explanations of attachment

• what are the two explanations of attachment?

  -learning theory

  -Bowlby's evolutionary theory
• learning theory - classical conditioning

  -before conditioning: UCS -> UCR

  (food) -> (happy)

  -during conditioning: NS -> NR

  (mum) -> (no response)

  UCS&NS -> UCR

  (food&mum) -> (happy)

  -after conditioning: CS -> CR

  (mum) -> (happy)

  -this explains attachment by infants associating happiness with their mother.

  -also referred to as the cupboard love approach.
• learning theory - operant conditioning

  -Dollard & Miller (1950): drive reduction. A drive is something that motivates behaviour. Discomfort: a drive to reduce discomfort; hungry infant: a drive to reduce hunger.

  -attachments are formed as the infant seeks the person who reinforces them.

  -positive reinforcement: when a baby cries, someone comes to them and gives them food.

  -negative reinforcement: mother removes discomfort the infant feels - the mother hears the baby cry and stops them. Behaviours are continued.-attachment = secondary drive.

  -Sears et al: baby transfers their feelings of food to the mother.
• Is attachment just cupboard love? (researchers views)

  -Isabella et al: disagree - attachment is based on interactional synchrony.

  -Lorenz: disagree - attachments are innate.

  -Harlow: disagree - attachments are about contact comfort.

  -Schaffer & Emerson: disagree - found multiple attachments which learning theory/cupboard love does not account for.
• AO3 - learning theory

  Strength(s):

  -role of conditioning. Conditioning may happen without food involved, infants may associate feeling warm and comforted with their primary caregiver. Example: Harlow's monkeys. Increases validity of the learning theory's explanation of attachment.

  -social learning theory: May & Vespo found that parents model attachment behaviours (hugs) and then reinforce these behaviours by showing approval of them. Infants may also observe the behaviours/reinforcement in older siblings. Fieldman - reciprocity. Increases validity.

  
  

  Weakness(es):

  -contradictory findings from animal studies. Learning theory states that attachments are built because of repetition/association/consequences and cupboard love. Lorenz found that attachments are innate (imprinting for survival), Harlow found that attachments are based on contact comfort. More contradictory evidence from Isabella et al (interactional synchrony). Decreases reliability and validity of learning theory for attachment.
• Bowlby's evolution theory

  -attachment has an evolutionary purpose.

  -he observed and interviewed children and their families who had been separated after WW2. They were done in institutions/hospitals.

  -attachment = survial.

  -nature
• social releasers

  -behaviours developed through natural selection.

  -help attract and maintain the attention of the primary caregiver e.g., smiling, crying.
• monotrophy

  -forms one main attachment. This attachment is unique and the strongest.
• critical period

  -Bowlby developed the critical period.

  -first 2.5 years of life.

  -if attachments are not formed in this time or are formed and then broken the infant will have severe effects on their psychological and emotional development.

  -law of continuity: mother & infant should continuously spend time together.

  -law of accumulated separation: any time spent away from the baby adds up which will have a negative impact.
• summary of evolutionary explanation

  -babies are seen as cute which means caregiver attaches easier.

  -caregiver acts as a secure base.

  -increases survival which makes the species continue.
• Bowlby - AO3

  Strength(s):

  -supporting evidence of internal working model: Hazen & Shaver, peoples attachment type plays a role in their later relationships. Increases validity.

  
  

  Weakness(es):

  -socially sensitive: critical period = 2.5 years, mothers do not get that much time off work and so might be concerned about the attachment they have with their baby. Causes psychological harm.

  -supporting research is not generalisable. Lorenz researched on geese and found imprinting & that attachment is innate and for survival. However, his use of geese means that the finding cannot be applied to human behaviour as humans are more complex than geese.
• learning & Bowlby - comparison

  -L: says how attachments are formed; B: how and why.

  -L: babies are passive; B: babies are active.

  -L: underestimates mothers; B: underestimates fathers.

  -L: behavioural; B: evolutionary.

  -L: not supported by Lorenz & Harlow B: supported by Lorenz & Harlow.