Attachment

• Reciprocity


  A two way bond between mother and child to allow an attachment to for,.

  Importance was demonstrated by Brazleton et al - children as young as 2 weeks attempt to copy their caregiver

  Feldman - caregiver responds to a child's signal 2/3 of the time
• Interactional synchrony


  A form of communication where the infant and caregiver become synchronized in their interactions.

  Condon & Sander - Children can synchronize their movements to the sound of an adults voice

  Brazleton et al - young infants can copy the displayed facial features

  
  

  Interactions at this stage are important for future attachment.
• AO3 - Reciprocity and Interactional Synchrony

  Difficult to distinguish meaning, hard to establish if the interactions are purposeful.

  Socially sensitive - could be used against wc mothers

  Observed behaviour doesn't show its importance for the future.

  
  

  Controlled observations allow for internally valid data due to control of variables.

  Brazleton's research was recorded from different angles, allowing for inter-rater reliability, giving way for valid conclusions

  Isabella et al concluded that poor interactional synchrony went on to have poor attachment quality.
• Stages of attachment - Schaffer & Emerson


  18 month longitudinal study, checking monthly. 60 Glasgow babies

  Analyzed the interactions between carers and infants and interviewed the carers.

  
  

  Infants could form an attachment to those who had more sensitive responsiveness (sensitivity to child's signals) rather than those who spent more time

  
  

  Asocial (0-6 weeks)

  Indiscriminate (6 weeks - 6 months) - Can be comforted by anyone

  Specific (7 months +) - Show stranger and separation anxiety

  Multiple (10/11 months+)
• AO3 - Stages of attachment

  Small sample

  Cultural bias

  Class bias

  Self report method

  Asocial stage is studied subjectively as motor skills are limited.

  Temporal validity - conducted in the 60s
• Role of the father

  Schaffer and Emerson - 75% of infants in their study had formed a secondary attachment to father by 18 months.

  Field - Fathers can be the primary caregiver and can do tasks a typical primary mother would do.

  Grossman - Longitudinal study found that the father's role in attachment is for stimulatory play
• AO3 - Role of the father

  Difficult to make generalisations as there is a lot of factors which could affect the fathers role.

  Biology suggests women are better suited to be primary caregiver as they are equipped with oestrogen - underlying caring behaviour.

  Economic implications - This may pressure women to stay home despite economically may not be beneficial

  McCallum et al - Single/Same sex children did not develop differently, do fathers have distinct role?

  Socially sensitive
• Animal studies - Lorenz


  Studied imprinting (attachment to first moving object or person seen) in goose. Half hatched seeing Lorenz first. Geese follow first moving object seen during 12-17 hour critical period after hatching - suggesting attachment is innate and programmed genetically.
• AO3 - Lorenz animal study

  Ethical issues due to irreversible effect on the animal and nervous system.

  
  

  Hoffman (supported by Guiton) suggests that when animals spend time with their own species, normal behaviour was seen, imprinting is reversible.

  Reliability, Guiton's yellow glove study.

  Generalisability issues
• Animal studies - Harlow

  Used rhesus monkeys to investigate how the mechanisms behind attachment formation.

  8 Infant monkeys were with 2 wired monkeys, one with wire, one with cloth. Monkeys spent most time with cloth covered monkey despite who gave them food, showing importance for contact comfort.
• AO3 - Harlow's animal study

  Unethical and limited value to understanding human infants.

  The 2 heads involved varied significantly, presenting itself as a confounding variable.

  Lack of internal validity

  Difficult to generalise

  
  

  Important for further research - Bowlby

  Used to demonstrate care needed in institutions (daycares, hospital)
• Learning theory of attachment

  Dollard & Miller - Attachment is learned through classical and operant conditioning.

  Food (UCS) produces pleasure (UCR). Association of food and mother together makes mother the CS and pleasure (happiness) the CR, forming an attachment.

  
  

  Secondary drive hypothesis - Primary drives essential for survival become associated with secondary drives such as emotional closeness.
• AO3 - Learning theory of attachment

  Schaffer & Emerson - Half the infants had a primary attachment to usual carer who fed

  Harlow's research goes against it

  Reliability is questioned as evidence is based on animals.

  Environmentally reductionist

  Ignores research from likes of Brazelton et al which demonstrate importance of human interaction and not just food
• Monotropic theory of attachment - Bowlby


  Evolutionary theory of attachment that suggests attachments are innate.

