Comparison: Bowlby vs learning theory

• Bowlby - AO1 (6 marks)


  Emphasises the attachment of a child with one primary caregiver. 

  •      A - Attachments are adaptable which comes from evolution and survival of the fittest since those who were less attached were less protected. 

  •      S – Children are social releasers as exhibit cute behaviours in order to elicit a caregiving response. 
• Bowlby - AO1 (6 marks)


  •      C – the critical period is 2.5 years in this stage a primary attachment must be formed with a caregiver as otherwise it may be difficult to for attachments latter on – evidence from 44 thieves. 

  •      M – monotropy is the special emotional bond a child forms with one primary attachment figure. 

  •      I – the internal working model provides a mental template/representation on what relationships should be like based on the attachment formed with the primary attachment figure.
• Learning theory - AO1 (6 marks)


  •      Uses operant and classical conditioning to explain how behaviours are learnt as children. 

  •      In classical conditioning the mother or primary attachment figure is the neutral stimulus (NS) who then becomes associated with food, unconditioned stimulus (UCS), over time with repeated association of the mother now conditioned stimulus (CS) produces the response of pleasure from the food, conditioned stimulus (CR).
• Learning theory - AO1 (6 marks)


  •      In operant conditioning the crying response from the infant leads to a response from the primary caregiver such as feeding which acts as positive reinforcement. As well, the caregiver receives negative reinforcement because the crying stops, so punishment is removed. 
• AO3 - A difference is that Bowlby’s model is less determinist


  E:  Has soft determinism as internal working model dictates the quality of future relationships however is contradicted by other evidence Koluchova twins and is an unconscious process. 

  E:  Hard determinism as indicates that an attachment will always form with caregiver who feeds the child however also as contradictory evidence that sensitive responsiveness is more important with Harlow’s monkeys.

  L:  Bowlby more optimistic about how those who had limited childhood attachment can still have quality future relationships. 
• AO3 - A difference between the two theories is that Bowlby’s model is less scientific than learning theory


  E:  Biological and evolutionary perspective is scientific and generally nomothetic using empirical evidence. However internal working model is an unconscious process so cannot be tested.          

  E:  Empirical methods and nomothetic approach to test classical and operant conditioning. 

  L:  Therefore learning theory is a more credible explanation as can explain cause and effect through the stimulus response model. 
• AO3 - A similarity between the two theories is that they both have practical applications in childcare. 


  E:  Critical period and monotropy lead to emphasis on early adoption for infants as well as key workers for day careE:  Can help explain secondary attachments forming with child and the importance of feeding.

  L:  Both of the theories provide a useful insight into caring for children in childhood to ensure good quality of attachment in the future. 
• AO3 - A difference between the two theories is that they fall on different sides of the nature nurture debate.  


  E:  Is nature as explaining attachment as an innate behaviour which is an advantage for survival. 

  E:  Nurture as behaviour is explained through learning which is influenced by the environment and conditioning principles.

  L: perhaps and interactionist approach which considers the interaction of both nature and nurture is a better explanation for attachment.