Attachment p1

• Interactional synchrony


  Parent and child synchronise movements and the coordination of micro level behaviour
• Meltzoff and Moore 1977 research suggests higher levels of synchrony is associated with better mother-infant attachment
• Reciprocity


  Mutual process where they are responding and mirroring to their signals by turn taking and eliciting a response from another
• Baby is showing reciprocity in this example
• Meltzoff and Moore 1977 study

  1. Aimed to investigate interactional synchrony between infants and their caregivers with a series of controlled observations

  2. Adults showed facial expressions 3 facial and 1 manual with babies aged 6-27

  3. The infants reaction was filmed and an association was found between the adults gesture or expression and the child's reaction

  4. An independent observer was asked to note tongue protrusion and head movements with behavioural categories

  5. More than one observer scored the recordings
• Meltzoff and Moore 1977 research


  • Reliable research evidence on interactional synchrony
  • Results indicated that babies aged 12-27 could imitate both facial and manual gesture, suggesting they were mirroring the actions of their caregiver
  • They concluded that the ability to imitate serves as an important building block for later cognitive development
  • Controlled environment valid results can be applied, high internal validity
• Controlled observations


  • Capture details
  • Both the mother and infant are filmed allowing further analysing to be done after the procedure
  • Objectively measured by an independent researcher and more than one observer scored the readings so inter-rater reliability could be assessed
  • Filmed from multiple angles recording fine detail of behaviour
  • Strength, high internal validity highly controlled
• Weakness to Meltzoff and Moore's research is that infants are hard to observe as their inner thoughts are unknown
• For example their movements were observed and categorised behaviourally and a simple movement could have been mistaken with one of the stimuli
• This makes the research unreliable as coincidences occur and inferences are made
• However because the babies are so young there are no demand characteristics as all of the behaviour is natural
• Therefore the application of the research is limited as all behaviour was observed
• Asocial first few weeks


  Behave the same to humans as inanimate objects, easily calmed by certain familiar adults, usually by their smell and voice, happy in the presence of humans rather than left alone
• Indiscriminate 2-7 months


  Preference for people over inanimate objects, recognise familiar adults, prefer certain familiar adults, no stranger anxiety or separation anxiety, don't know you are home and will go to people easily, they are attached quite similarly to all adults
• Specific attachments 7 months


  Separation anxiety is experienced, stranger anxiety is, they know their primary attachment figure- the person who is most responsive and gives them the most interaction, this is the mother in 65% of cases according to Schafer
• Multiple attachment by 1


  Secondary attachments begin after specific, 29% of babies had secondary attachments just one month after their primary attachment (Shaffer and Emerson), by one a baby should have multiple secondary attachments
• Shaffer and Emerson 1964 study

  60 babies in Glasgow working class, babies and mothers visited at home every month for a year to 18 months, measured separation and stranger anxiety by asking the mothers questions (qualitative)
• Findings: 25% of babies showed separation anxiety 25-32 weeks matching stages, primary attachment usually mother, attachment was usually caregiver who was most interactive and sensitive to infants signals (reciprocity)
• Shaffer and Emerson 1964 study


  • Strength: longitudinal study, children observed and followed up regularly and due to the naturalistic study there would be less demand characteristics, they followed up on some infants for 18 months
  • Weakness: conflicting evidence from different cultures on multiple attachments, it is not clear what age infants form multiple attachments, some research indicates babies form attachments to a single caregiver before having multiple but psychologists who work across different cultures suggest they form multiple attachments from the start, this is an issue as there is then a presence of cross-cultural differences which suggests a low ecological validity
• Weakness with theory is their asocial stage as it is difficult to study, young babies are often hard to observe due to their poor coordination and inferences therefore have to be made, it is difficult to make judgements about infants based on observations as we have to apply meaning to babies movements even though it could be completely meaningless or a coincidence, therefore it is difficult to make judgements about infants based on observations and evidence will be limited and unreliable
• Primary attachment


  Most babies attach to their mum's first due to nurturing and oestrogen, Schaffer and Emerson suggests that 3% of fathers are a sole object of attachment however research shows that the father in a single parent family is more likely to adopt the traditional maternal role
• Secondary attachments


  Schaffer and Emerson 1964 found that 75% of infants studied had formed an attachment with the father in 18 months as secondary attachments
• Fathers role in long term development


  Grossman's 2002 longitudinal study consisted of 44 families comparing the role of the fathers and mothers contribution to their children's attachment at 6,10,16 years, found the fathers play style was closely linked to the fathers own internal working model of attachment, he suggested the fathers play style is more influential in developing an attachment bond in the earlier years
• Fathers play role


