ATTACHMENT

• Definition of attachment

  An emotional bond between 2 people. It's a 2 way process that endures over time. It leads to certain behaviors such as clinging and proximity-seeking and serves the function of protecting an infant.
• We can recognise an attachment when people display these 3 behaviours

  proximity:

  people try to stay physically close to those whom they have become attached

  separation distress:

  people are distressed when an attachment figure leaves their presence.

  secure base behavior:

  regularly return to attachment figure
• Definition of reciprocity

  infant and mother respond to each others signals and elicits a response from the other one like a dance
• Definition of intersectional synchrony

  Mother and infant interact in such a way that their actions and emotions 'mirror' each other- they are coordinated (synchronized)
• Meltzoff and Moore-controlled observation

  *selected 4 different stimuli ( 3 faces + 1 hand gesture) and observed the behavior of infants in response

  *to record observations observers who had no knowledge of what the infant had seen watched the videotapes in slow motion

  *each observer observer was asked to note all instances of infant tongue protrusions and head movements using the below categories:

  .Mouth opening

  .Termination of mouth opening

  .Tongue protrusion

  .Termination of tongue protrusion

  
  

  Each observer scored the tapes twice and all scores were greater than .92
• What did Piaget believe as an alternative explanation for this behavior

  -infants only repeated the behavior as they were being rewarded for it eg with a smile

  -piaget called this pseudo imitation
• Evaluation of reciprocity and interacational synchrony

  -problems with observing infants

  infant mouths are fairly constant making it difficult to differentiate between general activity and specific imitated behaviors

  +Murray and Trevarthen (1985)

  2 month old infants interacted with mother via video monitor

  in the next part a video tape of the mother was played and the infant became distressed as the mother wasn't responding

  this shows infants are actively eliciting a response not a reward

  -Failure to replicate

  other studies have failed to replicate the findings

  marian et al replicated murray and trevarthen's study and found infants couldn't distinguish between live and video taped interactions of their mothers suggesting they aren't responding to the adult

  -Individual differences
• Parent-infant interaction?

  -schaffer and emerson found majority of babies attached to mothers first (7 month)- spent more time with infant

  -within a few weeks children formed secondary attachments with fathers

  -in 75% of infants studied attachment formed with father at 18 months (infants protested when father walked away)
• The role of the father Grossman (2002)


  Grossman (2002) carried out a longitudinal study looking at both parents' behaviour and its relationship to the quality of children's attachments into their teens

  
  

  Quality of infant attachment with mothers but not fathers was related to children's attachments in adolescence, suggesting that father attachment was less important

  
  

  However, the quality of fathers' play with infants was related to the quality of adolescent attachments. Suggesting fathers have a more different role in attachments, to do with play and stimulation, less with nurturing
• Fathers as primary attachment figures

  . There is some evidence to suggest that when fathers do take on the role of being the main caregiver they adopt behaviors more typical of mothers

  . Tiffany Field (1979) filmed 4 month old babies in face-to-face interaction with primary caregiver mothers, secondary caregiver fathers and primary caregiver fathers.

  -primary caregiver fathers, like mothers, spent more time smiling, imitating and holding infants than the secondary caregiver fathers.

  -this behavior appears to be important in building an attachment with the infant.

  -so it seems that fathers can be the more nurturing attachment figure.

  -the key to the attachment relationship is the level of responsiveness not the gender of the parent
• evaluation on the role of fathers

  . inconsistent findings on fathers

  -research into the role of the father is confusing as different researchers questions.

  -some are interested in understanding the role of fathers as secondary attachment figures whereas others are more concerned with the father as a primary attachment figure

  -due to conflicting findings psychologists cannot easily answer the question of what is the role of the father?

  
  

  .if fathers have a distinct role why aren't children without fathers different?

  -The Grossman study found fathers as secondary attachment figures had an important role in their child's development.

  -However, other studies have found that children growing up in single or same sex parent families do not develop any differently from those in 2 parent heterosexual families

  -This would suggest that the father's role as a secondary attachment figure is not important

  
  

  . Why don't fathers generally become primary attachments?

