Theory that children come into the world biologically pre-programmed to form an attachment, with emphasis on one primary caregiver
John Bowlby rejects learning theory of attachment
Because of evidence showing babies do not only attach to the person that feeds them
Attachment behaviour
Increased our chances of survival chances (evolutionary explanation)
Monotropic theory
Emphasis on one primary caregiver, attachment to this caregiver is different and more important than later attachments
The law of continuity
The more constant and predictable a child's care, the better the quality of their attachment
The law of accumulated separation
The effects of every separation from the mother add up, and the safest dose is therefore a zero dose
Social releasers
Infants are born with cute behaviours (crying, smiling, cooing, gripping etc.) to stimulate care/loving behaviours from mother
Attachment is a reciprocal process - both baby and mother are born to become attached, social triggers release attachment response
If a child doesn't make a primary attachment by the age of 2 and a half, they will struggle to form any attachment in later life
Internal working model
The type of relationship the baby experiences with the mother, will assume/expect all relationships are like that (a mental representation or blueprint)
Early attachment experiences of the child
Will shape emotional relationships later in life (secure or insecure relationships)
Positive attachments
Will lead to further good relationships, and vice versa
Early attachment experiences
Affect the child's own ability to parent in later life
Evidence supporting social releasers
T.Berry Brazelton et al (1975) found that the more a baby is ignored, the more distressed and less reactive they become, illustrating the role of social releasers in emotional development
Criticism of monotrophy concept
Rudolph Schaffer and Peggy Emerson (1964) found that even if the first attachment seems significantly stronger, it does not differ in quality from the child's other attachments
The idea of separation and continuity suggests working mothers can have a negative effect on babies' emotional development
Feminists pointed out that mothers shouldn't be blamed for everything that happens to the child