Attachment

• An Attachment bond is...

   A strong, lasting emotional bond formed between a baby and their main caregiver
• Features of attachment

  Safe Base- children turning back to caregiver when scared/anxious.

  Separation Anxiety- When children become distressed when they are separated from their attachment figure.

  Stranger Anxiety- When children display distress in the presence of unfamiliar people, and instead prefer the company of their attachment figure.
• Strengths of Longitudanal Studies

  First, longitudinal studies enable us to get deeper insights into behaviour by seeing how behaviour changes over time. 

  Second, longitudinal studies give us insights into how early experiences shapes behaviour.

  Third, longitudinal studies lead to more reliable results, because researchers can establish whether the participants’ behaviours are consistent over time.
• What is meant by Attrition?

  Attrition occurs when there is a loss of participants across the course of a study.
• Attachment Stages:

  Pre-Attachment Stage- first 3 months, no preference for any adult.

  Indiscriminate Attachment Stage- 3-7 months, prefer familiar people, not one person in particular.

  discriminate Attachment Stage- 7-9 months, preference to specific person.

  Multiple Attachment Stage- 9 months onwards, attachment with people other than main caregiver.
• Schaffer and Emerson (1969)


  Longitudinal and Naturalistic observational study

  60 babies from birth to 18 months

  observed with caregivers to see separation anxiety + stranger anxiety

  interviews conducted with family members

  
  

  RESULTS:

  Babies formed stronger attachments if caregivers displayed high sensitive responsiveness.

  Evidence for the four stages of attachment.

   87% of babies formed attachments with 2+ caregivers.

  31% of babies formed attachment with 5+ caregivers

  main attachment figure not always main caregiver
• Strengths and Weaknesses to Schaffer and Emerson (1969)

  STRENGTH: naturalistic observational study = more ecological validity + generalise behaviours in everyday life

  WEAKNESSES:observer bias: (tendency for researchers to see what expect when conducting observation)Interview technique: socially desirable bias
• ,Reciprocity


  The infant and caregiver take turns in an interaction, so that they respond to each others reactions
• Interactional synchrony


  caregivers and babies perform similar actions in time with each other
• There are two studies that support the role of interactional synchrony and reciprocity in strengthening attachments...

  Condon and Sander demonstrated that caregivers and infants display interactional synchrony and reciprocity

  observed movements made by babies when with their mothers

  babies actions timed in time with mothers speech

  Isabella (et al) also doing positive correlation between interactional synchrony and strength attachment bond
• The Learning Theory Of Attachment

  Attachment is learnt through experience of being fed by care givers.

  The reason babies form attachments is because caregivers feed them.

  learn through operant + classical conditioning
• Classical conditioning on Attachment

  baby --> food = unconditional stimulus

  baby --> caregiver = neutral stimulus

  • if the caregiver feeds the baby the caregiver will become a conditioned stimulus and the baby will produce a happy conditioned response.
• Operant reinforcement on Attachment

  Positive Reinforcement = the action of staying near the caregiver, babies learning that they get food when they stay near their caregiver.

  Negative Reinforcement = the action of staying near the caregiver, babies learning that they can reduce hunger by staying near the caregiver.
• Harlow (1959)


  AIM: Test Learning Theory of Attachment by investigating whether monkeys choose comfort or food:

  • laboratory experiment
  • 8 baby monkeys: 2 control groups
  • one: wire-mum, towel-mum (milk)
  • two: wire-mum (milk), towel-mum
  • DV: amount of time spend with either mother
  • IV: type of mother

  RESULTS: Doesn't support Learning Theory of Attachment

  • suggests attachments are driven by comfort
• Harlow Evaluation:

  STRENGTHS:

  • conducted laboratory experiment = control extraneous variables e.g. milk given, living conditions

  WEAKNESSES:

  • two types of fake mother had different heads = act as confounding variable
  • conducted on monkeys = lack generalisability (not representative)
  • unethical = distressed monkeys, couldn't consent
• STRENGTHS of Learning Theory and Attachment

  support from observation from Dollard + Miller:

  • observed babies and counted times fed in 1 year = 2000+ plus
  • suggesting Learning Theory of Attachment is true
• WEAKNESSES of Learning Theory of Attachment

  • Harlow found that baby monkeys choose comfort over food 
  • Babies raised in communal environments (Israel) by foster mums called metapelets don’t form attachments to their foster mums
• Bowlby- Attachment 


  According to Bowlby’s monotropic theory, we have become biologically pre-programmed to need to form attachments to our caregivers through the process of  evolution
• Social Releasers


  behaviours that babies perform to attract the attention of their caregivers

  Caregiver biologically-programmed to help when social releasers cued

  Crying, smiling, crawling and following are all social releasers.

