Ainsworths Strange Situation

• Ainsworth (1969) (AO1)


  100 middle class American infants (1-2 years old).

  Child and caregiver in unfamiliar playroom with 2-way mirror for covert observation.
• Process (AO1)


  7 episodes - each 3 min long - involved the child being in different situations such as alone, with caregiver or with stranger.

  Security of attachment judged on proximity seeking, exploration and secure-base behaviour, stranger anxiety, separation anxiety and response to reunion.
• Secure attachment (AO1)


  Moderate levels for all behaviours, comfort on reunion required and accepted.
• Insecure-avoidant attachment (AO1)


  Explore freely but do not seek proximity or show secure base behaviour, low stranger anxiety, do not require comfort on reunion.
• Insecure resistant attachment (AO1)

  Explores less and seeks proximity more than others, high stranger anxiety, high separation anxiety, resists comfort on reunion.
• British toddlers (AO1)


  60-75% secure

  20-25% insecure avoidant

  around 3% insecure resistant
• HIgh inter-rater reliability (+AO3)

  Bick eat al (2012) found that observers trained in observing the Strange Situation agreed on attachment type for 94% of the tested babies.
• Opposing evidence - there are more than 3 attachment types (-AO3)


  Main and Solomon (1986) pointed out that a minority of children display an atypical attachment that cannot be classified as class A, B or C - this is called disorganised attachment - these infants display a mix of resistant and avoidant behaviours.
• Ethical concerns (-AO3)


  Babies were put in extremely anxiety-provoking and upsetting situations.
• Reliability (+AO3)


  Study was carried out in controlled conditions and has a clear and systematic procedure which could be repeated in the same way every time - the procedure has been carried out many times since the original study with similar results.
• Good methodology/validity (+AO3)


  Covert observation so observed behaviour would be natural an so there would not be demand characteristics - this leads to high internal validity/ecological validity.
• High predictive validity (+AO3)


  The various attachment types are strongly predictive of later development - infants assessed as secure typically go on to have better outcomes in many areas, including having better and longer-lasting romantic relationships in adulthood whereas infants assessed as insecure-resistant typically go on to have worse outcomes in many areas, including being bullied in later childhood.
• Low generalisability across culture (+AO3)

  Study took place with American children but attachment may not have the same meaning in countries outside of western Europe and the USA where mothers and babies develop their relationships in different wats and so may act differently in the Strange Situation.
• Takahashi (1990) (-AO3)


  Found that the test dows not work well in Japan because Japanese mothers rarely leave their children and therefore there are high levels of separation anxiety - so the test would probably indicate that they were insecure-resistant when they may have actually be securely attached.
• Low internal validity (-AO3)


  The test may not actually be measuring attachment quality - the test definitely measures anxiety produced by being in an unfamiliar environment but it can be questioned whether the main influence on this anxiety is attachment or not - Kagan (1982) suggested that it may instead be temperament that is influencing whether the child is anxious or not.