Caregiver-Infant Interactions

• Attachment can be defined as an emotional bond between two people in which each seeks closeness and feels more secure when in the presence of the attachment figure
• Caregiver-Infant Interactions:

  • Interactions between very young babies and their parents are baby-led
  • Reciprocity: both infant and caregiver are active contributors in the interaction and respond to each other
  • Interactional Synchrony: rhythmic interaction between infant and caregiver involving mutual focus, reciprocity, and mirroring of emotion or behavior
• Reciprocity is a description of how two people interact. Caregiver-infant interaction is reciprocal in that both caregiver and baby respond to each other's signals and each elicits a response from each other (similar to a conversation).
• Interactional synchrony is when the caregiver and baby reflect (mirror) both the actions and emotions of each other and do this in a coordinated (synchronised) way.
• The first few months of life are characterised by a period of intense socialisation where infants develop attachments with primary caregivers such as mothers.
• Good quality early social interactions are associated with the successful development of attachments between babies and their caregiver(s).
• 𝙍𝙀𝘾𝙄𝙋𝙍𝙊𝘾𝙄𝙏𝙔:

  An interaction is said to show reciprocity when each person responds to the other and elicits a response from them. This kind of reciprocal interaction is sometimes called 'turn-taking' and is an essential part of any conversation (otherwise people would talk over each other).
• 𝘼𝙇𝙀𝙍𝙏 𝙋𝙃𝘼𝙎𝙀𝙎 𝙊𝙁 𝙍𝙀𝘾𝙄𝙋𝙍𝙊𝘾𝙄𝙏𝙔:

  Babies have periodic 'alert phases' in which they signal (e.g. making eye contact) that they are ready for an interaction. Research shows that mothers typically pick up on and respond to their baby's alertness around two-thirds of the time, although this varies according to the skill of the mother and external factors such as stress.

  From around three months this interaction tends to become increasingly frequent and involves both mother and baby paying close attention to each other's verbal signals and facial expressions.
• 𝘼𝘾𝙏𝙄𝙑𝙀 𝙄𝙉𝙑𝙊𝙇𝙑𝙀𝙈𝙀𝙉𝙏 𝙄𝙉 𝙍𝙀𝘾𝙄𝙋𝙍𝙊𝘾𝙄𝙏𝙔:

  Traditional views of childhood have portrayed babies in a passive role, receiving care from an adult. However, it seems that babies as well as caregivers actually take quite an active role. Both caregiver and baby can initiate interactions and they appear to take turns in doing so.

  T. Berry Brazelton et al. (1975) described this interaction as a 'dance' because it is just like a couple's dance where each partner responds to the other person's moves.
• 𝙄𝙉𝙏𝙀𝙍𝘼𝘾𝙏𝙄𝙊𝙉𝘼𝙇 𝙎𝙔𝙉𝘾𝙃𝙍𝙊𝙉𝙔:

  Two people are said to be 'synchronised' when they carry out the same action simultaneously. Interactional synchrony can thus be defined as the 'temporal co-coordination of micro-level social behaviour' (Feldman 2007). It takes place when the caregiver and baby interact in such a way that their actions and emotions mirror each other.
• 𝙎𝙔𝙉𝘾𝙃𝙍𝙊𝙉𝙔 𝘽𝙀𝙂𝙄𝙉𝙎:

  Meltzoff and Moore (1977) observed the beginnings of interactional synchrony in babies as young as two weeks old. An adult displayed one of three distinctive facial expressions or gestures. The baby's response was filmed and labelled by independent observers. Babies' expressions and gestures were more likely to mirror those of the adults than chance would predict i.e. there was a significant association.
• 𝙄𝙈𝙋𝙊𝙍𝙏𝘼𝙉𝘾𝙀 𝙊𝙁 𝙄𝙉𝙏𝙀𝙍𝘼𝘾𝙏𝙄𝙊𝙉𝘼𝙇 𝙎𝙔𝙉𝘾𝙃𝙍𝙊𝙉𝙔 𝙁𝙊𝙍 𝘼𝙏𝙏𝘼𝘾𝙃𝙈𝙀𝙉𝙏:

