animal studies

• lorenz and harlow are the key researchers who used animal studies to investigate attachment
• lorenz - geese
• harlow - monkeys
• lorenz aimed to investigate imprinting on geese
• lorenz's procedure

  • group of goslings divided into 2 groups (one group with mother, other group placed in incubator and only saw lorenz when hatched)
  • to test effects of imprinting lorenz marked 2 groups to distinguish them when placed together
• findings of lorenz's study

  • those left with mother upon hatching followed her
  • those who hatched + seen lorenz first followed him
  • lorenz pointed out imprinting had to take place in set period after hatching (critical period) - if animal isnt exposed to moving object during critical period will NOT imprint
  • contradictory - not all animals imprint on humans - curlews
• conclusion

  • some animals will imprint on 1st moving thing seen
  • imprinting is similar to attachment - binds a young animal to caregiver a special relationship
  • lorenz found imprinting is irreversible and long lasting
  • imprinting has effect on later preferences (sexual imprinting) whereby animals will choose to mate with the same object upon which they were imprinted.
• evaluation points for lorenz's animal study

  • research support
  • imprinting IS reversible
• research support for lorenz's study (+)

  • lorenz research has been supported by other studies that have demonstrated imprinting in animals
  • guitton found chicks were exposed to yellow gloves when fed in 1st few weeks after birth - then imprinted to gloves - later tried to mate with gloves
  • shows animals arent predisposed to imprint on specific objects but will imprint + attach on any moving thing present during critical period
• imprinting being reversible - as eval point for lorenz's animal study

  • lorenz suggested imprinting was irreversible where once an animal has imprinted on something - it can no longer be reversed
  • however, later research has shown imprinting can be reversible - guitton found imprinting could be reversed with chickens who tried to mate with the rubber gloves
  • after spending time with own species, the chicks were able to engage in normal sexual behaviour with other chickens
  • findings from alternative research go against lorenz conclusions which reduced validity of own findings]
• harlow - aimed to demonstrate attachment is not based on feeding bond between mother and infant as predicted by learning theory
• harlow's procedure

  • harlow created 2 wire 'mothers' - each with different head (extraneous variable) - one wrapped in cloth/other just wired
  • 4 of the monkeys - mother with cloth provided food and other 4 monkeys had food provided by one without cloth
  • amount of time monkeys spent with each mother was measured
  • monkeys response when frightened was recorded
• findings of harlows study

  • all monkeys spend more time with cloth monkey - regardless of whether it provided them with food or not
  • those fed from wire mother would only spend time with it to get food - then returned to cloth mother
  • when frightened - all ran to cloth covered mother _ when playing with new objects they kept foot on it for reassurance
• conclusion of harlows study

  • infants form attachment not to person who feeds them but instead person that provides contact comfort
• long lasting effects of harlows study

  • motherless monkeys developed abnormally - socially abnormal through freezing or running away when approached by other monkeys - didnt show normal mating behaviour/didnt cradle own babies
  • harlow found critical period was 90 days - past that attachment wont form
• evaluation points for harlows animal study into attachment

  • confounding variable
  • ethical problem
• confounding variable as eval point for harlows study

  • harlows method used was questioned
  • example - 2 different heads (acts as confounding variable as varied systematically with IV)
  • confounding variables within study can mess up final conclusions due to uncertainty whether preference of one mother having attractive head as opposed to cloth caused the interaction
  • reduces validity of findings meaning study is limited
• ethical problems as eval point for harlows animal studies

  • study seen as unethical
  • questioned whether Harlow had taken into consideration the ethical concerns towards monkeys involved
  • as result of using monkeys in study - harlow caused emotional distress and further implications on social and emotional long term development on monkeys
  • harm was considerable enough that experiment couldnt be carried out on humans
  • however - study had significant effects on understanding of attachment - info collected allowed better care to be delivered since - do benefits outweigh costs
• evaluation - BOTH - harlow and lorenz - generalising animals (-)

  • both lorenz and harlows studies generalise findings to how humans behave
  • number of differences between humans and animals such as humans having free will
  • applying animal studies to humans = questionable
  • important animal studies are not only method of research in understanding behaviour (lorenz links to bowlby - critical period)
  • limitation as it limits application