strange situation

• A strength of the technique is its reliability. Inter-rater reliability (determined by comparing the ratings made by two observers) is high (0.94 agreement was found by Ainsworth in 1978).

  Furthermore, Wartner found that 78% of children were classified in the same way at 1 year and again at 6 years. This shows that the technique is reliable, as it finds the same attachment type consistently over time.


  AO3
• The validity (accuracy) of the procedure has been questioned. Lamb found that children behave differently with different people. For example, they may be securely attached to mother but avoidant with father.

  AO3
• Furthermore, the strange situation by its very nature is strange / artificial and hence we cannot be sure that the children (and mothers) would behave like this in more natural surroundings. In addition, the procedure has been criticised, since the mothers know that they are being studied, it might be that they respond in a different (more positive way than usual, in turn affecting the response of the child - making it invalid.

  AO3
• -Subsequent research has found that Ainsworth overlooked a fourth type of

  Stranger

  attachment. Main & Soloman (1986) analysed over 200 SS videotapes and

  proposed the insecure disorganised type D attachment, which is characterised by a lack of consistent pattern of social behaviour - a mix of avoidant and resistant behaviour.

  AO3
• • The procedure is highly unethical - causing distress to infants.

  AO3
• • The strange situation is a culture bound test, i.e. it does not have the same meaning in countries outside Western Europe and USA. Cultural differences in childhood experiences are likely to mean that children will respond differently to the strange situation. E.g. Takahashi (1990) has noted that the test does not really work in Japan because Japanese mothers are so rarely separated from their babies and so infants showed very high levels of separation anxiety in the strange situation.

  AO3