Attachment

• What is an attachment?

  Attachment can be defined as an emotional relationship between two people in which each seeks closeness and feels more secure when in the presence of the attachment figure.
• What is caregiver-infant attachment?

  - The emotional bond between a young child and a nurturing figure who elicits back a response to their interactions.
• What are the three behaviours used to recognise attachment?

  ProximitySeparation distress:Secure-base behaviour:
• proximity


  infant trying to stay physically close to their caregiver
• seperation distress


  signs of anxiety if their caregiver is not in their presence
• secure base behaviour


  - even when infants are separate from their caregiver, infants tend to make regular contact with them

  - babies show this when they repeatedly go to their attachment figure when playing.
• What is reciprocity?


  - caregiver-infant interaction is a two-way/mutual process

  - each party responds to the other's signals to sustain interaction (turn-taking).

  - the behaviour of each party elicits a response from the other.
• What are the two stages of reciprocity?

  1) Alert phases

  2) Active involvement
• What is interactional synchrony?


  - synchronisation occurs when two people perform the same action simultaneously.

  - mother and infant reflect each other's actions and emotions in a coordinated, synchronized manner.
• When does interactional synchrony begin and why is it Important for attachment?

  Meltzoff and Moore (1977):Identified interactional synchrony in two-week-old infants.- adults displayed facial expressions, babies' responses filmed and observed.- babies mirrored adults' expressions more than chance (significant association).Russell Isabella (1989): Higher synchrony linked to better mother-baby attachment in 30 observed caregiver-infant pairs.
• Research into interactional synchrony aim + procedure (Meltzoff and Moore 1977)


  Aim:To investigate reciprocity between infants and their caregivers.

  Procedure:Controlled observationswith infants aged 6 to 27 days- exposed to four stimuli: three facial gestures, one manual gesture- responses observed and recorded, independent observer noted tongue protrusion and head movements.Observers scored recordingstwiceforinter-raterandintra-observer reliability.
• Meltzoff and Moore findings + conclusion


  Findings:The results indicated that babies aged 12 to 27 days old could imitateboth facial expressionsandmanual gestures.

  Conclusions:Meltzoff and Moore concluded that the ability to imitate serves as an important building block for later social and cognitive development.
• Evaluate caregiver-infant interaction (1): Filmed observations

  POINT =A strength of caregiver-infant interactions are that it's usually filmed in a laboratory, and there are several benefits to this:

  EXPLANATION =1.EVS, CVsand other activity that may distract a baby can be controlled.2. Using films also means that observations can be recorded and analysed later = makes it unlikely for researchers to miss key behaviours.3. Having filmed interactions also means that more than one observer can record data and establish theinter-rater reliabilityof observations.4. Finally, babies don't know they're being observed, so their behaviour does not change in response to observation (this would be an issue for overt observations)

  EVALUATION =Therefore, the data collected in such research should have good reliability and (internal) validity
• Evaluate caregiver-infant interaction (2): Difficulty observing babies


  POINT =A limitation of CG-I interactions is that it is hard to interpret a baby's behaviour.

  EVIDENCE/EXPLANATION =Young babies lack coordination, much of their bodies are almost immobile and the movements being observed are just small hand movements or subtle changes in expression. This makes it difficult to be sure, for example, whether a baby is smiling or just passing wind and it is also difficult to determine what is taking place from the baby's perspective. For example, we cannot know whether a movement such as a hand twitch is random or triggered by something the caregiver has done.

  EVALUATION =This means that we cannot be certain that the behaviours seen in caregiver-infant interactions have a special meaning.
• Evaluate caregiver-infant interaction (3): Development importance


  POINT =A further limitation is that simply observing a behaviour does not tell us its developmental importance, therefore these observations don’t tell us the purpose if synchrony and reciprocity.

  EVIDENCE/EXAMPLE =For example,Fieldman (2012)points out that synchrony (and by implication reciprocity) simply describe behaviours that occur at the same time.

  EVALUATION =This is a weakness because these are robust phenomena in the sense that they can be reliably observed, but this may not be particularly useful as it does not tell us their purpose.
• Briefly discuss how researchers might address difficulties encountered when trying to investigate caregiver-infant interaction.


  • Problem of context affecting behaviour - research should take place in natural setting e.g. child's home to increase validity.

  • Most research is observational so bias in observer interpretation - may be countered by using more than one observer.

  • Practical issues e.g. need for fewer but shorter observation periods because of limited waking periods.