  Babies are biologically pre-programmed to perform social releasers.
• Monotropic 


  Mono = one

  Tropic = attachment

  Bowlby stated that babies form one, unique attachment to one caregiver
• The Critical Theory

  Bowlby's theory:

  First 2 1/2 years of babies life to form attachment
• The Internal Working Model

  The internal working model is a schema built from a child’s relationship with its main attachment figure, that guides the child's expectations and beliefs about future relationships.
• Lorenz + imprinting


  Lorenz conducted an experiment on geese to see how they form attachments

  
  

  A control group of baby geese were hatched normally in the presence of their mother. An experimental control group were hatched in the presence of Lorenz.

  
  

  The baby geese attached to the first thing they saw suggesting the attachment was biologically pre-programmed
• WEAKNESSES Lorenz

  A first weakness of his study is that the results were not completely  replicated in later studies.

  For instance, in Guiton’s research into imprinting baby chicks, he found that attachments were reversible and weren’t  monotropic .

  A second weakness of his study is that the results might not  generalise to humans.
• support for Bowlby's monotropic Theory (metapeletes): 


  Observations of  metapeletes  in Israel support the idea that attachments are formed to the main caregiver who provides emotional support and comfort, and that attachments are monotropic  .
• Bowlby's theory: real-world application:

  positive: longer visiting hours for hospitals and longer parental leave.

  negative: made mothers feel guilty for not staying at home and looking after children
• Bowlbys' Maternal deprivation Theory 


   When children are deprived of an attachment figure during the critical period, they suffer psychological damage.

   Psychological damage caused by deprivation is long-lasting and irreversible.
• Consequences of Deprivation

  Impaired emotional development, such as lashing out and showing signs of not caring for other

  Impaired behavioural development, such as delinquency like fighting and fraud.

  Impaired cognitive development, such as low IQ and poor language skills
• PDD MODEL

  • three stages of short term detachment from main caregiver:
  • protest
  • despair
  • detachment
• Little John Case Study

  • conducted by Bowlby and Robertson
  • Little John was separated from his mother and placed in a nursery for 9 days.
  • case study
  • Little John experienced all 3 stages
  • It was concluded that the effects of the separation were long-term
• Bowlby's 44 Thieves study

  • compared 44 thieves to a control group of 44 non-criminals
  • conducted interviews
  • Bowlby asked the children to describe their childhood, focussing particularly on whether they had been separated from their attachment figure.
  • 50% thieves - maternal deprivation in childhood
  • 5% control group - maternal deprivation
  • 32% classed as affectionless psychopaths
  • 86% of affectionless psychopaths experienced maternal deprivation
• Limitations of Bowlbys' 44 thieves study

  • interviews unreliable and lack objectivity (e.g. leading questions, memory fogged)
  • participants influenced by investigator effects (respond to demand characteristics)
  • Lacked control over extraneous variables as natural experiment
• Limitations of Bowlby's Maternal Deprivation Theory

  • bowlby believed effects are irreversible
  • Jarmila Koluchova proved differently:

  When the twins were found at the age of 7, they had experienced severe deprivation.

  With the help of their adopted parents, the effects of the twins’ deprivation were reversed.

  By the time they were adults, both twins were above average intelligence, had good jobs, and were in happy relationships.
• Limitation of Bowlby Maternal Deprivation Theory- confounding variables

  • There are many other confounding variables that could cause any psychological damage to the children.
  • Establishing a causal relationship between deprivation and psychological damage is difficult.
• Limitations of Maternal Deprivation Theory: Privation vs Deprivation


  Michael Rutter criticised Bowlby’s theory because he confused deprivation with privation

  privation: child never forms attachment to caregiver

  more sever long-term effects
• Hodges and Tizzard

  • natural experiment
  • 65 children
  • 4 groups:
  • children who were adopted early
  • returned to biological parents
  • remained in institution
  • control group who had not bee institutionalised

  FINDINGS:

  The children who were adopted early didn’t develop psychological damage.

  The findings suggest that the effects of privation are irreversible.

   The children who experienced privation and remained in the institution, or were returned to their biological parents, experienced impaired emotional development.
• Rutter Romanian Children

  • naturalist, longitudinal study
  • 111 Romanian children adopted in british homes
  • compared to 53 British orphans
  • found that Romanian children who were adopted after 6months had long-lasting effects of privation
  • Romanian children who were adopted before 6months reversed long-lasting effects of privation
  • Romanian children had more severe emotional impairment due to conditions of institutions of Romania (more neglection etc)
• Limitations of Institutionalisation

  Families might have displayed social desirability bias meaning a possible underestimation of the negative effects of privation.

  There is often attrition in longitudinal studies meaning a possible underestimation of the negative effects of privation.
• Attachment styles:

  children displaying different behaviours + feelings towards caregivers
• characteristics of secure attachment

  • high stranger anxiety
  • high separation anxiety
  • secure safe base
  • happy reunion behaviour
  • caregiver's sensitive to children's needs