Psychology Attatchment

avatar
Created by
Lucille Holmes

Cards (49)

  • Caregiver-infant interactions

    Reciprocity and interactional synchrony
  • Attachment

    Close two way bond between 2 individuals who see each other as essential for each others emotional security
  • Attachment behaviour (PSS)

    Proximity ,Separation and Secure base behaviour
  • Interactional synchrony

    Mother and infant reflect both the actions and emotions e.g. cooing
  • Meltzoft and Moore

    2 week old kids mirrored expressions
  • Isabella et al

    High levels of synchrony gave a higher chance of high quality attachment
  • Reciprocity

    One person responds to the other, essential for an attachment to form.
  • Evaluation of research into Caregiver - Infant interactions

    STRENGTHS
    - Filmed observations: increases validity, reduces researcher bias
    - Real life application: PCIT improves quality of attachment for at risk families
    WEAKNESS
    - Role of the child in attachment: is the behaviour of the child deliberate/conscious
    - Socially Sensitive Research: pressure on the mother and disregards the father
  • Role of the father in ...
    > Primary Attachment ( Schaffer & Emerson ) - 70% attached to the mother, 27% attached to mother & father, 3% attached to father
    > Secondary Attachment ( Schaffer & Emerson ) - 75% attached to their father
    > Teen attachments ( Grussmann) - longitudinal study, Quality of attachment with father < quality of attachment with mother. Therefore, fathers are less important in long term emotional development.
    > Fathers Play - Quality of this was linked to attachment. Therefore fathers role is to do with play + stimulation not nurturing.
    > Level of response ( Schaffer & Emerson ) - Key to attachment is the level of responsiveness not the gender of the parent.
  • Evaluation of Research into the role of the father
    STRENGTHS
    > Economic Implications - Mothers feel less pressure to stay home due to past research
    WEAKNESS'
    > Contradicting research - SCF or PCF? What is truly the role of the father ?
    > Fathers role in play + stimulation - children in single sex families don't develop differently so that isn't their distinct role.
    > Fathers & Primary Attachments - Fathers cannot be the primary attachment due to less Oxytosin level.
    > Sexual Biases - prevent objective observations as researcher has come in with preconceptions about the fathers behaviour.
  • Schaffer's stages of attachment

    Asocial ( 1st few weeks ) - Behaviour towards objects + humans = similar
    Indiscriminate ( 2 - 7 months ) - observable human behaviour, preference for humans
    Specific ( 7 months ) - stranger / separation anxiety , primary attachment formed.
    Multiple Attachment ( 1 year ) - Secondary Attachments
  • Schaffer & Emerson

    PROCEDURE:
    -60 babies- 31 male, 29 female, W/C families
    -Glasgow
    -visited at home
    -every month for the first year and then at 18 months
    - researcher asked mother questions about separation anxiety ( behaviour during everyday separation ) and stranger anxiety ( anxiety response to unfamiliar adults )
    FINDINGS:
    -Between 25 and 32 weeks, 50% of babies should separation anxiety towards specific attachment
    - Attachment was mostly with caregiver who most interactive, it wasn't to do with time.
  • Evaluation of Schaffer's stages of Attachment
    STRENGTHS
    > External Validity - Natural behaviour was observed
    > Longitudinal study - children followed up + observed regularly. No participant variables = internal validity
    WEAKNESS'
    > Multiple Attachments - when a playmate leaves baby = distressed ( BOLWBY ) This doesn't mean that they've formed an attachment.
    > Collectivist Cultures - multiple attachments are the norm. Lacks cross cultural validity.
  • Animal Studies in Attachment
    Lorenz - Imprinting
    > Geese attach to the first thing they see and follow it to ensure survival this also affects later mating behaviour
    > 2 conditions : mother & Lorenz ( Incubator )
    > Geese followed respective mothers everywhere even when put together.

    Harlow - Contact Comfort
    > Cupboard love theory is too simplistic & ignores other needs
    > 2 conditions : wire mother ( with milk ) & soft mother
    > Monkeys cuddled soft mother and in frightening situations they went to her.
    Consequences : Adulthood = aggressive + couldn't mate + ate their young
  • Evaluating Animal Studies of Attachment
    STRENGTHS
    > Humans & Monkeys = similar. This means that results can be applied to human children.
    > Practical Applications - childcare, vital that all needs are catered for.

