AO1

• What was the aim of Rutter et al.'s 2011 study?

  To investigate effects of institutionalisation on development
• What was the control group in Rutter et al.’s study?

  52 UK children adopted around the same time
• What did Rutter et al. find about the Romanian orphans upon arrival in the UK?

  Half showed delayed intellectual development and malnourishment
• What was the mean IQ of children adopted before 6 months in Rutter et al.'s study?

  102
• How did the IQ of children adopted between 6 months and 2 years compare to those adopted earlier?

  It was lower, with a mean IQ of 86
• What was the relationship between age at adoption and intellectual development in Rutter et al.’s study?

  Earlier adoption led to higher IQs
• What attachment style was associated with children adopted after 6 months in Rutter et al.’s study?

  Disinhibited attachment
• What behaviours are associated with disinhibited attachment in children?

  Attention-seeking, clinginess, indiscriminate social behavior
• Did children adopted before 6 months show disinhibited attachment?

  No, they rarely displayed it
• What long-term behavioural issues did Rutter et al. find in children after age 15?

  ADHD was more common in older samples
• What was the aim of Zeanah et al.'s research?

  To assess attachment in Romanian institutionalized children
• How many children were involved in Zeanah et al.'s study?

  95 Romanian children aged 12 to 31 months
• How did the attachment of institutionalised children compare to the control group in Zeanah et al.'s study?

  19% were securely attached vs. 74% in control
• What was found about disinhibited attachment in Zeanah et al.'s study?

  44% of institutionalised children displayed it
• What is disinhibited attachment?

  Inappropriate attention-seeking and clinginess
• How did institutional care affect children's attachment styles in Zeanah et al.'s study?

  Linked to higher disinhibited attachment and lower secure attachment
• What explanation did Rutter provide for disinhibited attachment in institutionalised children?

  Adaptation to multiple caregivers during critical period
• How did Rutter et al. explain the recovery of intellectual development in children?

  Early adoption can mitigate developmental damage
• What was the finding regarding intellectual disability in children from Rutter et al.’s study?

  Most showed intellectual disability upon arrival
• What can be concluded about the importance of early adoption from the studies of Rutter et al. and Zeanah et al.?

  Early adoption mitigates negative effects of institutionalisation
• What was the results of Rutter et als research?

  165 Romanian orphans. 52 UK adoptees were the control group at age 11. Those adopted before six months had an IQ of 102. Those were adopted after had an IQ of 86 children adopted after six months had disinhibited attachment.