bolwby's monotropy theory :explanations for attachment

• plan

  - intro

  - monotropy

  - social releasers and the critcal period

  - internal working model↓

  - ao3 bowlby's theory lacks validity

  - ao3 support evidence for social releasers

  - ao3 support for the internal working model
• intro ↓

  - Bowlby (1988) rejected learning theory as an explanation for attachment

  - Instead he said look at the lorenz and harlow’s research and proposed an evolutionary explanation- attachment is innate which can give survival advantages

  - Its similar to imprinting to keep young animals safe by having them stay close to adults
• monotropy (1/2) ↓

  - Monotropy theory emphasises a child's attachment to one particular caregiver which is different from the others

  - Bowlby called this figure the ‘mother’ but it didn’t have to be the biological mother (or a female)
• monotropy (2/2)

  - He believed the more time the baby spent with the mother/primary attachment figure, the better the attachment bond. To clarify this, he put forward 2 principles;

  - Law of continuity – the more constant and predictable a child’s care is, the better quality the attachment will be.

  - Law of accumulated separation – the effects of separation from the mother add up ‘and the safest dose is therefore a zero dose’ (Bowlby 1975)
• social releasers and the critcal period ↓

  - Bowlby suggested that babies are born with innate behaviour such as smiling, cooing and gripping in order to get attention from adults

  - These are known as social releasers – activate adult social interaction so the adult can attach to the baby

  - Recognized that that attachment was a reciprocal process

  - Both mother and baby were wired to become attached
• social releasers and the critcal period (2/2)

  - Beginning the early weeks of life, Bowlby identified the critical period around 6 months when the infant attachment system is active

  - Bowlby viewed this more of as sensitive period – a child is most sensitive at 6 months but can extend up to the age of 2

  - If attachment hasn’t formed during this time, kid will find it harder to form one later
• internal working model↓ ↓

  - Bolwby proposed that kids develop a internal working model of their relationship with their primary attachment figure

  - Internal working model~ mental representations of the world – ITC, the model affects future relationships because of how we percieve relationships

  - A child who first experienced a loving relationship with a reliable caregiver tends to form an expectation that all relationships are loving and reliable

  - So they bring these qualities to future relationships
• nternal working model↓ ↓ (2/2)

  • However, a child who first experienced an poor treatment from their caregiver will tend to form poor relationships where the expect the same treatment from others or treat others in that way

  - Internal working model affects the child’s ability to become a parent

  - People tend to base their parenting based on how they were raised

  - This explains why children from functional families produce similar families themselves
• ao3 the concept of validity from bowlby's theory lacks validity ↓ (1/2)

  - Schaffer and emerson (1964) found that although most babies attached to one person first, a significant minority formed multiple at attachments at the same time
• ao3 the concept of validity from bowlby's theory lacks validity ↓ (2/2)

  Though first attachment appears to have a strong influence on behaviour, it may just mean its stronger but not different in terms of the quality from the other kids’ attachments

  - e.g. other attachments to family member s provide all the same qualities ( emotional support, safe base etc)

  - ..means bowlby is incorrect when he says that there's a unique quality and importance to the child primary attachment
• • ao3 support evidence for social releasers ↓

  - evidence that social releasers are designed to elict caregiver interactions

  - T.Berry Brazelton et al (1975) observed babies trigger interactions with adults using social releasers

  - Researchers told the babies primary attachment figure to ignore the babies’ social realsers

  - This increased the babies distress – led most to lay motionless and curl up

  - … shows the role of social releasers in emotional development

  - Suggests that theyre important in the process of developing attachment
• ao3 support for the internal working model ↓ (1/3)

  - helps predict that patterns of attachment will be passed on to the next generation

  - Bailey et al ( 2007) assessed attachment in 99 mothers and their one year old babies

  - Measured mother’s attachment to their own primary attachment figures ( ie. Their parents) and attachment quality with their babies
• ao3 support for the internal working model ↓ (2/3)

  - Found mothers with poor attachment to their own primary AF were more likely to be poorly attached to their babies

  - .. supports bowlby’s idea that the mother’s ability to form attachments to their babies is influenced by their internal working models from their own early attachment experiences
• ao3 support for the internal working model ↓ (3/3)

  - However, there may be more important influences on social development

  - e.g. some believe that genetic differences in anxiety and sociability affect social behaviour in both babies and adults - these can also impact on their parenting ability ( kornieko 2016)

  - .. means bowlby may have over stated the importance of the internal working model in social behaviour and parenting at the expense of other factors