Romanian orphan studies: Institutionalisation

• [AO1](Romanian orphan studies/institutionalisation) What sample did the researcher Rutter et al. follow in his 2011 study?

  A group of 165 Romanian orphans who experienced very poor conditions before being adopted in the UK.

  As well as a control group of 52 adopted children from the UK.
• [AO1](Romanian orphan studies/institutionalisation)Rutter et al.(2011) English and Romanian adoptee study(ERA) procedure:

  • Longitudinal study
  • Tested the extent to which good care can make up for poor early experiences in institutions. Physical, cognitive and emotional development has been assessed at 4, 6, 11, 15 and 22-25 years.
• [AO1](Romanian orphan studies/institutionalisation) Rutter et al.(2011) English and Romanian adoptee study(ERA) found what results in regards to intellectual development?

  Half of the Romanian orphans showed delayed intellectual development when they came to the UK.

  At age 11 recovery rates were related to their age at adoption:

  • Those adopted before six months had a mean IQ of 102.
  • Those adopted after two years had a mean IQ of 77.

  These differences continued to be apparent at age 16(Beckett et al. 2010).
• [AO1](Romanian orphan studies/institutionalisation) Rutter et al.(2011) English and Romanian adoptee study(ERA) found out what in regards to emotional development?

  They found the frequency of 'disinhibited attachment' was related to the age of adoption:

  • Apparent in children adopted after they were six months old: Clinginess, attention-seeking and indiscriminate affection to strangers.
  • Rare in children adopted before the age of six months.
• [AO1](Romanian orphan studies/institutionalisation)How did the Rutter et al.(2011) English and Romanian adoptee study(ERA) support Bowlby's view of maternal deprivation?

  • The findings supported Bowlby's view that there is a sensitive period in the development of attachments- a failure to form an attachment before the age of six months(and after the age of 2 years) appears to have long-lasting effects.
• [AO1](Romanian orphan studies/institutionalisation) Zeanah et al.(2005) Bucharest early intervention project(BEI) Procedure:

  • The researchers used the 'Strange Situation' to assess attachment in 95 Romanian children aged 12-31 months who had spent most of their lives in institutional care.
  • They were compared to a control group of 50 children who had never experienced institutional care.
• [AO1](Romanian orphan studies/institutionalisation) Zeanah et al.(2005) Bucharest early intervention project(BEI) found that:

  • Only 19% of the institutionalised group were securely attached(74% of the control group were).
  • 44% of the institutionalised group had characteristics of disinhibited attachment(20% of control group had this).
• [AO1](Romanian orphan studies/institutionalisation) What are the effects of institutionalisation?

  • Disinhibited attachment
  • Damage to intellectual development
  • Quasi-Autism
  • Lack of internal working model
• [AO1](Romanian orphan studies/institutionalisation) What is disinhibited attachment?

  Children with disinhibited attachment tend to:

  • Be equally friendly and affectionate towards people they know well or total strangers.
• [AO1](Romanian orphan studies/institutionalisation) How can institutionalised children be intellectually damaged?

  • Institutionalised children often show signs of intellectual disability.
  • This effect is not as pronounced if the children are adopted before 6 months of age.
• [AO3](Romanian orphan studies/institutionalisation) One strength of the Romanian orphans study is real-world application:

  • Results from this research have led to improvements in the way children are cared for in institutions(Langton 2006).
  • Children's homes now avoid having large numbers of caregivers for each child. They have one or two 'key workers' who play a central role.
  • This means children in institutional care have a chance to develop normal attachments and disinhibited attachment it avoided.
• [AO3](Romanian orphan studies/institutionalisation) Another strength is fewer confounding variables than other research:

  • Studies before the Romanian orphans studies often involved children who experienced loss or trauma before they were institutionalised.
  • Neglect, abuse and bereavement meant it was hard to observe the effects of institutionalisation in isolation. The children were affected by multiple factors functioning as confounding variables.
  • This means we can be fairly sure that differences in institutionally-cared-for children are the result of this type of care.
• [AO3](Romanian orphan studies/institutionalisation) A limitation is that the Romanian orphan studies may have new confounding variables:

  • They may have new confounding variables because quality of care was so poor, making it hard to separate effects of institutional care from those of poor institutional care.
  • This means that internal validity might not be better than in previous studies after all.
• [AO3](Romanian orphan studies/institutionalisation) One limitation is the lack of data in adult development:

  • It is too soon to say for certain whether children suffered permanent effects because we only have data on their development as far as their early twenties.
  • It will be some time before we have information about some key questions(e.g. orphans' ability to form and maintain romantic/parenting relationships).
  • This means the Romanian orphan studies have not yet yielded their most important findings, some children may 'catch up'.
• [AO3](Romanian orphan studies/institutionalisation) Another limitation is social sensitivity, but is overpowered by strength of the benefits:

  • Late-adopted children were shown to have low IQ. This might subsequently affect how they are treated by parents, teachers etc. and might create a self-fulfilling prophecy.
  • On the other hand, much has been learned from the Romanian orphan studies that might benefit future institutionalised or potentially institutionalised children.
  • So the potential benefits of the studies outweigh their social sensitivity.