Biological argument

• What does the biological argument suggest about men?


  • that they are not biologically programmed to provide a sensitive and nurturing attachment
• What did Hardy (1999) find?


  • found that fathers were less able to detect low levels of infant distress in comparison to mothers
  • Hardy's research supports the idea that the lack of oestrogen in men means that men are not equipped with the right hormones to form close relationships with their children
• Women's biology

  • having breasts means that they have a more natural opportunity to have skin to skin contact with their infant through breast feeding
  • women have increased levels of hormones that encourage attachment behaviours - e.g OXYTOCIN (love hormone) - because it encourages a connection between mother and child
• What has recent research suggested about oxytocin in men?

  when men become fathers, recent research suggests that they have elevated levels of oxytocin (love hormone)
• Schaffer and Emerson....


  ....
• What did Field do?


  • conducted research which compared the behaviours of primary caretaker mothers with primary & secondary caretaker fathers
  • face to face interactions were analysed from video footage with infants at 4 months of age
  • observed that fathers engaged more in game playing and held infants less
• Field - primary caregiver fathers

  • they focused more on attachment building behaviours compared to secondary caregiver fathers
  • these attachment building behaviours are called "sensitive responsiveness" (smiling, intimate vocalisation)
• What does Field's research discredit?

  • the biological argument
  • why? because it provides evidence to suggest that males are capable of taking on a nurturing approach
• What did Grossman do?

  • conducted a longitudinal study of 44 families comparing the role of father and mothers contribution to their children's attachment experiences at age 6, 10, 16
• What did Grossman find?

  • the importance of quality mother-child attachment, and that the quality of this attachment was a better predictor of a child's future attachments
  • that the internal working model (if a child has good attachment with mother, they will form good attachments in the future) did not apply to father-child attachment which suggests that the role of the father is less important
• What did Grossman find about a father's play style?

  • that it was closely linked to the fathers own internal working model of attachment
  • play sensitivity was a better predictor of the child's long term attachment than the early attachment type they infant had with their father - for example, if a child doesn't have a strong attachment with dad but spend lots of time together, it can have positive effects on the infant (father's not less important, just adopt a different role)
• Brown et al 


  • investigated father involvement, paternal sensitivity and father-child attachment security at 13 months and 3 years of age
  • their results demonstrated that involvement and sensitivity influenced father-child attachment security at age 3
  • found that involvement was a greater predictor of secure attachment when fathers were rated as less sensitive
• What do both Brown and Field's research indicate?


  • that the gender of a cargiver is not crucial in predicting attachment types / quality but rather it is the extent of caregiver involvement
  • this can be linked to Ainsworth's caregiver 'sensitivity hypothesis'