  - traditional gender roles- women expected to be more caring and nurturing

  - women have lots of female hormones- biologically predisposed to be an attachment figure

  
  

  . Socially sensitive research

  - research into mother- infant interaction is socially sensitive because it suggest that children may be disadvantaged particular child rearing practices
• The development of attachment - key study Schaffer and Emerson

  .Method

  - 60 babies (31 male, 29 female) all from Glasgow from skilled working class families

  - babies and mothers visits fed at home every month for 1st year and then again at 18 months

  - researchers asked mothers questions about the kind of protest their babies showed in 7 everyday separations like separation anxiety, intensity of protest and who they were directed towards

  - this was designed to measure infants attachment

  - researchers also assessed stranger anxiety

  
  

  .Findings

  - between 25 and 32 weeks- 50% of the babies showed signs of separation anxiety usually towards mother

  - attachment was to caregiver who was most interactive and sensitive to the infants signals

  - this was not necessarily who spent the most time with the infant

  - by 40 weeks 80% of the babies had a specific attachment and 30% displayed multiple attachment
• What are multiple attachments?


  Attachments to 2 or more people. Most babies appear to develop multiple attachments once they have formed 1 true specific attachment
• Evaluation of Schaffer and Emerson's study

  . Unreliable data

  - data is based on mothers reports of their own infants- some mothers less sensitive to infants protests therefore less likely to report them

  - social desirability/ demand characteristics could also mean data lacks internal validity

  
  

  . Biased sample

  - this sample was biased all families were working class

  - done in 1960's - parental care of children has changed eg mothers work and now stay at home fathers if conducted today different results- data lacks temporal validity

  
  

  . Longitudinal study

  - less confounding variables like changes in pts and same ones were used over number of years which helps with internal validity.

  
  

  . Good ecological/ external validity

  - arrived out in the pts own homes/ most observations were done by the children's own parents during normal day to day activities.

  - behaviours by babies unlikely to be affected by observer so study has good external/ ecological validity.
• Schaffer and Emerson's stages of attachment

  . Stage 1 : indiscriminate attachments

  0-2 months

  - similar responses to all objects human/ non human

  - infants showed greater preference to social stimuli eg a smiling face and more content towards humans at end of period

  - reciprocity and interactional synchrony play a role in establishing relationships

  
  

  . Stage 2: beginnings of attachment

  4 months

  - become more social and now prefer human company

  - can discriminate between familiar and unfamiliar people

  - however still comforted by anyone and don't show stranger anxiety

  - sociability

  
  

  . Stage 3: discriminate attachment

  7 months

  - show separation anxiety when a particular person puts them down

  - show joy at reunion with that person and are most comforted

  - have now formed a primary attachment with mother (65%)

  - displays stranger anxiety

  
  

  Stage 4: multiple attachments

  1 year

  - infant develops wider circle of multiple attachments dependent on amount of relationships

  - these attachments are secondary attachments

  - 29% of children have a secondary attachment within a month of forming a primary attachment

  - within 6 months this has risen to 78%
• Evaluation of Schaffers stages of attachment

  . Stage theories

  - suggest development is inflexible

  -in some situations multiple attachments may come first

  
  

  . Problems studying the indiscriminate stage

  - the first few weeks babies are found they are pretty much immobile so difficult to make judgments/ observations

  
  

  . Conflicting evidence on multiple attachments

  - not clear when children develop multiple attachments

  - bowlby believes infants form main attachment before multiple

  - however other psychologists believe babies form multiple attachments first who study culture

  
  

  . Schaffer and Emerson used limited behavioural measures of attachment

  - used simple behaviours of stranger anxiety to smashes attachment

  - some critics believe these are too limited and not it depth enough

  
  

  . Measuring multiple attachment

  - may be a problem with how multiple attachment is assessed

  - just because baby gets distressed when individual leaves doesn't mean that individual is an attachment figure

  - problem with Schaffer and Emerson because they can't distinguish between secondary attachment figures and playmates
• Lorenz's research- animal studies

  - Lorenz observed imprinting

  . Procedure

  - Lorenz took a clutch of gosling eggs and divided them into 2 groups

  - one group was left with natural mother while others were with Lorenz

  - first thing they saw was Lorena

  - Lorenz marked groups and imprinted on Lorenz

  
  

