types of attachment

• The strange situation

  a controlled observation designed to assess the quality of the childs attachment to their caregiver.

  • 5 behavioural categories to judge the quality of attachment used (proximity seeking, exploration and secure base behaviour, separation anxiety, stranger anxiety and reunion behaviour)

  Procedure:

  • 100 middle class American infants aged between 12-18 months.
  • an observation in a controlled environment
  • series of 3 minute episodes involving mother, baby and stranger.
  • the childs response is recorded in the different episodes using certain measures
• episodes in SSP

  episode 1- child encouraged to explore

  tests exploration and secure base

  episode 2- stranger enters room and attempts to interact with the child

  stranger anxiety is tested

  episode 3- mother leaves the child alone with the stranger

  separation and stranger anxiety are tested

  episode 4- mother returns and stranger leaves

  tests reunion behaviour and exploration/ secure base

  episode 5- mother leaves again (child alone)

  tests separation anxiety

  episode 6- stranger returns

  tests stranger anxiety

  episode 7- mother returns and interacts with child

  tests reunion behaviour

  the child is classified as securely attached, insecure avoidant or insecure resistant
• Type A (insecure avoidant)

  • explores and doesnt use mother as a safe space- doesnt return
  • low separation anxiety- not much distress when mother leaves
  • low stranger anxiety- not much distress when stranger interacts
  • no joy/little reaction on reunion
  • makes up 22% of British infants
• Type B (secure attachment)

  • explore using the mother as a secure base (returns to mother)
  • moderate separation anxiety, moderate distress when she leaves.
  • moderate stranger anxiety- moderate distress when stranger interacts
  • easily comforted on reunion (reunited with mother)
  • Makes up 75% of British infants
• Type C (insecure attachment)

  • child doesnt explore/ stays close (clingy)
  • high separation anxiety, extreme distress when mother leaves
  • high stranger anxiety , extreme distress
  • child shows little joy on reunion and isnt comforted by mother
  • makes up 3% of British infants
• caregiver sensitivity hypothesis

  attachment type is due to the behaviour of the mother. 'sensitive' mothers are responsive to the child and are more likely to have securely attached children.
• strange situation evaluation 1

  P attachment type in the SSP can predict the success of later relationships

  E securely (type b) children have better relationships in childhood e.g. better achievement at school and no involvement in bullying

  E and better relationships and mental health in adulthood

  L the SSP may be able to predict the quality of later relationships
• strange situation evaluation 2

  P the SSP did not consider temperament and wider family influences that may have affected the behaviour of the children in the SSP.

  E the SSP bases attachment by observing the relationship between the children and mother. (no other attachment figures)

  E children behave differently depending on which parent they are with (SSP only measured attachment to the mother)

  L it may not be a valid measure of attachment type, as it measures one relationship and does not consider temperament of the child
• strange situation evaluation 3

  P SSP is reliable and can be replicated as the procedure is standardised

  E it has good inter-rater reliability

  E Bick et al (2012) found agreement on attachment type in 94% of cases

  L the procedure is reliable because it takes place under controlled conditions and behaviours like proximity-seeking and stranger anxiety are easy to observe.

  The childs behaviour when observed may be atypical. ecological validity may be low as the study was carried out in controlled conditions, which were unfamiliar to the child, and might not represent the attachment type displayed when the infant is at home
• strange situation evaluation 4

  P It may not be appropriate to use the SSP in different cultures because of differences in child-rearing practices

  E the SSP was developed in the USA. babies have different experiences in different cultures which may affect their behaviour in the SSP

  E Takahashi (1986) found a higher proportion of Japanese babies displayed very high levels of separation anxiety and so were classified as insecure resistant

  E Takahashi (1986) suggests that this anxiety response was not due to the babies being insecurely attached but due to the unusualness of mother-baby separation (rare in Japan)

  children in germany are encouraged to be independent and may appear to show insecure avoidant attachment in the SSP

  L therefore, it may not be valid to use it to study attachment types in different cultures
• strange situation evaluation 5

  P ainsworth identified three attachment types: secure, insecure avoidant and insecure resistant.

