Evaluation

• Counter-evidence from animal studies

  One limitation of learning theory explanations for attachment is lack of support from studies conducted on animals:

  • Lorenz's goslings imprinted on the first moving object they saw, regardless of food
  • Harlow's monkeys spent more time with the soft, fabric model
  • Other factors than association with food are important in forming attachments
• Counter-evidence from evidence with humans

  A further limitation of learning theory explanations is a lack of support from studies of human babies. For example:

  • Schaffer and Emerson (1964) found that babies form primary attachments with mothers regardless of who feeds them
  • Isabella et al (1989) found that it was interactional synchrony that predicted quality of attachment, not feeding
• Adequate explanation for attachment

  One slight strength is that the learning theory of attachment is an adequate explanation for attachment:

  • Humans do learn through association and reinforcement
  • However:
  • Food may not be the main reinforcer
  • Attention or responsiveness is not accounted for
  • It is very weak evidence as it offers only a limited explanation
• Social learning theory

  David Hay and Jo Vespo (1988) suggested that:

  • Parents teach children to love them by modelling attachment behaviours e.g. hugging.
  • Parents reinforce behaviour by showing approval when babies display their own attachment behaviours e.g. hugs, showing attention.
  • Further advantage - based around two-way interaction between baby and adult, meaning it fits better with research into the importance of reciprocity