  Findings

  - goslings separated based on who they were attached with

  - lorenz's brood showed no recognition of mother

  - Lorenz noted that imprinting is restricted to a critical period

  - he also found birds would display sexual imprinting on humans if imprinted at birth
• Evaluation of lorenzs research

  . Research support for imprinting

  - Guiton (1966)

  demonstrated that leghorn chicks exposed to yellow rubber gloves became imprinted on the gloves

  This supports the view that animals imprint on anything that is present during critical period

  
  

  . Some of lorenzs observations have been questioned

  - the idea that imprinting has a permanent effect on mating has been questioned

  - guiton learned that chickens eventually learned to prefer mating with other bucks

  - this suggest imprinting isn't as permanent as Lorenz thought

  
  

  . Generalisation to humans

  - problems generalising birds to humans

  - attachment systems different

  - shows more emotional attachment and able to form anytime
• Harlow's research- animal studies

  . Procedure

  - Harlow created two wire monkeys one in a soft cloth

  - 8 rhesus monkeys were studied for 165 days

  - for 4 of the monkeys the milk bottle was in the cloth covered monkey and plain wire for the other 4

  - observations were made of the monkey infant responses when frightened

  
  

  . Findings

  - all 8 monkeys spent most time with cloth covered mother whether or not this mother had the feeding bottle

  - when frightened monkeys clung to cloth covered mother and when playing kept one foot in her for reassurance

  - these findings suggest infants attach for comfort not food

  
  

  . Long lasting effects

  - Harlow notes many long term consequences

  - monkeys reared with wire covered monkeys most dysfunctional

  - however those with cloth cover didn't develop normal social behaviour and were more aggressive and bred less often

  - some monkeys killed their children

  
  

  . Harlow concluded a critical period for attachment was 90 days otherwise damage was irreversible
• Evaluation of Harlows research

  . Confounding variable

  - two stimulus objects varied eg heads were different

  - possible infants preferred cloth covered mother because nicer head

  - this lowers internal validity of study

  
  

  . Theoretical value

  - harrows findings had a profound effect on psychologists

  - showed that attachment develops through comfort

  - also showed importance of quality relationships for later social relationships and reading children

  
  

  . Practical value

  - findings have helped social workers understand risk factors in child neglect and abuse

  - findings are also important in care of captive monkeys

  
  

  . Generalising to humans

  - animals differ to humans in many ways

  - however findings can be similar for example Harlow and Schaffer and Emerson- infants don't attach to person that feeds them

  
  

  . Ethics

  - the monkeys suffered greatly in these studies and their suffering was human like
• Types of attachment - ainsworth


  . The strange situation

  - controlled observation to test attachment and response to:

  - exploration/ secure base behaviour

  - separation anxiety

  - reunion

  56 American babies used

  
  

  . Behaviours has to judge attachment included:

  - proximity seeking

  -exploration and secure base behaviour

  - stranger anxiety

  - separation anxiety

  - reunion behaviour
• Results of ainsworth's strange situation

  Type of attachment:

  Secure

  Exploration:

  Explore happily but regularly go back to caregiver proximity seeking and secure base behaviour

  Reaction to caregiver leaving ( separation anxiety):

  Moderate distress

  Reaction to stranger (stranger anxiety)

  Moderate distress

  Reaction to caregiver (reunion):

  Require and accept comfort- easily soothed

  %:

  66%

  Behaviour of caregiver:

  Attentive and sensitive

  
  

  Type of attachment:

  Insecure resistant

  Exploration:

  Does not explore- do not want to leave mother- low exploration behaviour

  Reaction to caregiver leaving ( separation anxiety):

  Very distressed- lord of crying/screaming- high anxiety

  Reaction to stranger(stranger anxiety):

  Very distressed- high anxiety

  Reaction to caregiver (reunion):

  Seeks and resists comfort- angry at being left

  %:

  12%

  Behaviour of caregiver:

  Attentive and insensitive

  
  

  Type of attachment:

  Insecure avoidant

  Exploration:

  Explore freely but do not seek proximity or show secure base behaviour

  Reaction to caregiver leaving ( separation anxiety):

