Attachment

• Attachment

  Emotional bond between 2 people, it's a two-way process that endures over time. Leading to behaviours such as clinging.
• Caregiver-infant interactions

  Reciprocity


  Research shows infants can coordinate with their caregivers in what seems like a conversation - Babies take turns whilst speaking

  • Brazelton suggests this is a basic rhythm, important for future communication
  • The regularity of the infant's signals allows caregiver to anticipate infant's behavior & respond appropriately, creating attachment between caregiver & infant
  • Mutual, two-way process, mimicking a conversation, with features such as turn-taking
• Caregiver-infant interactions

  Interactional synchrony

  Meltzoff and Moore (1977)

  • Demonstrated how babies as young as 2-3 weeks can imitate facial expressions & hand gestures
  • An adult model demonstrated 3 facial expressions
  • a dummy was placed in the baby's mouth, preventing response
  • After the display, the dummy is removed, the baby's expressions are filmed
  • There was an association between the infant & model behaviour, infant tried to imitate the model's behaviour
• Real or pseudo imitation?

  Jean Piaget believed true imitation can only happen towards the end of the infant's 1st year. any imitation before is due to response training, the infant repeats rewarded behaviour because of reinforcement.
• Support of interactional synchrony


  Murray (1985) 2 month old babies interacted with their mothers via a video monitor in real time. Next, the babies watched a pre-recorded video of their mothers, the children showed distress at this as they couldn't gain their mother's interest.

  This shows the infant is an active participant in interactions, supporting the idea behaviours are innate.
• A03, caregiver-infant interactions

  Problems with testing infant behaviour

  Is testing infant behaviour always reliable?

  • Infants mouths are in constant motion with the tested expression of Meltzoff & Moore's study.
  • It's difficult to distinguish between general activity & imitation
  • M&M overcame this by asking an observer (who had not idea what the imitated behaviour was) to judge the infant's behaviour from the videos.

  This shows the difficulty of testing infants but also how to reslove this, increasing internal validity
• A03, caregiver-infant interactions

  Failure to replicate


  • Koepke et Al failed to replicate Meltzoff and Moore's study, according to Meltzoff however, this was due to a lack of control when replicating the study
  • Marian et Al replicated the study by Murray, found infants could distinguish the live video from the taped video, suggesting infants do not respond to adults. However, this finding may be due to the procedure

  Earlier study findings weren't replicable, this may however be due to methods used in later studies
• A03, Caregiver-infant interactions

  Intentionality supported

  Another method to test intentionality in infants is to observe how they respond to inanimate objects.

  Abravnel and DeYong observed infant behaviour when interacting with 2 objects stimulating:

  • Tongue movements
  • Mouth opening/closing

  Infants aged 5-12 weeks made little response to objects

  Suggesting infants don't imitate everything but socially respond to humans
• A03, caregiver-infant interactions

  Individual differences

  Variation between infants in interactional synchrony

  • Isabella et Al found that more strongly attached infants showed greater interactional synchrony
  • Heiman showed infants who demonstrate lots of imitation from birth on wards form better quality relationships at 3 months. However, it isn't clear if this is due to early imitations

  There are significant individual differences but cause of difference isn't certain
• What was the aim of Schaffer and Emerson's study?

  To investigate the formation of early attachments, the age at which they developed, their emotional intensity and to whom they were directed.
• Procedure of Schaffer and Emerson's study?

  60 infants aged 5-23 weeks from Glasgow were studied

  • the babies and mothers were visited at home monthly every month for a year and then again at 18 months
  • The researchers asked mothers questions about how infants reacted to separations (e.g. caregiver leaving the room, separation anxiety). In order to measure infants attachment
  • The researchers also assessed stranger anxiety
• Findings of Schaffer and Emerson's study

  from 25-32 weeks, 50% of the babies showed signs of separation anxiety towards a particular adult, usually the caregiver who was the most interactive and sensitive to infant signals (specific attachment).

  By 40 weeks, 80% of infants displayed specific attachments and 30% displayed multiple attachments
• Stage 1 of attachment - asocial


  From birth-2 months, infants react in the same way to all objects. Towards the end of this period, they begin to show a preference for social stimuli e.g. a favorite toy.

  During this period, reciprocity and interactional synchrony play a role in establishing the infants' relationship with caregivers
• Stage 2 of attachment - Indiscriminate/pre-social


  The beginnings of attachment

  Around the age of 2 months, infants become more social, they prefer human company rather than inanimate objects and are easily comforted by anyone. They don't show stranger anxiety and are quite sociable
• Stage 3 of attachment - Discriminate/specific attachment


  From 7 months, infants protest when away from a particular person (separation anxiety)

  • When reunited, infant shows joy and is easily comforted by them, showing they were the primary attachment figure
  • The infant shows stranger anxiety, showing specific attachment has been formed
  • Specific attachment forms intensely to the caregiver who spent quality time with their infants, by being sensitive to their signals & offering them more interaction
• Stage 4 of attachment - multiple attachments


  Soon after the main/primary attachment has been formed, infants can quickly develop multiple attachments, depending on the number of consistent relationships the infant has

  
  

  Schaffer and Emerson found within 1 month of the primary attachment, 29% of infants formed multiple attachments e.g. with grandparents, within 6 months, this rose to 78%

  By the age of one, the majority of infants had developed mutliple attachments
• A03, stages of attachment

  Unreliable data


  Data collected by Schaffer and Emerson may be unreliable

  • They used self-report techniques based on the mother's reports of the infants. Some mothers may be less sensitive of infant's protests & less likely to report them
  • Mothers may also not want to be seen as bad if their child doesn't feel attached to them so do not tell the truth when reporting

  Demand characteristics challenge the validity of the data
• A03, stages of attachment

  Biased sample

  Population and temporal validity issues in Schaffer and Emerson's study

  • Studied working class children, results may be different for other classes
  • The study was done in the 1960s , parental care has changed since then, e.g. more women work & so infants have carers or father's stay home for infants.
  • Cohn et Al found the number of stay at home dads has quadrupled in the last 25 years

  If a similar study was conducted today,with a more varied population would findings be different?
• A03, stages of attachment

  Challenging monotropy

  Is all attachment equal or are some more significant?

  • Bowlby believes infants form one specific attachment and then form secondary attachments (e.g. with fathers & siblings) which meet other needs for the infant the primary attachment doesn't give
  • Rutter believes all attachment figures are equal, all attachments integrate to produce an infant's attachment

  Varying opinions on whether there is a hierarchy of attachment
• A03 stages of attachment

  Cultural variations

  Important cultural differences in terms of how people interact with each other influence attachment

  • In individualist cultures, people focus solely on their own needs and their closest families needs
  • Collectivist cultures focus more on large group needs, many people share things such as childcare, multiple attachments are more likely in collectivist cultures & happens earlier

  The stages of attachment model only relates to attachment in individualist cultures
• A03, stages of attachment

  Difficulty with stage theories

  Stage theories suggest development is inflexible

  • the attachment model suggests a fixed order for development. Suggests single attachments always come before multiple attachments, however, in some situations and cultures, multiple attachments come first
  • Stage theories can be problematic as they lead to standard expectations, if families do not follow these expectations they may feel isolated, judged and abnormal
• Proximity 


  People try to stay physically close to those the are attached to
• Secure-base behaviour 


  Even when independent of an attachment figure, we stay in contact with them