Attachment Psych P1

• What is attachment


  Deep and lasting emotional bond. Both members seek closeness and feel more secure when close to their attachment figure
• What is reciprocity


  Turn taking form of interaction. Both the caregiver and infant contribute to the interaction by responding to the other's signals and cues
• What is interactional synchrony


  A simultaneous interaction between the infant and caregiver with matching coordinated behaviour and matching emotional states
• Meltzoff and Moore


  Infant response matched experimenter's facial expression. Shows ability to reciprocate through imitation
• Condon and Sander


  They found interactional synchrony between caregiver speech and how they moved

  Innate ability for interaction
• Limitation of infant caregiver interactions


  Infants cannot communicate thoughts or feelings. Therefore inferences are used about observed behaviour.

  Socially sensitive as mothers who return to workplace cannot develop interactional synchrony with infant and be discriminated.
• What is asocial stage


  0-6 Weeks. Display innate behaviour to ensure proximity to potential caregiver, including inanimate objects
• What is indiscriminate attachment


  6weeks - 7 months. Ability to differentiate between humans and objects smiling at those who they see more frequently. Do not show stranger/separation anxiety
• What is specific attachment


  7-9months. Babies form strong attachment to primary caregiver. Shows separation anxiety and stranger anxiety.
• What is multiple attachments

  9/10+ months. The infant starts to form attachments with other caregivers and stranger anxiety decreases
• Schaffer and Emerson


  60 working class babies and families

  Monthly interviews for a year and visit after 18months.

  Assessing stranger anxiety when left with researcher

  Separation anxiety when PCG left room
• Results of Schaffer and Emerson

  Separation anxiety occurred by 25 weeks

  Stranger anxiety around 1 month later

  After 18 months 87% formed multiple attachments
• Limitations of Schaffer


  Ethnocentric + Small sample size

  Lack temporal validity as practices changed
• Strengths of Schaffer and Emerson


  Mundane realism as observed in own homes

  Naturalistic behaviours

  Typical situation for strangers to enter
• Role of the Father

  Primary attachment figure was mother 65% time, 30% both, 3% alone

  After 18months 75% formed attachment with Father
• Importance of active play


  Fathers are seen to engage in play

  Role encourage risk taking behaviour

  Mothers in workforce so Father changes to be more like mother
• Grossman (2002)


  44 Families Longitudinal study of babies at 6/10/16

  Quality of baby's attachment of mothers but not fathers was related to attachment in adolescents
• Geiger


  Fathers' play interactions are more exciting and pleasurable

  than mothers', whilst mothers are more nurturing and

  affectionate suggesting they have different roles.
• Field


  Observed Primary Mother / Primary Father /Secondary Fathers

  Primary Fathers showed more smiling, imitating and holding that SCF

  Primary Father can adapt PCG emotions
• Evaluation of role of Father

  Research is socially sensitive. Role of mother is not replaceable - Fathers feel they cannot fully provide needs. Or they believe they can take an active role

  Economic implications for equal paternity and maternity leave

  Oestrogen is lower therefore cannot be nurturing to offspring

  Research conflicting -> RoTF is ambiguous
• Lorenz


  Two groups of hatchlings. One hatched by lorenz, one aturally
• Lorenz findings


  Lorenz geese imprinted on him rather than mother

  In natural, imprinted on Mother

  Critical period of 32 hours - After cannot imprint

  Biological attachment
• What is cupboard love

  children learn to love whoever feeds them
• Harlow


  One surrogate mother provided food, one provided comfort (cloth). Time spent was recorded + when frightened
• Harlow findings


  infant monkeys spent most of time with cloth mother

  When frightened they ran to cloth mother

  Reject cupboard love
• Evaluation of animal research


  Humans are more complex than biology

  Humans also use social experiences

  Supported by Bowlby Humans have similar critical period

  Imprinting RWA of skin to skin contact

  Unethical - Removed from mother + frightened (cost-benefit analysis)
• Learning Theory


  Dolland and Miller - Cupboard Love

  Classical conditioning association between caregiver and food

  Mother (NS) + Food (UCS) -> UCR

  Mother (CS) -> CR

  Positive response feeding crying baby -> cries more

  Negative reinforcement parents feed
• Drive reduction theory


  Secondary drive (attachment, food) reduce primary drive of hunger
• Strengths of Learning Theory


  Face validity - Crying learnt to give attention

  Empirical lab study - Research support Pavlov + Skinner
• Limitations of Learning theory


  Environmentally reductionist - More complicated than stimulus response

  Harlow found contact preferred over food

  Bowlby does not depend on learning theory rather evolutionary
• Bowbly monotropic theory


  Innate drive to form strong attachment to mother and stay in proximity - Instinctual to survive by crying - Social releasers - for attention

  Critical period first 30 months. Without attachment negative impacts lifelong

  IWM shapes future relationships

  Strength of attachment is seen in safe base behaviour
• Strengths of Bowlby monotropic theory


  Similar critical period as seen in Lorenz

  Applied to childcare - Skin to skin contact RWA
• Limitations of bowlby monotropic theory


  Alpha bias - Lacks temporal validity as both parents now share caregiving

  Research support in Learning theory opposes Bowlby

  Continuity hypothesis is deterministic as free will in future RS is not accounted
• What is Type A

  Insecure Avoidant. Low stranger anxiety, low separation anxiety. Mothers have little sensitive responsiveness
• What is Type B

  Secure. Moderate level of stranger anxiety and separation anxiety. Reunion allows for settling
• What is Type C

  Insecure resistant. Infants have high stranger + separation anxiety. Mixed emotions in reunion

  Inconsistent sensitive responsiveness
• Ainsworth Process


  E1: observer enters

  E2: Baby explores

  E3: Stranger interacts with baby (stranger anxiety)

  E4: Mother leaves (separation anxiety)

  E5: Mother returns (reunion behaviour) stranger leaves

  E6: Mother leaves

  E7: Stranger enters (stranger anxiety)

  E8: Mother returns (reunion behaviour)
• Ainsworth findings


  66% type B

  34% insecure (22% type A, 12% type C)
• Strengths of Ainsworth


  Highly controlled standardised study so findings can be replicated

  Predictive validity: Later life secure had better RS

  McCarthy found adults with most secure RS were secure as a child
• Limitations of Ainsworth


  Imposed etic assuming ethnocentric applies to other cultures

  Artificial stimuli - Low ecological validity (in lab)

  Overt - Sensitive responsiveness by mother due to demand characteristics