  Little/no reaction/ indifferent

  Reaction to stranger (stranger anxiety):

  Indifferent-calmed by either mother or stranger- no preference for mother

  Reaction to caregiver (reunion):

  Indifferent- ignores return of mother/ is not bothered by her return

  %:

  22%

  Behaviour of caregiver:

  Inattentive and insensitive
• Evaluation of Ainsworths strange situation

  .General positives

  - easily replicated due to being a controlled observation

  - indication of social and emotional capacity in later life

  - insecure resistant attachment is associated with the worst outcomes including bullying and adult mental health issues

  
  

  . General negatives

  - biased sample

  - ethical issues

  - low ecological validity

  - sample is small

  - culturally biased

  
  

  . Good inter-rater reliability

  - different observers watched strange situation and agreed

  - bick et al found agreement on 94% of tested babies

  
  

  . There is at least 1 more attachment type:

  - ainsworth came up with 3

  - however main and Solomon said disorganised attachment exists where children display a range of behaviours

  
  

  . The strange situation may be culture bound

  - test does not have the same meaning in countries outside Western Europe and USA

  - for example children respond differently in different cultures

  
  

  . Low internal reliability- did the strange situation actually measure what it intended to measure?

  - strange situation could've been measuring quality of attachments rather than attachment types

  - main and Weston found children behaved differently depending on parent they were with
• Cultural variations in attachment- van ijzendoodn and kroonenberg

  - conducted a study to look at proportions of secure, insecure resistant and insecure avoidant across a range of countries

  - also looked at differences across same countries

  
  

  . Method

  - conducted a meta analysis of 32 studies conducted in 8 countries

  - 1990 children used

  - compared findings to look for trends in attachment types

  
  

  . Conclusions

  - Great Britain had the overall highest rate of secure

  - secure attachment was most common in all countries

  - insecure avoidant was the next most common in ever country except Israel and Japan

  - in west Germany they had the highest rate of insecure avoidance out of all countries

  - variations within cultures was approximately 1.5 times greater than cross-cultural variation

  
  

  These findings support secure attachment as best and findings similar to USA
• Other studies into cultural variations

  . Simonella et al (2014)

  1. Conducted a study in Italy on attachment and % matched those found in study

  2. Assessed 76 12 month old babies using ss

  3. Found 50% sure 36% insecure avoidant

  Lower % if secure

  4. This is because increasing amount of mothers rely on childcare

  5. This suggests culture changes can make dramatic differences to patterns of attachment

  
  

  . Jin et al

  1. A Korean study conducted to compare attachment studies

  2. The ss used 87 children

  3. Most infants= secure

  4. However more classified as insecurely attached only 1 avoidant

  5. Similar distribution found in Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonbergs study

  6. Japan and Korea have similar child rearing styles which explains similarity
• General evaluation of van ijzendoorn and kroonenbergs study

  . Large sample size

  - meta analysis = very large sample size- nearly 2000 infants

  - large samples increase internal validity by reducing anomalous results from bad methodology or unusual participants

  
  

  . Samples tend to be unrepresentative of culture

  -Meta analysis claimed to study cultural variations whereas comparisons were made between countries not cultures

  - within each country there are many different cultures for example poverty

  -sagi (2001) found distributions of attachment type in Tokyo were similar to westerns samples whereas a more rural sample insecure resistant

  - comparisons between countries may have little meaning

  
  

  . Imposed Etic

  -tools like the ss are related to cultural assumptions (designed in America)

  - the ss was designed in 1 culture meaning resumes lack validity

  - eg USA willingness to explore = secure attachment but in Japan not willing to explore= secure attachment

  
  

  . Some samples for countries were very small unrepresentative

  
  

  . Number of studies conducted in each country is uneven

  
  

  . Rothbaum et al (2000)

  - attachment theory is only relevant to western culture as aim in Japan is to create dependence whereas western is fostering independence
• Explanations of attachment
• Explanations of attachment

  .Classical conditioning=learning through association

  -unconditioned stimulus (food)-unconditioned response (pleasure)

  -neutral stimulus (mother)-no response (baby)

