learning theory

• learning theory

  theories from the behaviourist approach

  emphasises the role of learning to acquire behaviour

  involves classical and operant conditioning.
• 'cupboard love'

  emphasises the importance of the attachment figure as a provider of food.

  children learn to love whoever feeds them
• classical conditioning

  • learning to associate two stimuli together so that we respond to one in the same way we respond to another.
  • unconditioned stimulus = food
  • unconditioned response = pleasure from food.
  • neutral stimulus = caregiver
  • conditioned stimulus = seeing the caregiver makes the baby expect food.
  • conditioned response = seeing the caregiver gives the baby a response of pleasure as they associate them with food.
• operant conditioning

  • learning from the consequences of behaviour.
  • behaviour is reinforced if it produces a positive response.
  • behaviour is less likely to be repeated if it is punished.
  • operant conditioning explains why babies cry for comfort.
  • if crying leads to the correct response (e.g. feeding) the crying is reinforced.
  • baby then directs crying for comfort as the caregiver will respond with comforting 'social suppressor' behaviour
• attachment as a secondary drive

  hunger is the primary drive - it's an innate biological motivator.

  attachment is the secondary drive - caregiver provides food so babies learn to associate the caregiver with satisfaction of a primary drive
• limitation - counter-evidence from animal studies

  LT has a lack of support.

  Lorenz's geese imprinted on the first moving object regardless of whether it was associated with food.

  Harlow's monkeys preferred a soft 'mother' to a wire one which provided milk

  shows factors other than association with food are important to form attachments.
• limitation - counter-evidence from studies on humans

  LT has a lack of support from human babies.

  Schaffer + Emerson found babies tended to form their main attachment to the mother regardless of whether she was the one who fed them.

  Isabella et al found high levels of interactional synchrony predicted quality of attachment - nothing to do with food.

  suggests food is not the main factor in forming human attachments.
• strength - some conditioning involved

  elements of conditioning could be involved in some aspects of attachment

  seems unlikely that association with food plays a central role but conditioning may still play a tole.

  e.g. a baby may associate feeling comfortable with the presence of a particular adult which could influence who their main attachment figure is.