  It is believed that interactional synchrony is important for the development of caregiver-infant attachments. Isabella et al. (1989) observed 30 babies and mothers together and assessed the degree of synchrony. The researchers also assessed the quality of mother-baby attachment. They found that high levels of synchrony were associated with better quality mother-baby attachment (e.g. the emotional intensity of the relationship).
• When Mary refers to her son Rudy entering an ‘alert phase’, she is probably thinking of research showing that babies have alert phases in which they initiate interaction and are particularly responsive to caregivers’ interactions. Mary is correct to point out that, as Rudy is in an alert phase, this is a good opportunity to have good-quality interactions with him. She is also correct in believing that this requires concentration as she will need to pick up on Rudy’s signals in order to build reciprocity. Mothers who are distracted tend to miss more of their babies’ non-verbal signals.
• Interactive synchrony is thought to play a role in the formation of secure attachments because it provides opportunities for infants to experience contingent responses from their caregivers. Contingency occurs when the infant’s behaviour causes something to happen – e.g., crying results in being picked up. Infants who receive contingent responses are more likely to form secure attachments compared to those who do not.
• The term ‘interactive synchrony’ describes how infants and their caregivers become attuned to each other through turn taking and mirroring behaviours. When these processes occur frequently, it leads to a positive cycle whereby both parties respond positively to each other. In contrast, if either party does not respond appropriately, then the process breaks down and negative cycles may develop.
• The term ‘contingency’ comes from the Latin word meaning ‘to hang’. In the context of attachment theory, it means that the infant’s behaviour has consequences. For example, if the infant cries then the parent responds appropriately. This creates a sense of security for the child as they know what to expect from others.
• 𝙀𝙑𝘼𝙇𝙐𝘼𝙏𝙄𝙊𝙉𝙎:

  1. filmed observations
  2. difficulty observing babies
  3. developmental importance (Feldman)
  4. counterpoint to importance (Isabella et al.)
  5. practical value vs ethics (Crotwell et al.)
• 𝟭. 𝗙𝗜𝗟𝗠𝗘𝗗 𝗢𝗕𝗦𝗘𝗥𝗩𝗔𝗧𝗜𝗢𝗡𝗦:

  One strength is that caregiver-infant interactions are usually filmed in a lab.

  Other activities that may distract the baby can be controlled, as well as allowing for observations to be recorded and analysed later - it is unlikely researchers will miss seeing key behaviours. Also, more than one observer can record data and establish inter-rater reliability. Babies don't know they're being observed so their behaviour does not change in response.

  The data collected in research like this should have good validity and reliability.
• 𝟮. 𝗗𝗜𝗙𝗙𝗜𝗖𝗨𝗟𝗧𝗬 𝗢𝗕𝗦𝗘𝗥𝗩𝗜𝗡𝗚 𝗕𝗔𝗕𝗜𝗘𝗦:

  One limitation is that it is hard to interpret babies' behaviours.

  Young babies lack coordination and much of their bodies are almost immobile. The observed movements in caregiver-infant interactions are small hand movements and subtle changes in facial expression. It is also difficult to determine what is happening from the baby's perspective - for example, whether a hand twitch is random or triggered by the caregiver.

  We cannot be certain behaviours seen in this research actually have a special meaning.
• 𝟯. 𝗗𝗘𝗩𝗘𝗟𝗢𝗣𝗠𝗘𝗡𝗧𝗔𝗟 𝗜𝗠𝗣𝗢𝗥𝗧𝗔𝗡𝗖𝗘:

  One limitation is that simply observing a behaviour does not tell us its developmental importance.

  Feldman (2012) argues that names like synchrony just give names to patterns of observable baby/caregiver behaviours. These are robust phenomena in the sense that they can be reliably observed, however, still don't tell us the purpose of these behaviours and therefore may not be particularly useful in understanding child development.

