Bowlbys theory (explanation of attachment)

• What was bowlbys theory (1958, 1969)

  Monotropic thoery
• Bowlby gave an evolutionary explanation - that attachment is an innate system that gives a survival advantages


  Imprinting and attachment evolved because they ensure young animals stay close to their caregivers and this protects them from hazards
• monotopic = having a primary attachment figure

  • bowlbys theory is described as monotopic because of the emphasis on the child’s attachment to one caregiver. this attachment if different from others and more important
• bowlby believed that the more time a baby spent with their primary attachement figures, the better. what were the 2 reasons for this?

  1. law of continuity - the more constant a child’s care, the better quality of attachement
  2. law of accumulated separation - the effects of every separation add up. so ‘the safest does is zero dose’
• what are social releasers

  • bowlby suggested that babies are born with a set of innate ‘cute’ behaviours e.g. smiling, cooing that encourage attention from adults.
  • the purpose of social releases is to activate adult social interaction (i.e make the adult attach to the baby).
  • bowlby recognised that attachment is a reciprocal system
• bowlby proposed there is a critical period

  • he proposed there is a critical period of 2 years when the infant attachment system is active
  • he viewed it as more of a sensitive period
  • a Child is maximally sensitive at 6 months and this may extend up to the age of 2 years. if an attachment has not formed in this time, a child will fit it much harder to form one later
• the first attachment forms an internal working model of internal relationships.

  • the internal working model acts as a ‘template’ for what relationships are like
  • a child whose first experience is a loving relationship with a reliable caregiver will tend to form an expectation that all relationships are loving and reliable.
  • a child’s whose first relationship involves poor treatment may expect such treatment from others
  • the internal working model may also affect the childs later ability to be a parent themselves
• one limitation is that the concept of monotropy lacks validity 


  the relationship with the primary attachment figure may simply be stronger than other attachments, rather than different in quality as bowlby believed. other family members may well develop attachments with the baby that have the same qualities, such as comfort and a secure base from which to explore. this means that bowlby may have been wrong to suggest that there is a unique quality to a child’s primary attachment
• one strength is evidence supporting the role of social releasers

  Brazelton (1975) instructed primary attachment figures to ignore their babies social releasers. babies (who were previously shown to be normally responsive) initially showed some distress, but eventually some curled up and laid motionless. this supports the idea that social releases play an important role in attachment development
• another strength is support for the idea of the internal working model

  the idea of the internal working model predicts that patterns of attachment will be passed from one generation to the next. Bailey (2007) studied 99 mothers. those with poor attachment to their own parents were more likely to have 1 year olds who were poorly attached. this supports bowlbys idea of an internal working model of attachment as its being passed through families
• another strength is support for the idea of the internal working model: counterpoint

  there are other influences on social development. for example a baby’s genetically influenced personality is important in the development of social behaviour, including their later parenting style. this suggests that bowlby overemphasised the importance of the internal working model in development