Explanations: learning theory

• Dollard and Miller proposed that caregiver-infant attachment can be explained by learning theory.

  -emphasises the importance of the attachment figure as a provider of food.
• classical conditioning

  = learning to associate two stimuli together so we begin to respond to one in the same way as we already respond to the other.

  • food serves as the unconditioned stimulus, being fed gives the baby pleasure- unconditioned response.
  • the caregiver starts as a neutral stimulus which produces no response.
  • when the caregiver provides food they become associated with food. So the neutral stimulus becomes the conditioned stimulus which produced a conditioned response of pleasure.
  • an attachment is formed and caregiver= attachment figure.
• operant conditioning

  = learning from the consequences of behaviour, if behaviour produces a pleasant consequence= behaviour is likely to be repeated so behaviour is reinforced. If it produces an unpleasant consequence its less likely to be repeated.

  • can explain why babies cry for comfort- crying leads to a response from the caregiver, as long as caregiver provides correct response, crying is reinforced.
  • this is a two-way process as when the baby cries, the caregiver receives negative reinforcement as crying stops. So strengthens an attachment .
• Attachment as a secondary drive

  Hunger can be thought of as a primary drive- its an innate, biological motivator. We are motivated to eat to reduce the hunger drive.

  • Sears suggests that as caregivers provide food, the primary drive of hunger becomes generalised to them. Attachment is thus a secondary drive is learned by association between the caregiver and the satisfaction of a primary drive.
• Evaluation- counter evidence from animal studies

  limitation= lack of support from studies conducted on animals.

  • Eg: Lorenz's geese imprinted on the 1st moving object they saw regardless of whether this object was associated with food.
  • Harlow's research with monkeys, there is no support for the importance of food, as when given a choice the monkeys displayed attachment behaviour towards a soft surrogate mother in preference to a wire one which provided milk.
  • shows that factors other than association with food are important in the formation of attachment.
• Evaluation- counter evidence from studies on human studies

  limitation= lack of support from studies of human babies.

  • eg: Shaffer and Emerson found that babies tended to form their main attachment to their mother regardless of whether she was the one who fed them.
  • Isabella found that high levels of interactional synchrony predicted the quality of attachment.
  • suggests that food is not the main factor in the formation of human attachment.
• Evaluation- some conditioning may be involved

  strength= elements of conditioning could be involved is some aspects of attachment.

  • seems unlikely that association with food plays a central role in attachment, but conditioning may still play a role.
  • eg: a baby may associate feeling warmth and comfort with the presence of a particular figure.
  • means that it may not be useful in understanding the development of attachments.
• Evaluation- counterpoint

  Both classical and operant conditioning explanations see the baby playing a relatively passive role in attachment development, simply responding to associations with comfort or reward.

  • research shows that babies take a very active role in interactions that produce attachment.
  • means that conditioning may not be an adequate explanation of any aspect of attachment.