    WEAKNESS'
    > Generalisability - Humans cannot imprint as we're immobile at birth
    > Overestimation of long term effect on imprinting - chicken study, when introduced to real chicken they eventually learnt to mate.
    > Unethical - animals don't have a right to not be researched / harmed. However when doing a cost benefit analysis, it has had great long term benefits.
  • Explanations of Attachment : Learning Theory
    Attachment is learned through classical conditioning and maintained through operant conditioning.
    Hunger - innate primary drive which is reduced by food
    Attachment - secondary drive
  • Cupboard Love Theory

    DOLLARD & MILLER
    Children learn to love whoever feeds them
  • classical conditioning

    SEARS ET AL
    satisfaction of primary drive with caregiver, Hunger is now generalised to caregiver.
    UCS - food , UCR - pleasure , NS - caregiver
    1. BEFORE CONDITIONING. UCS - UCR & NS - no response
    2. DURING CONDITIONING. UCS + NS - UCR
    3. AFTER CONDITIONING. UCS = NS = CS - CR (UCR)
  • Operant Conditioning

    Positive reinforcement
    Baby crying - Mother feeds baby - infant learns reward for crying = food

    Negative reinforcement
    Mother feeds baby - Baby stops crying - Mother escapes unpleasant stimuli.

    > Attachment is maintained through the interplay of positive & negative reinforcement strengthening attachment.
  • Evaluation of Learning Theory
    STRENGTHS
    > Scientific principles from behaviourism, giving the theory credibility
    > Explanation developed by SLT - parents teach love through modelling attachment behaviour
    WEAKNESS'
    >Animal studies - Harlow - importance of contact comfort
    > Schaffer & Emerson - wasn't always the person that fed, based on how interactive the person was ( Reciprocity + interactional synchrony )
  • Explanations of Attachment - Bowlby's theory

    Attachment = innate = survival advantage
  • Monotropic

    Primary attachment figure, a more important, unique attachment
  • Law of Continuity

    Constant childcare = better quality attachment
  • Law of accumulated separation

    Separation adds up so the safest dose is ZERO
  • Social releasers

    innate ' cute behaviours ' ( smiling, cooing ) = attention from adults. This activates adult attachment system ( make them feel love ). And babies respond back ( reciprocal system )
  • Critical period

    2 years old - if there is no attachment it will be hard to form later relationships
  • Internal Working Model

    Template for future relationships that can affect child - parent relationships in the future.
    If 1st experience = loving = expectation of loving relationships later.
  • Evaluation of Bowlby's Theory

    STRENGTHS
    > Social Releasers ( Brazleton ) : parents ignoring social releasers = child is distressed + motionless
    > Internal Working Model ( Baley ) : mother + poor attachment = 1 year old had a poor attachment
    WEAKNESS'
    > Deterministic - Internal Working Model implies that people are slaves to their past
    > Monotropy - collectivist cultures, some babies form multiple attachment. Lacks cross cultural validity.
    > Socially Sensitive ( Feminists ) : due to Law of accumulated separation, mothers are blamed for going to work.
    > Temperament of the child ( Kagan ) some babies are anxious, some babies are sociable. This can explain later social behaviour over quality of attachment.
  • Ainsworth Strange Situation

    AIM : asses quality of a child - caregiver attachment

    PROCEDURE : controlled observation in a lab , 2 way mirror, covert observation , multiple observers recording every 15 seconds ( time sampling ) noting down the strength of behaviour on a scale of 1 - 7.

    categories to judge attachment quality : Proximity Seeking, Exploration + secure base behaviour, Stranger Anxiety, Separation anxiety, Reunion Response.

