the effects of institutionalisation?


  • Long-term consequences of emotional deprivation could be less severe than initially thought in Bowlby's early research
  • In infants adopted from institutions before attachments start to develop, effects can be totally reversed
  • Effects can also lessen over time in infants adopted post-6 months
  • The longer the child is institutionalised, the more significant the effects will be
• Effects of institutionalisation A&E point 1: idea that children who grow up in institutions will exhibit long-term effects = strengthened by research evidence

  • Rutter et al. (2011) -> >50% Romanian children who showed disinhibited attachment at 6 years old still showed signs of it at 11
  • Also found evidence for cognitive impairment -> longer time spent in institution = lower IQ
  • Zeanah et al. (2005) -> institutionalisation = 2x as likely to result in disinhibited attachment
  • Emotional maladjustment = result of deprivation of nurturing primary caregiver
• Effects of institutionalisation A&E point 2: weaknesses in Romanian orphan studies = we must be careful when drawing conclusions about negative effects of institutionalisation

  • Children deprived of physical + educational care as well as emotional care -> can't say that all negative impacts are solely due to emotional deprivation
  • All experiments = quasi or natural -> investigators could not control extraneous variables = no causal conclusion
• Effects of institutionalisation A&E point 3: important real-life applications

  • Improvement in lives of vulnerable children -> changes in UK policy = differences in quality of institutionalised children's lives
  • Policy encouraging mothers to breastfeed adoptees revoked -> children given up as soon as possible = they can be adopted before they begin to form attachments
  • Policy introduced stating each child in care must have key worker -> no longer have many staff caring for them all at once = secure attachments can form while in care = chance of disinhibited attachment lessened
• Research into effects of institutionalisation / Romanian orphan studies A&E point 1: studies such as Rutter et al. = strong internal validity = trustworthy

  • Range of measures to assess children's progress beyond institutions (e.g. observations, standardised testing, interviewing parents/teachers) = Rutter et al. able to see extent to which measures of development correlated
  • More accurate picture of children studied = results more generalisable + longitudinal studies = more than just a 'snapshot' into children's experiences
• Research into effects of institutionalisation / Romanian orphan studies A&E point 2: weaknesses in Romanian orphan studies = we must be careful when drawing conclusions about negative effects of institutionalisation

  • Children deprived of physical + educational care as well as emotional care -> can't say that all negative impacts are solely due to emotional deprivation
  • All experiments = quasi or natural -> investigators could not control extraneous variables = no causal conclusion
• Research into effects of institutionalisation / Romanian orphan studies A&E point 3: Romanian orphan studies are better than earlier studies into deprivation/institutionalisation = results + conclusions are strong

  • Little control over extraneous variables BUT more control than previous studies -> usually, children experience trauma before institutionalisation = potential skew in results
  • Not a problem in Romanian orphan studies -> children in orphanages from birth (result of Ceaușescu outlawing contraception/abortion for women <45 + taxing families with <5 children)