Attachment

• Reciprocity


  The child and the parent pay attention to each others verbal and non-verbal signals, taking it in turn to initiate the sequence
• Interactional synchrony


  The child and parent are in harmony with their verbal and non-verbal signals, mirroring each other
• A child will have more than one attachment figure, forming multiple attachments to key people in their life
• Research has often overlooked the role of the father in attachment
• Caregiver infant interactions is an often overlooked part of the course but has come up several times as extended answer questions
• Reciprocity


  When the caregiver and infant respond to each others signals appropriately
• Interactional synchrony


  When an infant mirrors the actions of their care-giver
• How infants learn to interact with other people

  1. Interactional synchrony

  2. Reciprocity
• Pseudo-conversation


  When the caregiver 'speaks' to the infant and then allows the infant to respond. This teaches the child about turn taking in conversations, even though neither party can understand what the other is saying.
• Motherease or caregivers


  The exaggerated sing-song voice often used by adults to 'talk' to babies and animals
• Multiple attachments


  Whereby an infant forms several, different attachments with a range of people, usually a family member
• Monotropy


  The theory of Bowlby which states that an infant forms one main attachment with their PCG and this is then replicated throughout their life in their relationships with others
• Ethology


  The study of non-human animals in order to learn more about humans. It differs from zoology which is the study of animals in order to understand the animal itself.
• Learning theory of attachment

  Attachment is not innate. Attachment is learned. Attachment depends on who feeds the infant.
• If he was not, then the experiment is not really about attachment/love and so is not valid
• It is also not reliable's as it can never, not should be, repeated
• How much can we apply this to human infants?
• There will clearly be differences in species and it would be wrong to generalise to human infants without more evidence
• However, some would argue that monkeys are similar to humans in that we have similar neurological structures, therefore some inference is possible (Green, 1994)
• The implications of both studies are important, especially Harlow: he disputes learning theory as an explanation and really shows the importance of the PCG role
• Lorenz also support the evolutionary explanation as it highlights attachment must be innate (at least in some species - so why not humans?)
• Learning theory of attachment

  Attachment is not innate, it is learned, and depends on who feeds the baby 'cupboard love'
• Classical conditioning


  We learn via association, where a neutral stimulus becomes a conditioned stimulus that produces a conditioned response
• How classical conditioning works with infants and attachment

  Infant is hungry (UCS), food gives pleasure (UCR), PCG provides food (NS), PCG becomes CS and infant feels pleasure (CR), attachment forms as infant wants PCG around
• Operant conditioning


  We learn via punishments and rewards, positive and negative reinforcement
• How operant conditioning works with infants and attachment


  Infant learns they can receive attention from PCG by crying, laughing, etc. (positively reinforced), PCG is also rewarded as infant stops crying (negatively reinforced)
• Primary drive


  Something the infant needs biologically to survive, such as food
• Secondary drive


  A stimulus that reinforces behaviour after it has been associated with the primary drive, such as the PCG
• Bowlby's monotropic theory


  Attachment is innate and pre-programmed, not learned, as it is vital for survival
• Critical period


  Idea that attachment has to form within a certain time scale, otherwise it will never happen
• Rutter found children adopted into stable homes could form attachments even when older than Bowlby's 2.5 year critical period
• Sensitive period


  Ideal to attach in first 2.5 years but possible to attach later
• Internal working model


  Representation of how we see ourselves and expect others to react, shapes our later relationships
• Secure attachment and IWM


  Infant feels loved, worthy of love, expects to be treated well, can accept rejection
• Insecure avoidant attachment and IWM

  Infant feels ignored, expects rejection, remains aloof to protect themselves
• Insecure resistant attachment and IWM


  Infant believes they must be clingy and possessive to keep PCG's attention, makes later relationships problematic
• Evidence for IWM comes from studies on continuity between childhood and adult attachment styles
• Ainsworth's 'strange situation'


  Lab observation to measure quality of attachment and attachment styles in infants
• Procedure of the strange situation

  Mother and infant play, stranger enters, mother leaves, mother returns, stranger returns, mother returns
• Ainsworth found 70% of infants were securely attached, 15% insecure avoidant, 15% insecure resistant