  -unconditioned stimulus of food and neutral stimulus of mother keep occurring together and give baby a sense of pleasure

  -conditioned stimulus (mother)-conditioned response (pleasure)

  
  

  .Operant conditioning=learning through reinforcement/reward

  -the infant is hungry so wants to reduce discomfort of hunger

  -when the infant is fed hunger is reduced and this produces pleasure

  -the feeling of no longer being hungry is positive and the food is positive reinforcement

  -the behaviour that led to being fed is likely to be repeated as it is rewarding

  -food is a primary reinforcer as it supplies the reward

  -through classical conditioning the infant learns to associate the person who provides food with avoiding the discomfort of hunger so they become the secondary reinforcer
• What is Bandura's social learning theory?

  people learn from one another, via observation, imitation, and modeling
• Evaluation of the learning theory

  . counter evidence from animal studies

  -don't support idea that we attach for food

  -lorenzs study geese imprinted before they were fed and maintained attachment regardless of who fed them

  -harlows monkeys attached to the soft monkey that provided comfort

  
  

  .counter evidence from human studies

  -shows feeding is not an important factor

  -in schaffer and emersons studys babies developed a primary attachment towards mothers even if other carers did most of the feeding

  -food is not the primary drive for attachment

  
  

  .learning theory has some explanatory power

  -infants do learn through associaion but food may not be the primary reinforcement

  -it may be that attention and responsiveness is important for attachment

  
  

  .learning theory ignores other factors linked to making attachments

  -quality of attachment is associated with factors like reciprocity and interactional synchrony

  -best attachments are with caregivers that are most sensitive to infants

  -learning theory ignores everything else other than food

  
  

  .an alternative explanation

  -bowlbys theory known as the evolutionary theory explains why attachments form and not just how and the advantages linked to protection and survival
• Explanations of attachment-bowlbys monotropic theory/evolutionary theory


  -bowlby rejected that an infant attaches for food

  -bowlby look at the work of lorenz and harlow and proposed am evolutionary explanation

  -attachment was an innate system for survival

  -imprinting and attachment evolved so young animals could be protected from hazards

  -childhood will affect adulthood

  bowlbys theory has several key concepts:

  A .attachments are Adaptive

  S . babies have Social releasers

  C . there is a Critical period for forming attachments

  M . there is 1 strong bond formed (Monotropy)

  I . babies have an Internal working model
• Explain the stages of ASCMI

  1. ATTACHMENTS ARE ADAPTIVE

  -attachments provide an advantage for survival

  2.SOCIAL RELEASERS

  -babies have innate features that unlock a tendency for adults to look after them like physical (expressions) and behavioural (crying)

  3.CRITICAL PERIOD

  -babies have to form attachments with their caregivers between 0-2 1/2 years

  - if his didn't happen infant would be damaged for life

  4.MONOTROPY

  -infants form one very special attachment with their mother or a substitue

  5.INTERNAL WORKING MODEL

  - monotropic attachment=mental schema for future relationships including your own children
• Evaluation of bowlbys monotropic/evolutionary theory

  .monotropy

  -supported by tronick et al

  -studied african tribe where babies were breastfed by many people but slept with mother

  -at 6 months still only showed one primary attachment

  
  

  .support for social releasers

  -cute infant behaviour to initiate social interaction

  -brazleton et al (1975) observed mothers and infants and reported interactional synchrony mothers ignored babies social releasers and they lay motionless

  -strong response shows significance of infant social behaviour eliciting caregiving

  
  

  . support for the internal working model

  -bailey et al(2007)

  -mothers who reported poor attachments with their own attachments had poor attachments with their own children

  
  

  .the temperament hypothesis

  -infants innate emotional personality

  -infants who have easy temperament more likely to become strongly attached and theopposite is true

  -belksy and rovine (1987) found infants 1-3 days old who had signs of temperament difficuly were more likely to become insecurely attached

  
  

  .monotropy is a socially sensitive area

  -the idea of having so much time apar causing so much damage to a baby can cause mothers to worry or feel guilty about their babies attachment
• The influence of early attachment on childhood and adult relationships-the role of the internal working model