  • Taking extra care in relation to ethics so as not to affect child/parent in any way e.g. protection from harm, confidentiality etc.
• Explain


  onereason why it is difficult to draw conclusions about the role of caregiver–infant interactions in the development of attachment.cannot ever show cause and effect because it is ethically impossible to manipulate the amount / quality of caregiver-infant interaction; extraneous factors such as home environment / substitute care / life events / culture / temperament
• Schaffer and Emerson (1964) 'Stages of Attachment' Research Aim and Procedure

  Aim:Investigate different stages of attachment.Procedure:-longitudinal studywith 60 babies from a predominantly working-class area in Glasgow.- initial age range: 5 to 23 weeks, studied until age 1.- mothers visited every four weeks.- mothers reported infants' responses to separation in seven everyday situations.- intensity of protests rated on a four-point scale.- mothers identified whom protests were directed towards.- stranger anxiety assessed by infant's response to interviewer at each visit.
• Schaffer and Emerson (1964) 'Stages of Attachment' Research Findings and Conclusion

  Findings:Between 25 and 32 weeks, 50% showed separation anxiety, often towards the mother (specific attachment).Attachment to the caregiver most interactive and sensitive, not necessarily the one spending the most time.By 40 weeks, 80% had a specific attachment, and nearly 30% displayed multiple attachments.Conclusions:Attachment develops in stages.Led to the development of the Stages of Attachment by Schaffer and Emerson.
• APRC Shaffer's and Emerson's Research procedure

  - study involved 60 babies (31 boys, 29 girls) from working-class families in Glasgow.

  - home visits by researchers monthly for the first year and again at 18 months.

  - mothers interviewed about babies' reactions to seven types of everyday separations to measure attachment (e.g., adult leaving the room).

  - researchers assessed stranger anxiety.
• What are Schaffer's & Emerson's (1964) stages of attachment?

  -Asocial stage

  -Indiscriminate attachment

  -Specific attachment

  -Multiple attachments
• APRC Shaffer's and Emerson's Research findings

  - Schaffer and Emerson concluded infants go through attachment stages.

  - mothers remain the most crucial attachment figures at 18 months.

  - in 65% of cases, the mother is the primary caregiver.
• What is the 'Asocial Stage'? [Stage 1]

  0-2 Months:- baby's behavior towards inanimate objects and humans is similar.- baby prefers familiar adults and is happier in the presence of humans.- formation of bonds with specific individuals, laying the foundation for later attachments.
• What is the 'Indiscriminate Attachment' phase? [Stage 2]

  2 to 7 months:- baby exhibits more obvious and observable social behaviours- prefers people over inanimate objects- enjoys cuddles and interaction from familiar adults.Generally accepts comfort from any adult (indiscriminate).No stranger or separation anxiety in the presence of unfamiliar adults.
• What is the 'Specific Attachment' phase? [Stage 3]

  7 Months & Onwards:- displays classic attachment behaviours towards a specific person- shows stranger anxiety and separation anxiety with their attachment figure.- formation of a primary attachment figure, often based on interaction quality, not time spent.- in 65% of cases, the primary attachment figure is the mother.
• What is the 'Multiple Attachment' phase? [Stage 4]

  By 1 year:- displays attachment behaviors like stranger and separation anxiety towards other familiar adults (secondary attachments)- Schaffer and Emerson observed 29% forming secondary attachments within a month of their primary attachment- by age 1, babies have developed multiple attachments
• Evaluate Schaffer's & Emerson's stages of attachment (1): Good external validity


  POINT:One strength his research has good external validity.

  EXPLANATION:This is because most of the observations (except stranger anxiety) were made by parents during normal activities, so the babies weren't distracted or anxious.EVALUATION:This means that it is highly likely that the participants behaved naturally whilst being observed, thus increasing validity.

  COUNTERPOINT:

  POINT:Because the mothers were the observers, there is a high chance of observer bias distorting the findings of the observation.

  EXPLANATION:They might have been biased in what they reported, for example, they might not have noticed/forgotten when their baby was showing signs of anxiety.

  EVALUATION:This means that even if babies behaved naturally, their behaviour may not have been accurately recorded.
• Evaluate Schaffer's & Emerson's stages of attachment (2): Poor evidence for the asocial stage


  POINT:A limitation with Schaffer and Emerson’s theory of the stages of attachment is that the asocial stage is difficult to study.

  EVIDENCE/EXPLANATION:The validity the measures they used to assess attachment in the asocial stage were flawed.-For example,young babies in this stage have poor co-ordination and are generally pretty much immobile.- if babies less than two months old felt anxiety in everyday situations, they might've displayed this in quite subtle ways, hard-to-observe ways.- this made it difficult for mothers to observe and report back to researchers on signs of anxiety and attachment in this age group (there isn’t much observable behaviour).

  EVALUATION:This is a weakness becausethe evidence obtained from the observations cannot be relied upon and therefore it is difficult to draw any firm conclusions. It even means that the babies may actually be social but because of these flawed methods, they appear 'asocial'.
• Evaluate Schaffer's & Emerson's stages of attachment (3): Real-world application


  POINT:Another strength of Schaffer and Emerson’s stages is that they have practical application in day care (where babies are cared for outside of their home by a non-family adultEVIDENCE/EXPLANATION:In the asocial and indiscriminate attachment stages day care is likely to be straightforward as babies can be comforted by any skilled adult- however, Schaffer and Emerson’s research tells us that day care with an unfamiliar during the specific attachment stage- this means that parents’ use of day care can be planned using Schaffer and Emerson’s stages.

