8. Romanian orphan studies

Cards (13)

  • Aim for the Romanian orphan studies
    After research was conducted on maternal deprivation it turned into orphan studies and looking at the devastating effects of initialisation on Romanian orphans
  • Background
    Romanian president in the 1990s required everyone mother to have 5 children and when many families could not afford this their kids were place in huge orphanages with terrible conditions.
    Up until many of them were adopted by British families.
  • Researchers
    Rutter et al (2011) and Zeanah et at (2005)
  • Rutter et al (2011) procedure

    Followed a group of 165 Romanian orphans for years as a part of the English Romanian adoptee study.
    Physical, emotional, and cognitive development was tested in ages 4,6, 11, 15 and 22-25.
    52 children which had been adopted in the UK around the same time served as a control group.
  • Rutter et al's aim

    was to investigate the extent to which loving care was able to make for poorly experiences in their early life in institutions.
  • Rutter et al findings

    - When children first came to the UK, they showed delayed signs of intellectual development
    - The adopted children all showed different rates of recovery related to their age
    - Mean IQ of children adopted before the sag of 6M was 102, adopted between the ages of 6M and 2Y 87
    - Children adopted before 6M showed a particular attachment style disinhibited attachment
  • Behaviours associated with disinhibited attachment
    clinginess, attention seeking very social behaviour with adults both familiar and unfamiliar
  • Zeanah et al (2005) - procedure
    - conducted the Bucharest early intervention
    - Assessing attachment types in 95 Romanian children ages between 12-31M
    - Most had lived institutions for the most of their lives (90%) average.
    - They were compared to a control group of 50 children who had never been placed in institutions
    - Measured using strange situation
    - And careers were asked about behaviour associated with disinhibited attachment.
  • Zeanah et al (2005) - findings
    74% in the control group were classed as securely attached and only 19% in in the institutionalised group.
    Disinhibited attachment applied to 44% of children in the institutionalised group but only 20% in the control group.
  • Real world application
    - It is used to improve the conditions of children going up outside family homes by improving psychologists understanding of the effects of institutionalised.
    - This has led to improvement made to children's homes. - They now assign one or two key workers to each child to allow them to form successful attachments.
    - efforts have been made to reduce the number of children placed in these home by helping them get adopted and forested quicker.
    - This means children can develop normal attachments disinhibited attachment can be avoided.
  • Fewer confounding variables
    - There have been many studies on institutionalised children like those from WW2
    - However, many of those children had experienced varying degrees of trauma from physical abuse, bereavement and neglect.
    - This makes it hard to distinguish the problems of institutions.
    - In contrast the children that partook in the Romanian orphan studies were handed over by loving parents who couldn't afford to keep them
    - This means the results are much less likely to be confounding by other negative early experiences increasing the overall internal validity.
  • poor institutionalisation
    - On the other hand, it may have been subject to different confounding variables. As the quality of the institutions that these children were in was remarkably poor they received no comfort.
    - This means that the Romanian orphan studies may represent poor institutionalisation rather than institutionalisation in general.
  • Lach of adult data -
    - There is a lack of data in the information regarding these infants in their later life.
    - The latest data we have is from children in their early to mid-twenties.
    - This means psychologists are unable to answer very valuable questions like how they were able to maintain future adult romantic relationships or the long-term effects of their mental health.