Stats and studies

• Tronick still face experiment

  babies became distressed and would try to tempt their mother into interaction.
• Meltzoff and Moore (1977)

  controlled observation of 12-21 day-old babies found an association between gesture the adult had displayed and the action of the baby 
• Isabella

  observed 30 mothers and infants, high levels of synchrony were                                             associated with better quality attachment (e.g. emotional intensity of relationship).
• Schaffer and Emerson (1964)

  Primary attachment usually with the mother, 27% of cases both, and 3% the father only. In 75 % of infants, an attachment was formed with the father by 18 months (secondary attachment). 
• Field et al (1978) 

  key to the primary attachment relationship is the level of responsiveness not the gender of the parent. Primary caregiver fathers show behaviours typical of primary caregiver mothers.

   
• Grossman (2002) 

  longitudinal, quality of fathers’ play with infants was related to the quality of adolescent attachment. Used Strange Situation, Adult Attachment Interview and play scale with 44 families 
• Schaffer and Emerson (1964) 

  longitudinal study of 60 Glaswegian babies. Observations, interviews and diaries. Between 25 and 32 weeks about 50% showed signs of separation anxiety towards a particular adult (usually the mother – specific (primary) attachment). By the age of 40 weeks, 80% of the babies had a specific attachment and almost 30% displayed multiple attachments
• Lorenz’s geese imprinting

  12 goose eggs randomly divided. The incubator group followed Lorenz everywhere and became distressed if they were separated from him. The control group followed the mother. The bonds proved to be irreversible (and innate). Sexual imprinting-the birds would choose to mate with objects similar to their imprinted object. Critical period of 32 hours
• Harlow’s monkeys

  importance of contact comfort. Both groups of monkeys spent more time with the cloth mother (even if she had no milk), sought comfort from her when scared. As adults, the privated monkeys suffered severe social and emotional consequences, attacked and sometimes killed their own offspring. Critical period of 90 days.
• Schaffer and Emerson

  primary attachment for 39% of babies in their study was not to the person who provided their physical care, including feeding
•  

  Guiton

  Chickens imprinted on yellow washing up gloves
• Bick et al. 

  Interrater reliability of Strange situation 94% agreement, due to clear objective behaviours. Replicable, standardised interactions
• Van Izjendoorn and Kroonenberg (1988) meta-analysis 

  Secure attachment was the most common. Insecure-avoidant was most commonly observed in Germany and least common in Japan 

  Individualists culture’s rates of insecure-resistant attachment was similar to Ainsworth’s original sample (all under 14%)

  Collectivist samples from China, Japan and Israel had higher rates of insecure-resistant attachment, above 25%. Highest in Israel, lowest in Britain
• Bowlby’s 44 thieves study (1944) used to form the MDH

  14/44 affectionless psychopaths, of these 12 had prolonged separations.

  Control group: 2/44 experienced long-separations and 0/44 affectionless psychopaths  
• Rutter and Sonuga-Barke (2010)

  Longitudinal study 165 orphans, tested at 4, 6, 11 and 15 to assess their physical, social and cognitive development, and data was also gathered by interviewing their adopted parents. adopted children were smaller, malnourished, and had lower cognitive and social development compared to British control adoptees. However, some children caught up after 6 months, suggesting a sensitive period in attachment development.
• Myron-Wilson and Smith (1998)

   questionnaires, secure infants are less likely to be involved in bullying, insecure-avoidant →  victims and insecure resistant → bullies
• Bailey et al

  99 mothers AAI and SSP. Same attachment to their mother and child
• Hazan and Shaver- Love quiz 

  620 replies to the ‘love quiz’ in a US newspaper. 56% securely attached, 25% insecure-avoidant and 19% insecure-resistant. Secure attachments were most likely to have good and longer lasting romantic experiences (average 10yrs). Avoidant respondents tended to fear intimacy and resistant were more likely to report extreme crushes and jealousy