  E Main and Solomon (1986) identified a type D or disorganised attachment who display a mixture of resistant and avoidant behaviours.

  E type D children have experienced neglect or abuse and many develop psychological problems in adulthood.

  L the original classification system was incomplete as some infants did not fit into the original categories of attachment
• cultural variations in attachment 1

  Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg (1988) conducted a meta-analysis of 32 studies of the SSP to assess cultural variations in attachment.

  They were analysed to find any overall patterns.

  Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg’s (1988) meta-analysis found:

  • Secure attachment was the most common in all cultures studied.
  • The lowest percent of secure attachment was shown in China (50%) and the highest in Great Britain (75%).
  • Avoidant attachment was more common in West Germany (35% - the highest % of insecure avoidant) but rare in Israel and Japan.
  • Japan (27%) and Israel (29%) had higher percentages of insecure resistant attachment.
  • Variation within cultures was 1.5 times greater than the variation between cultures. There is more variation within countries than between countries. E.g., In the USA one study found only 46% securely attached compared to one study at 90%
• other studies of cultural variation 1

  • Takahashi (1990) who found high levels of insecure resistant attachment in Japanese infants where mothers rarely leave infants in early childhood.
  • Grossman and Grossman (1991) found that German infants tended to be classified as insecurely rather than securely attached. 35% were classed as insecure avoidant.
  • Sagi et al (1985)-Infants raised on Israeli Kibbutz tended to be classified as insecure resistant rather than avoidant.
• other studies of cultural variation 2

  • Simonelli et al (2014) found lower rates of secure attachment and higher rates of insecure avoidant in an Italian study which was attributed to long working hours of mothers of very young children. Patterns of attachment types are not necessarily static and may change in line with cultural change.
  • Kyoung (2005) compared proportion of attachment types in Korea and the US. The overall proportions of insecure and secure babies were similar. But those classed as insecure were insecure resistant and only one was insecure avoidant – similar to the findings in Japan (similar child-rearing styles which could explain this).
• cross-cultural research evaluation 1

  P Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg’s meta-analysis can be criticised because of the limited number of studies in some countries.

  E A disproportionately high number of the studies reviewed were conducted in the USA (18 out of 32). E There were only 36 infants in the Chinese study so there is the problem of over-generalising from a limited sample to say that this reflects all Chinese children (the population of China is huge, so this small number is not very representative).

  L The samples in studies may not represent the culture as a whole.

  Meta-analyses include very large samples which increases the validity of findings. Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg found more variation within countries than between countries.
• cross-cultural research evaluation 2

  P The strange situation was developed in America and may have limitations in studying attachment types in different cultures, especially where child-rearing practices are different.

  E Children in Germany are encouraged to be independent and may therefore appear to show insecure avoidant attachment.

  E Japan are rarely separated from their mothers and may therefore appear insecure resistant.

  L It may not be appropriate to use the SSP to measure attachment in different cultures.
• cross-cultural evaluation 3

  P The validity of research using the strange situation can be questioned as the child’s temperament may explain attachment type shown.

  E Children who have been in day care may appear to be insecurely avoidant because they are used to separation from their mother which is why they do not show distress on separation.

  E The validity of some measures can be questioned, e.g., proximity-seeking may be a measure of insecurity rather than security.

  L There may be a lack of ecological validity, the children are in an unfamiliar environment so may act differently
• cross-cultural evaluation 4

  P Cross cultural research has found very similar attachment types in different countries.

  E Bowlby’s theory explains this by proposing that attachment is innate and universal.

  E Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg suggest global media represents a particular view of how parents and babies should behave which may override traditional cultural differences in the way children are brought up.

  L It is difficult to decide whether similarity in attachment type is due to nature or nurture.