Caregiver-Infant Interactions

• Attachment- a close, two-way emotional bond between two individuals where they both see each other as essential for their own emotional security
• Reciprocity- two-way process where caregiver and infant respond to each others signals to sustain an interaction, eliciting a response from each other
• Interactional synchrony- caregiver and infant reflect each others emotions and actions in a coordinated manner
• Reciprocity:

  Infants move in a rhythm when interacting with a caregiver (like turn-taking). They have alert phases- signalling they’re ready to interact. Caregivers pick up on 2/3 of an infants alterness- which varies due to the skill of the mother and external factors. Infants take an active role, and feel distressed when these attempts are ignored.
• Interactional synchrony:

  Rhythmic interaction between caregiver and infant, with mutual focus on eachother and mirroring eachothers emotions and behaviour. Both are able to anticipate each others behaviour to elicit a response. More likely to develop if infant is fully attended to and is provided with playful stimulation when alert.
• The purpose of reciprocity and interactional synchrony is to contribute to the infant‘s social and emotional development, helping them to form secure attachments with their caregivers.
• Evaluation of the supporting evidence for attachment:

  • Babies can’t communicate- inference is heavily relied on
  • Research uses observations as its main method
  • Practicality issues of researching young babies- they’re often asleep or being fed
  • Issue of intentionality- are imitative behaviours deliberate?
  • Research might be socially sensitive- implications for working mothers
• Response to reunion- how does baby act after separation from caregiver?
• Stranger anxiety- how does baby behave with an unfamiliar adult?
• Secure-base behaviour- does baby explore their surroundings and check back in with caregiver?
• Separation anxiety- how does baby respond to caregiver leaving?
• Proximity-seeking behaviour- how close does baby stay to caregiver?
• Stage 1- Asocial (0-8 weeks):

  • Similar behaviour from baby between humans and non-humans
  • Preference to objects with faces
  • Beginning to recognise specific faces
  • Happier with humans than alone with a preference to familiar individuals
  • Smiles at anyone
• Stage 2- Indiscriminate (2-7 months):

  • Baby recognises and prefers familiar people
  • Smiles more at familiar faces
  • Preference shown for people over objects
  • Accepts comfort from any adult, no stranger anxiety shown
  • No separation anxiety shown when caregiver leaves
• Stage 3- Specific Attachment (7-12 months):

  • Primary attachment to one particular individual who is most sensitive to baby's signals and interacts the most with baby
  • Baby shows stranger anxiety and separation anxiety
  • Familiar adults are used as a secure-base
• Stage 4- Multiple Attachments (1 year+):

  • Secondary attachments formed with familiar adults, baby shows separation and stranger anxiety
• Schaffer & Emerson (1964): Longitudinal study investigating the age when specific attachments developed

  • 60 Glaswegian babies visited monthly for their first 18 months.
  • Caregivers gave observation based diary entries of daily major events and interviewed on their child's response to separation.
  • Attachment measured through separation and stranger anxiety in 7 normal situations.
  • 50% of babies showed separation anxiety during the 25-32 week period.
  • First attachment was formed with the caregiver who provided the most interaction.
  • Stranger anxiety was shown one month after attachment forms.
• Evaluation of Schaffer & Emerson (1964):

  • Generalisability- natural behaviour due to natural environment- high ecological validity BUT limited sample so lowers ecological validity.
  • Reliability- non-standardised procedure due to self-reporting, increases social desirability bias due to caregivers influence, difficult to replicate= low reliability.
  • Application- supports paternal leave to lessen stress on mother of the idea of returning to work, gives idea of when infants can go into childcare (Stage 4- Multiple Attachments).
• Evaluation of Schaffer & Emerson (1964):

  • High internal validity- longitudinal study allows more insight into how behaviour changes and what might cause the changes, repeated measures- baby compared to own development, lowers risks of participant or extraneous variables.
  • Low internal validity- little evidence of the asocial stage, it's difficult to judge babies behaviour at this stage.
• Role of the father- Schaffer & Emerson (1964):

  • Believed that fathers were less likely to be the baby’s first attachment compared to the mother.
  • Only in 3% of cases, the father was the primary attachment.
  • 75% of babies formed attachments with their fathers by 18 months, shown by separation anxiety.
• Role of the father- Grossman et al (2002):

  • Longitudinal study into child attachments until their teen years, studying both caregiver‘s behaviour and it’s impact on the quality of the child’s later attachments.
  • Findings- quality of child’s attachment relates to the mother, and determines the quality of their later attachments.
  • Quality of the father‘s play was also related to the quality of the child’s later attachments, suggesting that father’s have a different role relating to play, not emotional development.
• Role of the father- Field (1978):

  • 4 month old babies filmed while interacting with their primary caregiver mothers or fathers and secondary caregiver fathers.
  • Primary caregiver fathers and mothers spent more time smiling, imitating and holding the child, than secondary caregiver fathers did.
  • Shows that fathers are able to take on the emotional role associated with mothers when they take on the primary caregiver role.
• Evaluation of studies into the role of the father:

  • Low internal validity- confusion around research question leads to less certainty of causation.
  • Low generalisability- research is biased towards hetero-normative families, low population validity.
  • Application- brings assurance to single/ same-sex parents (Field 1978).
  • Conflicting evidence- Grossman et al (2002) suggests the father’s role is involved in play, however Field (1978) suggests the father is able to have an emotional role.
  • High economical value- supports paternity leave, encouraging mothers to go back to work.