learning theory (explanations of attachment)

• Dollard and Miller, learning theory of attachment

  • Attachment behaviours are due to conditioning
  • Focuses on: the importance of food, classical and operant conditioning and drive reduction
• Importance of food

  • Sometimes called the ‘cupboard love’ explanation = because it emphasises the importance of food in attachment formation
  • Children learn to love whoever feeds them
• Role of classical conditioning

  • Classical conditioning = involves learning to associate 2 stimuli
  • In attachment:
  • UCS (food) leads to UCR (a feeling of pleasure)
  • This response is not learn so it is an unconditioned response (unlearned)
• baby learns that mother produces a sense of pleasure (through classical conditioning)

  • A caregiver (eg mother) starts as a NS (something that produces no response)
  • BUT when the caregiver provides food over time, they become associated with ‘food’ - so the neutral stimulus becomes a CS
  • Once conditioning has taken place the sight of the caregiver produces a CR of pleasure
  • According to the learning theorist, the conditioned pleasure response is the basis of love
  • Now an attachment has formed and the caregiver becomes an attachment figure
• role of operant conditioning

  • Operant conditioning = explains why babies cry for comfort (an important building block for attachment)
  • Crying leads to a response from the caregiver (eg feeding)
  • As long as the caregiver provides the correct response, crying is reinforced because it produces a pleasurable consequence
  • At the same time as the baby is reinforced for crying, the caregiver receives negative reinforcement because the crying stops
  • Negative reinforcement = is escaping from something unpleasant, which is reinforcing
  • This interplay of positive/negative reinforcement strengthens an attachment
• drive reduction

  • Hunger is a primary drive = an innate biological motivator
  • We are motivated to eat to reduce the hunger drive
  • Attachment is a secondary driver learned by an association between the caregiver and the satisfaction of a primary drive
  • Sears et al = suggested that as caregivers provide food, the primary drive of hunger becomes generalised to them
• limitation = counter-evidence from animal studies

  • Lorenz’s geese imprinted on the first moving object they saw
  • Harlow’s monkeys attached to a soft surrogate in preference to a wire one with milk (comfort over food)
  • In both these animal studies = imprinting/attachment did not develop as a result of feeding
  • Shows that factors other than feeding are important in attachment formation
• limitation = counter-evidence from human studies

  • Schaffer and Emerson = showed that for many babies their main attachment was not to the person who fed them
  • Isabella et al = found that interactional synchrony (unrelated to feeding) predicted attachment quality
  • Suggests that other factors are more important in attachment formation than feeding
• strength = some elements of conditioning could still be involved

  • Seems unlikely that association with food is central to attachment BUT conditioning may still play some role in attachment
  • Eg = a baby’s choice of primary attachment figure may be determined by the fact that a caregiver becomes associated with warmth and comfort
  • Means that conditioning could still be important in choice of attachment figures, though not the process of attachment formation
• counterpoint to elements of conditioning being involved in attachment

  • This point of view ignores That fact that babies take a very active role on the interactions that reduce attachment
  • Eg = they initiate interactions (Feldman and Eidelman)
  • Suggests that learning theory may be inappropriate in explaining any aspect of attachment
• extra evaluation = social learning theory

  • Hay and Vespo = suggest that parents teach children to love them by modelling attachment behaviour (eg hugging and kissing)
  • Parents also reward babies with approval when they display their own attachment behaviour (eg ‘thats a lovely smile’ etc)
  • => social learning theory can provide better explanations (including explaining the active role taken by babies in attachment development)