    7 episodes ( 3 minutes )
    1. Child encouraged to explore by caregiver
    2. Stranger enters
    3. Caregiver leaves
    4. Caregiver returns & stranger leaves
    5. Caregiver leaves
    6. Stranger returns
    7. Caregiver returns

    FINDINGS & CONCLUSIONS :
    Secure ( Type B ) - 70%
    - Explores + proximity
    - moderate separation + stranger anxiety
    - requires + accepts comfort at reunion
    Insecure - Avoidant ( Type A ) - 15%
    - freely explores + greater proximity
    - no stranger + separation anxiety
    - doesn't require comfort at reunion
    Insecure - resistant ( Type C ) - 15%
    - Explores less + no proximity
    - stranger + separation anxiety
    - resist comfort when reunited
  • Evaluation of the Strange Situation
    STRENGTHS
    > Predictive validity - attachment type can predict later development
    > Interrater reliability - 94% agreement, controlled conditions, less interpretations.
    WEAKNESS'
    > Culture bound - Japan - collectivist culture - mothers + child = rarely split. Not a lot of exploration behaviour. Lacks cross cultural validity.
    > Temperament - confounding variable - KAGAN - incomplete research
  • Cultural Variations in attachment - Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg

    AIM : look at proportions of different types of attachment across countries + differences within countries

    PROCEDURES : 32 studies with the strange situation, 8 countries, 1990 children, meta analysis

    FINDINGS: SECURE attachment was most common in all countries ( 75% in GB, 50% in China )

    Individualist cultures of INSECURE RESISTANT was low ( under 14% ) but for collectivist cultures rates were high ( above 25% ) - This shows cultural difference in the distribution of INSECURE attachment

    Variation between the same country were 150% greater than variations between different countries . e.g. in the US one study 46% SECURE, in another 90% SECURE
  • Cultural variations in attachment - Simoreli et al

    AIM : whether proportion of attachment types still matched previous study in Italy

    PROCEDURE : Mother varied in education levels

    FINDINGS : 50% SECURE ( lower than previous ) , 36% INSECURE - AVOIDANT
    [> This is most likely due to the increasing number of mothers working long hors and using professional childcare. This shows that cultural changes can make a difference in patterns of attachment.
  • Evaluation of Cultural Variations in attachment
    STRENGTHS
    > Meta Analysis - large sample - internal validity - reduces bias - credibility - reliability

    WEAKNESS'
    > Subcultures within countries - comparisons between countries have little meaning
    > American / British culture bias - Ainsworth (US), Bowlby (GB) - imposed etic ( cultural universals ) disregarding cultural emic ( cultural uniqueness )
    > Temperament - confounding variable (kagan) - incomplete research
  • Bowlby's Theory of Maternal Deprivation

    Continuous maternal care is necessary for emotional development.
  • Maternal Deprivation

    breakdown of a maternal attachment between a child & their mother that can lead to serious negative consequences ( delinquency, reduced intelligence , affectionless psychopathy , increased aggression )
  • Critical Period

    Extended separation during 30 months = psychological damage
  • Bowlby - 44 Thieves study

    AIM : To investigate the effects of maternal deprivation on people to see whether delinquents have suffered deprivation.
    PROCEDURE :
    Interview 44 adolescents who were referred to a child protection program in London because of stealing.
    Another group of 44 adolescents were selected as controls. These people were referred to the child protection program because of emotional problems, but have not committed crimes.
    Bowlby also interviewed both groups' parents to state whether their children had experienced separation during the critical period and for how long.
    FINDINGS :
    12/14 juvenile thieves had prolonged separation in 1st 2 years
    In the control group only two had had such a separation.
    Several of the young thieves 14/44 showed affectionless psychopathy
    None of the control group were affectionless psychopaths.
  • Evaluation of Bowlby's Theory of Maternal Deprivation
    STRENGTHS
    > Harlow - contact comfort - adult monkeys were aggressive ( can it be generalised to humans though ??)
    > Goldfarb - orphaned children - lower IQ, more aggressive, less emotionally mature

    WEAKNESS'
    > Researcher Bias - Bowlby - examined + diagnosed himself - less validity
    > Correlation - maternal deprivation & affectionless psychopathy - external variables - it's not causation
    > Critical vs. Sensitive Period - 2 twin boys locked in a cupboard - fostered & recovered fully after care
    > Deprivation vs. Privation - ( RUTTER ) - long term damage is due to privation not deprivation - 44 thieves - moved from home to home so they never got to form it.
  • deprivation

    loss of an attachment
  • Privation

    No attachment formed at all