  . the role of the internal working model

  -internal working model acts as a template for future relationships

  - quality of childs first relationships is crucial as it will affect later ones

  -a child who has a loving relationship will also seek out loving relationships

  -a child with bad relationships may struggle to form relationships

  -insecure avoidant children likely to be victims of bullying and insecure resistant children likely to be bullies
• the influence of early attachments on childhood and adult relationships-key study hazan and shaver (1987)


  .hazan and shaver

  -placed a love quiz in the rocky mountain news

  -quiz asked questions about current attachment experiences, attachment history to identify current and childhood attachment types

  -questionnaire also asked questions about attitudes towards love- assessment of the internal working model

  -analysed 620 responses, 205 men and 415 women from a fair-cross section of the population

  
  

  .findings

  -56% of respondents securely attached, 25% insecure-avoidant, 19% insecure-resistant

  -secure attachments most likely to have good and long lasting romantic experiences

  -avoidant tend to reveal jealousy and fear intimacy
• relationships in adulthood with romantic partners- mccarthy (1999)

  .mccarthy (1999)

  -studied adult women who had been assessed as infants for attachment type

  -those who were securely attached had best adult friendships and romantic relationships

  -those classed insecure avoidant struggled with intimacy and adult relationships
• behaviours influenced by the internal working model

  .childhood friendship

  -continuty between early attachment and later social/emotional behaviour

  -those securely attached more popular as explained by internal working model have higher expectations

  
  

  .poor parenting

  -harlow=poor attachment and later difficulty in parenting

  
  

  .romantic relationships

  -hazan and shaver demonstrated link between early attachment and future romantic relationships

  
  

  .mental health

  -lack of attachment during critical period leads to lack of internal working model

  -leads to attachment disorder in DSM
• other evaluation

  .research is correlational

  -cant claim early attachment causes type of romantic relationships

  -as other factors like the temperament of the baby can affect attachment

  
  

  .retrospective classification

  -most studies like hazan and shaver rely on retrospective recall and memories of past may be flawed

  
  

  .however simpson et al supports hazan and shaver

  -assessed infant attachment at 1 years old

  -found pts rated as securely attached had a higher social competence as children

  -closer to friends

  -more attached to romantic partner

  -attachment does predict future relationships

  
  

  .deterministic

  -suggests future relationships are determined by childhood relationships

  -this means children insecurely attached are doomed

  -however research has found children who are insecurely attached can have secure relationships

  
  

  .low correlations

  -fraley (2000) conducted a review of 27 samples where infants were assessed in infancy and later reassessed (1-20 months later)

  -correlations ranging from 0.5 to as low as 0.1

  -low correlation suggests attachment type is not predicitive

  of later attachment behaviours

  
  

  .alternative explanation

  -adult relationships guided by a self-verification process

  -tendency to seek others who confirm to your expectations of a relationship

  -therefore adult secure relationship causes adult attachment type
• Bowlbys theory of maternal deprivation


  .maternal deprivation theory

  -bowlby believed a child denied maternal care may become emotionally disturbed

  -bowlby predicted that if maternal deprivation happened before 2 1/2 you may:

  *become a delinquent

  *become an affectionless psychopath

  *have reduced intelligence

  -however this only applies to the critical period and no risk up to age 5
• key study bowlbys 44 thieves

  .bowlbys 44 thieves

  -analysed history of patients

  -all children attending emotionally maladjusted

  -he studied 88 children (44 thieves and half control group)

  -he asked both groups to state if theyd suffered maternal deprivation and for how long

  
  

  .findings:

  -almost none of the control group had maternal deprivation wheras 39% of the thieves group had

  -32% of the thieves group categorised as affectionless psychopaths

  -86% of the affectionless psychopath thieves had experienced maternal deprivation compared to 17% of the control group

  
  

  -these findings support that early maternal deprivation is linked to delinquency and affectionless psychopathy

  -

  -60 children who had spent time apart from their mothers before age 4 showed lower achievement in school

  
  

  .general evaluation points about the 44 thieves study

  1. bowlby is not distinguishing between privation and deprivation

  2.counter evidence suggests children can recover from deprivation

  3.replications have not found similar findings

  4.real world applications to hospitalisation