  We cannot be certain from observational research that reciprocity and synchrony are important for development.
• 𝟰. 𝗖𝗢𝗨𝗡𝗧𝗘𝗥𝗣𝗢𝗜𝗡𝗧 𝗧𝗢 𝗜𝗠𝗣𝗢𝗥𝗧𝗔𝗡𝗖𝗘:

  There is evidence from other lines of research to suggest that early interactions are important.

  For example, Isabella et al. (1989) found that the achievement of good interactional synchrony predicted the development of a good-quality attachment.

  This means that, on balance, caregiver-infant interaction is probably important in development.
• 𝟱. 𝗣𝗥𝗔𝗖𝗧𝗜𝗖𝗔𝗟 𝗩𝗔𝗟𝗨𝗘 𝗩𝗦 𝗘𝗧𝗛𝗜𝗖𝗦:

  Attachment research has clear real-world applications. Crotwell et al. (2013) found that Parent–Child Interaction Therapy (PCIT) improved interactional synchrony in 20 low-income mothers and their preschool children.

  However, there is also an argument against socially sensitive research (Isabella et al.) as it can be used to restrict freedom of choice (e.g. when a mother should return to work).

  There is a strong argument that attachment research is valuable, but psychologists need to be clear about its purpose.
• A feature of reciprocity is that it can be compared to a dance.
• A feature of early caregiver–infant interactions is that babies signal that they are ready for a period of interaction in alert phases.
• Alert phase -> Infant signals that he or she is ready to interact.
• Reciprocity -> Both partners in an interaction affect each other's actions.
• Interactional synchrony -> Signals become increasingly similar during interaction.
• Attachment -> A two-way emotional bond.
• Interactional synchrony appears to be important in developing attachment between babies and caregivers.
• Children whose primary caregiver is under stress or lacks skill in picking up signals are disadvantaged.
• Mothers typically respond to infant alertness two-thirds of the time.
• Research has shown that, although mothers typically pick up infant signals around two-thirds of the time, this can be lower when mothers are under stress (Finegold et al. 2016).

  Based on research e.g. by Isabella et al. (1989) we also believe that the quality of the mother-baby relationship depends on the quality of these early interactions.

  Therefore, we would expect that a mother's stress would impact her ability to develop a good relationship with her baby.
• The more sensitive the parent, the better the child’s social development
• Attachment is a strong, enduring, emotional and reciprocal bond between two people, especially an infant and caregiver.
• Interactional Synchrony is copying behaviour and reciprocity relates to turn-taking in verbal and non-verbal signals. 
• If you are asked about interactions in the exam, you must use BOTH theories, unless specifically directed by the question not to.
• INTERACTIONAL SYNCHRONY:

  • This is when an infant mirrors the actions of their caregiver
  • Examples of this would be facial expressions or hand gestures
  • They are said to 'copy' their caregiver
• 𝙈𝙀𝙇𝙏𝙕𝙊𝙁𝙁 𝘼𝙉𝘿 𝙈𝙊𝙊𝙍𝙀:

  • Used infants as young as two weeks old and observed them via a camera
  • The infants observed a parent do 2 or 3 of four actions
  • Independent observers were asked to view the footage and state what they saw the infant actually do
  • This was a 'Double Blind' as the observer did not know what the aim of the experiment was
  • This was to check if the infant really did copy the caregiver at a certain time as it was felt the Primary Care Giver (PCG) and/or experimenter would be biased
  • A positive correlation was found between the infant's actions and those of the PCG
• 𝙄𝙎𝘼𝘽𝙀𝙇𝙇𝘼 𝙀𝙏 𝘼𝙇.:

  • Assessed Interactional synchrony in 30 infants using the Meltzoff and Moore method used
  • Found that better synchrony was shown by those infants who had high levels of attachment to their PCG
  • This shows that interactional synchrony is important and is linked to strong, securely attached relationships
• RECIPROCITY:

  • This is another type of interaction between a caregiver and an infant
  • It is when the caregiver and infant respond to each other's signals appropriately
  • The simplest example is a smile; the caregiver smiles and the infant smiles back