1 Attachment

• Ainsworth's Strange Situation


  Technique used to measure attachment type
• Ainsworth's attachment types


  • Secure (Type B)
  • Insecure-avoidant (Type A)
  • Insecure-resistant (Type C)
• Secure attachment (Type B)


  • Children explore happily but regularly go back to their caregiver (proximity seeking and exploration and secure base behaviour)
  • Show moderate separation distress and moderate stranger anxiety
  • Securely attached children require and accept comfort from the caregiver in the reunion stage
• Insecure-avoidant (Type A)


  • Children explore freely but do not seek proximity or show secure base behaviour
  • Show little reaction when their caregiver leaves and they make little effort to make contact when the caregiver returns
  • Show little stranger anxiety
  • They do not require comfort at the reunion stage
• Insecure-resistant (Type C)


  • These children seek greater proximity than others and explore less
  • They show huge strangers and separation distress but resist comfort when reunited with their carer
• Ainsworth's aim was to measure the security of attachment a child shows towards their caregiver
• Ainsworth's Strange Situation method

  1. Child and caregiver enter an unfamiliar room

  2. They were observed every 15 seconds

  3. Each of the stages lasted for 3 minutes
• Stages of the Strange Situation

  • Caregiver and child enter unfamiliar room, child encouraged to play
  • Stranger enters and tries to interact with child
  • Caregiver leaves whilst stranger is present
  • Caregiver returns and stranger leaves
  • Caregiver leaves child alone
  • Stranger returns and tries to interact with child
  • Caregiver returns and is reunited with child
• Behaviours measured in the Strange Situation

  • Exploration and secure-base behaviour
  • Stranger anxiety
  • Separation anxiety
  • Response to reunion
• Attachment types and associated behaviours

  • Secure (66%)
  • Insecure-avoidant (22%)

  Exploration & Secure base behaviour: Infant explores the unfamiliar environment, returning to the mother at regular intervals and using her as a safe base

  Insecure-avoidant: Explores the unfamiliar environment but does NOT return to the mother and does NOT use her as a safe base

  Insecure-resistant: Stays by mom, doesn't explore

  Separation Anxiety: Medium separation anxiety, play disrupted when mother leaves

  Insecure-avoidant: Low separation anxiety, not concerned by mother's departure

  Insecure-resistant: High separation anxiety, extremely distressed and violent when mother leaves

  Stranger Anxiety: Medium stranger anxiety, wary of strangers and will move closer to mother

  Insecure-avoidant: Low stranger anxiety, unconcerned about strangers

  Insecure-resistant: 'Hot and Cold' behaviour towards stranger, unsure how to act

  Reunion Behaviour: Shows joy on reunion, pleased to see mother and easily comforted

  Insecure-avoidant: Shows no joy in reunion, little reaction and often ignores mother

  Insecure-resistant: Not easily comforted by mother and rejects (resists) attempts of mother's comfort
• Bowlby proposed the Maternal Deprivation Hypothesis 20 years before his attachment theory
• Maternal Deprivation


  A scientific term summarising the work of John Bowlby on the effects of separating infants and young children from their mother/attachment figure
• First 30 months of life are critical to development
• Separation from the mother, and any other suitable substitute care


  Means children are deprived of emotional care for an extended period during the critical period
• Bowlby believed psychological damage was inevitable
• Consequences of maternal deprivation

  • Inability to form attachments in the future (the Internal Working Model)
  • Affectionless psychopathy (cannot appreciate the feeling of victims and so have an inability to feel remorse)
  • Delinquency (behavioural problems in adolescence)
  • Problems with Cognitive Development - lower IQ
• Bowlby's 44 Juvenile thieves study


  Aim: To investigate the long-term effects of maternal deprivation

  Method: He selected an opportunity sample of 88 children attending his clinic. Group 1- thief group: 31 boys and 13 girls referred for stealing. Group 2- control group: 34 boys and 10 girls referred for emotional problems. The two groups were matched for age and IQ. The children and their parents were interviewed on their early life experiences.

  Results: 15 of the thieves were classed as affectionless psychopaths, 12 of these 15 had experienced early prolonged separation from their mothers in 1st 2 years. A further 5 thieves experienced separation. ONLY 2 non-thief control groups had experienced separation.

  Conclusion: Those who had separation were a high percentage with affectionless psychopathy and of the thieves group
• Bowlby's 44 thieves study


  Provides support for the idea that damage from maternal deprivation was inevitable and these long lasting effects include delinquency and affectionless psychopathy, and so suggests that maternal deprivation hypothesis is valid
• Koluchova's study of twin boys locked away for 7 years

  Showed that the signs of privation were reversible in a loving family, going against Bowlby's claim that psychological damage was inevitable
• Rutter's study of Romanian orphanage children

  Showed no signs of privation in children adopted before 6 months, but did show signs in those adopted after 6 months, partially supporting Bowlby's theory
• Lewis' replication of Bowlby's 44 thieves study


  Did not find the same results, with a larger sample size, suggesting maternal deprivation does not lead to criminality and going against Bowlby's findings
• Harlow's study of infant monkeys separated from mothers


  Showed the monkeys that were separated ended up with behavioural issues and became dysfunctional adults, supporting the maternal deprivation hypothesis
• Attachment


  An emotional tie between two people; a caregiver (usually a mother) and a child. The relationship is reciprocal (shared)
• Bowlby's view on attachment

  • Babies are born with an innate instinct to form attachments in order to increase their chances of survival (evolutionary perspective)
  • Infants form one very special attachment with their mother (monotropy)
• Reciprocity


  When an individual responds to an action with an action of similar value or intention
• Interactional synchrony


  Where an infant mirrors the actions of another person; the infant and caregiver are coordinated and their mood mirrors one another
• Caregiver-infant interactions help build relationships, allow understanding to expect responses, and serve as a 'conversation' before language
• Still Face Experiment


  Shows the importance of reciprocity in the formation of attachment - when responses are absent, the baby becomes distressed
• Neglect can be an issue, e.g. in orphanages where care is always changing and not responsive, as it can impact brain development at a critical time
• Reciprocity


  Where a baby responds to the caregiver with a similar interaction
• Interactional Synchrony


  Where a baby 'mirrors' the caregivers actions at the same time
• Reciprocity and Interactional Synchrony

  • Help build relationships
  • Understanding to expect responses
  • Conversation before language
• Still Face Experiment


  1. Tronick asked moms to not look when the baby (points, smiles, cries, etc.)

  2. The baby cried, was distressed and its posture changed

  3. Slumped in chair
• The Still Face Experiment shows the importance of caregiver-infant interaction in the formation of attachment
• When responses are absent


  • Stress response occurs
  • Release of stress can lead to illness
• Brain is developing at this young age, reciprocity/attention/responsiveness is needed to build connections in the brain
• Neglect can be an issue, e.g. in orphanages when care is always changing and not as responsive
• Understanding the importance of caregiver-infant interaction can have practical uses, such as training foster families and adoptive parents about the value of reciprocity and interactional synchronisation in child development
• Meltzoff & Moore Experiment

  1. Aim: To examine interactional synchrony in infants

  2. Method: Using a controlled observation, an adult model displayed one of three facial expressions, or a hand gesture. Infant's expressions were filmed and identified by independent observers

  3. Results: There was a clear association between the infants' behaviour and that of the adult model. Infants would imitate the adults

  4. Conclusion: This shows that children will imitate their caregiver and that these interactions are important and intentional to form a bond between child and caregiver
• The findings of Meltzoff and Moore suggest that interactional synchrony is innate and reduces the strength of any claim that imitative behaviour is learned