AO3

• evidential basis 


  • flawed evidence - study was opened to bias as Bowlby assessed deprivation and psychopathy knowing what he hoped to find (researcher and confirmation bias)
  • Goldfarb - studied the deprivation of wartime orphans but this evidence is flawed as ppts were traumatised and lacked good aftercare (confounding variables)
  • therefore Bowlby had little solid evidence on which to base his theory of maternal deprivation
  • but there has been recent progression of evidence for the theory - levy et al - found that even short separations can harm social development in rats.
• real world application


  • robertson filmed 2 year old laura, during an 8 day period in the hospital
  • seen to be frequently distressed and begs to go home
  • this along with bowlbys theories led to changes in the way children are treated in hospital
• No clear distinguishment between deprivation and privation

  • Rutter suggested Bowlby may have gotten confused with the concept of deprivation - stated they are often confused
  • Privation - failure to form any attachment in the first place
  • deprivation - the loss of the primary attachment figure after attachment has developed
  • Therefore Bowlby has not provided a clear distinction between the 2 concepts and that they theory is therefore not detailed enough
• Critical period is too narrow

  • Koluchova - studied a pair of Czech twins
  • Ages 2 to 7 - Locked in a cellar and abused leading to physical and linguistic problems
  • Therefore, the critical period is sensitive and not critical. If it was critical like Bowlbys theory suggests the twins should never have been able to recover