How does the Strange Situation findings have good predictive validity? (strength)
The outcomes predict a number of aspects of baby's later development e.g research to show Type B babies have better outcomes which include achievement in school (McCormick) and less involvement in bullying (Kokkinos), tend to have better mental health in adulthood (Ward).
Shows the experiment measures something real and meaningful to development.
What is a counter argument to the fact that the Strange Situation findings have good predictive validity?
Not all psychologists believe it measures attachment e.g Kagan suggested genetically influenced anxiety levels may account for variations in attachment behaviour. Perhaps the findings lack validity and might just be a correlation.
How does the Strange Situation have good reliability? (strength)
There is inter-rater reliability and Bick tested this by getting a team of trained observers to observe the babies behaviours and found agreement on attachment in 94% of cases, perhaps as behaviours were easy to observe e.g crying.
How many the Strange Situation findings be culture bound? (limitation)
Attachment styles may not be a valid measure in different cultural contexts as strange situation was developed in UK and US.
One reason is that babies have different experiences so may affect their responses to the experiment.
E.g Japanese study Takahashi- babies showed high seperation anxiety so a disproportionate amount classified as type C (raised more closely to mother in Japnan as suggested).