  POINT:However, it should be noted that the stages also strongly encourage women to return to work to avoid specific attachment, potentially before they are ready- this is an issue because their theories are socially sensitive, and may not consider how a mother is entitled to fulfil her maternity leave 9 months after the birth- overall, it can be used to help parents choose when to send their children to daycare, but its impact on mother should also be considered
• Evaluate Schaffer's & Emerson's stages of attachment (4): Cultural bias/ethnocentrism


  POINT:A further weakness is that there is conflicting evidence from different cultures on multiple attachments.

  EVIDENCE/EXPLANATION:For example,there is no doubt that children become capable of multiple attachments however; it is not clear at what age this happens. Some research seems to indicate that most babies form attachments to a single main carer before they become capable of developing multiple attachments. Other psychologists, in particular those who work in those cultural context were multiple care givers are the norm, believe babies form multiple attachments from the outset.

  EVALUATION:This is a problem becausethe presence of cross-cultural differences in child-rearing means that it is difficult to produce a theory that is applicable to all cultures (collectivist and individualist), therefore Schaffer and Emerson’s theory can be criticised as beingethnocentric.
• Explain attachment to fathers

  - fathers less likely to be the baby's first attachment.

  - Schaffer and Emerson found 3% cases where the father was the sole attachment at 7 months.

  - in 27% of cases, the father was the first joint attachment with the mother.

  - most fathers later become important attachments.

  75% of babies formed attachment with fathers by 18 months (shown through separation anxiety)
• APRC Grossman's Longitudinal study procedure

  - longitudinal study with 44 families.

  - compared fathers' and mothers' contributions to children's attachment experiences at 6, 10, and 16 years
• APRC Grossman's Longitudinal study findings

  - quality of mother-child attachment important for assessing attachment into adolescence

  - not the same for father-child attachment, indicating a potentially less crucial role for fathers

  - quality of father's play linked to attachment quality, suggesting a stimulatory role for fathers
• Description (AO1) Of Research Into Multiple Attachments And The Role Of The Father:

  1. Parent-Infant Attachment

  2. The Role of the Father

  3. Fathers and Primary Caregivers
• Parent-Infant Attachment


  - traditional researched focuses on mother-infant attachment.Schaffer and Emerson (1964): majority form primary attachment to mothers around 7 months.- secondary attachments to other family members, including fathers, develop within weeks or months.- 75% of infants studied formed attachment with fathers by 18 months, indicated by protests when fathers walked away.
• The Role of the Father

  Grossman et al. (2002): Longitudinal study on parents' behaviour and children's attachment into teens.- quality of infant attachment with mothers linked to adolescent attachment, while father attachment seemed less crucial- fathers' play with infants played a distinct role, emphasising play and stimulation rather than nurturing.
• Fathers and Primary Caregivers


  - evidence suggests fathers, as primary caregivers, adopt nurturing behaviors akin to mothers.Field (1978): Filmed 4-month-olds with primary caregiver mothers, secondary caregiver fathers, and primary caregiver fathers.- primary caregiver fathers, like mothers, smiled, imitated, and held infants more than secondary caregiver fathers.- nurturing behavior is crucial for attachment, showcasing fathers' capacity to be nurturing attachment figures.- attachment relationship relies on responsiveness, not the parent's gender.
• Outline 3 research studies into the role of the father.

  1)Schafferfound that initially babies become attached to their mother (7 months) and then after this form secondary attachments with others such as the father. 75% of babies had an attachment with their father by 18 months of age, they showed separation anxiety.

  2)Lambindicated that between the ages of 15-24 months they will show a preference towards their father, this suggests that the father may become the PCG.

  3)Grossmanconducted a longitudinal study and found a direct correlation between the quality of fathers play with infants and the quality of adolescent attachments. This suggests that the father may be more about play and stimulation whereas the mother is more about nurturing.
• Evaluate research into the role of the father (2): Nature vs Nurture - both biological and gender roles


  POINT:The role of fathers as secondary attachment figures can be explained through biological processes and gender stereotyping.

  EVIDENCE/EXPLANATION:For example,the fact that fathers tend not to become the primary attachment figure could simply be down to the result of traditional gender roles, in which women are expected to be more caring and nurturing than men. On the other hand, it could be that females hormones (oestrogen) create higher levels of nurturing and therefore women are biologically pre-disposed to be the primary attachment figure.

  EVALUATION:This is a strength asit confirms that such difference between mothers and fathers in the role of rearing children can be down to an individual’s nature but also their experiences of nurture.--> perhaps link back to nature vs nurture debate, interactionist approach etc
• Evaluate research into the role of the father (3): Confusion over research questions/inconsistent findings


  POINT:A weakness of research into attachment figures is that there are inconsistent findings as to the role of the father in attachments.

  EVIDENCE/EXPLANATION:For example,research into the role of the father in attachment is confusing because different researchers are interested in different research questions. Some researchers are interested in understanding the role fathers have as secondary attachment figures, whereas others are more concerned with the father’s role as a primary attachment figure. The former have tended to see fathers behaving differently from mothers and having a distinct role. The latter have tended to find that fathers can take on a ‘maternal’ role.

  EVALUATION:This is a problem becauseit means psychologists cannot easily answer the questions ‘what is the role of the father?’ The findings from research being inconsistent means that firm conclusions cannot be drawn.