  Research shows that the fathers act as a play role, Bowlby suggests a father is more likely to engage in physically active activities, traditionally seen like this
• Fathers can be great primary caregivers


  Evidence shows some fathers do take on the role of mother, as primary care givers, 4 month babies were filmed with fathers interacting with them with primary and secondary fathers, primary caregivers infants spent more time smiling and imitating than secondary fathers
• Responsiveness is what is most important

  Fathers can be the more nurturing attachment figure and gender isn't important, smiling, imitating and holding infants is more important so therefore the level of responsiveness is the most important
• Strength of research on role of father


  • It encourages women to return to work, Tiffany Field 1978 observed interactions with primary caregiver mothers and primary caregiver fathers and secondary fathers, suggests that fathers can be a nurturing attachment figure if they have high responsiveness, relieving pressure of mothers
• Weakness is that it lacks temporal validity, laws like same sex marriage and adoption are legal and the findings from the role of the father don't show the modern day role of the father, for example in same sex male 2 dad households where one has to be the primary caregiver
• Confusing findings, unclear, some research focuses on role of father as secondary others as primary, research suggests that when fathers are primary caregivers they can play a more maternal role, the differing research aims make the findings confusing and unrelated
• Lorenz study


  12 goose eggs divided into 2, 6 hatched with goose mother, 6 hatched with Lorenz present in an incubator, mixed them up and saw who would follow making sure he was the first moving object they saw, they followed who they hatched with, imprinting on Lorenz, found a biological basis for attachment is adaptive promotes survival
• Harlow study


  16 rhesus monkeys, 2 wire mothers surrogate mothers one dispensed milk and one cloth covered who didn't dispense milk, the time the monkeys spent with each was recorded, Harlow's fear conditions: scary paper monster used to see who the monkey would run to for comfort, a new environment where the wire mother appeared and the monkey displayed phobic responses, found monkeys spent more time with cloth monkey regardless of who provided food, = contact is more important than food in attachment, long term effects= displayed dysfunctional behaviour, timid, inadequate mothers
• Weakness of using animal studies of attachment in humans


  • Generalisability differences due to difference in nature and complexity of the bond, humans have billions of neural connections and different brain structures, however Green 1994 stated that mammals have the same brain structure as humans and the only difference relates to size and number of connections, therefore animal studies cannot be applied to attachment
• Strength of animal studies


  • Support from human studies to back animal study, for example Schaffer and Emerson's Glasgow study which supports the idea that responsiveness more important than food and supports their stages of attachment especially the critical period, seen with Lorenz goslings where they imprint each others sounds, however it was unethical and the monkeys were not given protection from harm, a monkey died because of starvation and stress, therefore there is a link with animal studies and human studies real life application
• Contradictory research to Lorenz, Guidon et al 1966 found when studying chickens that they imprinted on rubber gloves, as adults they would try to mate with the gloves, however over experience they learned to prefer the chickens to mate with, this suggests that Lorenz's conclusion on imprinting isn't permanent but short term
• Strength of animal studies


  • Practical application because of similarities between monkeys and humans, research has shown the genome structure of rhesus monkeys share 93% of DNA with humans conducted at Washington Uni, Harlow's research can explain implications for childcare also disagreeing with learning theory, his research demonstrated the importance of early experiences on long term development and that it's vital all children's needs are catered for
• Harlow's study was extremely unethical, not given protection from harm, a monkey died because of starvation and stress, as they grew older they became inadequate mothers causing problems to their children
• Dollard and Miller's learning theory 1950


  Suggests the main attachment figure is who feeds the child, cupboard love theory - the infant learns to love the person that feeds them, learning theory suggests attachment is learnt through classical and operant conditioning is a behaviourist explanation
• Classical conditioning


  Creates attachment by associating the caregiver (NS) with breast milk (UCS) causes unconditioned response of pleasure and when conditioned the mother becomes the (CS) and the infant associates that with pleasure and happiness
• Operant conditioning


  Strengthens attachment, crying is positively reinforced by caregiver, when the baby cries the mother gives it food
• Drive reduction theory


  Learning theory draws on this concept where hunger is seen as a primary drive as it is a biological motivation, the infant is motivated to eat to reduce this drive, Sears suggested when caregivers provide the infant food the infant associated the caregiver with the primary drive making attachment a secondary drive due to the association of the caregiver and the satisfaction of the primary drive of food