caregiver-infant interactions

• What is reciprocity?


  Caregiver & infant respond to each others signals, each elicits a response from the other
• Who studied reciprocity?

  Feldman (2007)
• What did Feldman (2007) find?

  From around three months old reciprocity increases in frequency as the infant and caregiver pay increasing attention to each other's verbal and facial communications
• What is sensitive responsiveness?

  Whereby the caregiver pays attention sensitively towards the infant's behaviour
• What did Feldman (2007) suggest about sensitive responsiveness provided by reciprocity?


  Will lay the strong foundations for attachment to develop later between the caregiver and infant
• Who studied interactional synchrony?

  Melzoff & Moore (1977)
• What is interactional synchrony?

  Caregiver & infant reflect both the actions and emotions of the otheranddo this in a co-ordinated way
• What did Melzoff & Moore (1977) find?

  Infants' aged 2-3 weeks tended to mimic adults' specific facial expressions and hand movements
• What does Melzoff & Moore (1977) support?

  That infant interactional synchrony is an innate ability to aid the formations of attachments
• What research makes us more confident that interactional synchrony is innate?

  In later studies, it was seen in infants of less than three days old.
• What are most studies into caregiver-infant interactions usually?

  Highly controlled observations, usually by filming
• Why is it good that most studies into caregiver-infant interactions are highly controlled observations, usually by filming?

  Distractions can be controlled for, videos can be analysed later and using inter-rater reliability
• The high level of control in caregiver-infant interaction research makes the research what?

  More valid
• What is the first weakness of caregiver-infant interaction research?

  It is hard to interpret a babies behaviour
• Why is it hard to interpret a babies behaviour?

  Young babies lack co-ordination, movements being observed are subtle
• Why is their behaviour being difficult to interpret a weakness of the research?

  This means we cannot be certain that the behaviours seen in caregiver-infant interactions have a special meaning
• What is the second weakness of caregiver-infant interaction research?

  Simply observing a behaviour does not tell us its developmental importance
• Provide an example of how observing a behaviour does not tell us its developmental importance

  Feldman (2012) points out that ideas like synchrony simply give names to patterns of observable caregiver and baby behaviours
• Why is the fact that caregiver-infant interaction research doesn't demonstrate the importance of these behaviours a weakness?

  May not be particularly useful in understanding child development as it does not tell us the purpose of these behaviours