  
  

  Adaptive - attachments are a biological advantage.

  Social releasers - These unlock the innate tendency to care as they activate the mammalian attachment system

  Critical period - 2.5-3 years old. If attachment isn't formed in this time, attachment cannot be formed.

  Monotropy - Special attachment to one person. If this is missing, maternal deprivation.

  Internal working model - mental schema for future relationships.
• AO3 - Bowlby's monotropic theory


  Supporting evidence for importance of IWM - Bailey et al

  
  

  Biologically reductionist

  Socially sensitive

  Falsifiable?

  Eclectic approach

  Contradictory research (Rutter - institutionalisation, Lorenz)
• Strange situation - Ainsworth


  A process in which the caregiver and stranger leaves and returns systematically to investigate exploration, separation and strange anxiety and reunion behaviour.

  
  

  Secure (70%) - Moderate separation and stranger anxiety, positive reunion behaviour and mother as safe base to explore

  Resistant (15%) - High separation and stranger anxiety, resists mother on reunion and explores least

  Avoidant - No stranger or separation anxiety, little interest when mother returns, easily comforted.
• AO3 - Ainsworth's strange situation


  Easy to replicate due to standardisation - reliability

  Little risk of demand characteristics (two way mirror used)

  
  

  Lack of population validity - American children used

  Only measured one attachment type - lack of internal validity

  Lack of ecological validity
• Cultural variations in attachment

  Kroonenberg et al - Meta-analysis of 32 studies in 8 countries.

  
  

  Highest secure (75%) - GB

  Lowest secure (50%) - China

  Highest avoidant (35%) - Germany

  Lowest avoidant (5%) - Japan

  Highest resistant (29%) - Israel

  Lowest resistant (3%) - GB

  
  

  Jin et al - Korean infants, high levels of resistant.
• AO3 - Cultural variations

  High reliability due to large sample in meta-analysis

  
  

  Imposed etic as British theory imposed on eastern cultures

  Different cultures within one country

  Biased sample (not all countries had a large sample)
• Maternal deprivation - Bowlby


  Attachment not formed during the critical period causes negative consequences due to maternal deprivation

  - No attachment in future

  - Affectionless psychopathy

  - Delinquency

  - Cognitive development issues

  Privation - When a child fails to form attachments

  
  

  44 thieves study

  14 displayed affectionless psychopathy, 12 of them suffered maternal deprivation
• Institutionalisation - Rutter et al


  Followed a group of 165 orphans adopted into British families.

  52 British adopted - control

  
  

  Half adoptees showed delayed intellectual development

  Mean iq (before 6 months) - 102

  Mean iq (after 6 months) - 86

  
  

  If adopted after 6 months - Disinhibted attachment

  If adopted before 6 months this was rare
• Institutionalisation - Zeenah et al

  Assessed 95 children 12-31 months who spent their lives in institutional care.

  50 children control group

  
  

  74% control - secure

  19% - control

  65% - disorganised attachment
• AO3 - Institutionalisation


  Real life application for key workers in orphanages - Ecological validity.

  Good for economy

  Quinton & Rutter - Those in 20s who were in childcare had more criminal records and difficulty parenting child

  Chugani - Dysfunction in impulse and attention

  
  

  Long term effects not clear

  Not typical orphanages - external and population validity?
• Later relationships and attachment

  Kerns - Secure children have better friendships

  Smith - Secure children are less likely to be involved in bullying

  
  

  Hazen & Shaver - Love quiz in local NA newspapers, asked about expectations of love and description of relationship with parents. Secure children 2x longer romantic relationships

  
  

  Bailey et al - Compared attachment of 99 mothers to babies. Most women had same classification of attachment to their babies and mothers
• AO3 - Maternal deprivation

  Supported by the outcomes of Harlow's study

  Real life application as orphanages and maternity units change to benefit this.

  
  

  Social sensitive

  Rutter - Bowlby doesn't distinguish between deprivation and privation, quality is more important

  Social context can affect attachment

  Case study - 2 twins locked away (Koluchova) for 7 years, able to recover

  Lewis et al - No link between maternal deprivation and later relationships
• AO3 - Attachment & later relationships

  Cultural bias

  Mixed evidence - Zimmerman (little relationship between infant and adolescent attachment type)

  Response bias

  Correlational evidence