Bowlbys monotropic theory

• What is a counter-argument to research support from animal studies?

  However, humans and monkeys do not have the same cognitive minds and humans attach between 7-11 months (according to Schaffer and Emerson). Therefore, animal studies do not provide as strong support for Bowlby's monotropic theory due to low generalisability to humans. 
• Bowlby's monotropic theory


  Suggests that a single primary caregiver, typically the mother, is important in forming a strong emotional bond with the infant
• Attachment


  • Believed to be biologically innate
  • Infants display innate behaviours known as social releasers
  • Primary caregiver is genetically primed to respond with care and affection
• Good attachment


  Based on the quality, rather than the quantity, of care, with mothers being responsive to their child's needs
• If babies do not form an attachment within the critical period or sensitive period of the first 2.5 years


  Risks of damaging the child socially, emotionally, and intellectually
• AO3


  strength = research support. For instance, Harlow found that monkeys who did not attach to a mother figure within the 90 day critical period became aggressive and had trouble interacting with other monkeys. This supports the monotropic theory on the consequences of not forming a monotropic attachment within the critical period and how it leads to disruption for healthy emotional and social development later in life. Therefore, research support strengthens the credibility of Bowlby’s monotropic theory on the critical period as an explanation of attachment.
• AO3

  One weakness of Bowlby's monotropic theory is that it is socially sensitive. Burman argues that the theory places an unfair burden of responsibility on mothers by emphasising them as the primary caregiver and highlighting the consequences if a baby fails to form an attachment within the critical period. This means that mothers who return to work and place their children in childcare may be stigmatised, especially if any issues arise in the child's later life. Therefore, Bowlby's monotropic theory has negative implications on the lifestyle choices women make 
• AO3

  Strength = research support. Bailey et al interviewed 99 mothers and found that if mothers had a poor relationship with their own parents, their children were more likely to be poorly attached. This was observed during the study's observations of parent-child interactions. This supports the idea that our early attachment experiences with our primary caregivers directly links to how we form and maintain relationships in later life.
• AO3


  Weakness = conflicting research. For example, Rutter et al studied adopted children raised in institutions after the critical period proposed by Bowlby and found that children were able to form secure attachments with their adoptive parents. This shows that the attachment is not with the biological mother, the critical period for attachment is not 2.5 years and can be extended with the right kind of care than suggested. Therefore, this conflicting research weakens the explanatory power of Bowlby’s monotropic theory that there is a critical period for attachment formation.