the development of attachment AO3

• A strength of Schaffer & Emerson’s study is that it was carried out

  longitudinally.


  • This means that the same children were followed- up and observed regularly.
  • This suggests that the results will be of higher internal validity than a cross-sectional study would have been because they do not have the confounding variable of individual differences between participants (participant variables).
• What is the effect of Schaffer and Emerson's study being longitudinal?

  Consequently, the conclusions from the research about how and when attachments develop are arguably valid.
• A criticism of Schaffer and Emerson’s study is that the sample used was biased in a number of ways.


  • all the families were working class and from the same city(Glasgow)
  • Child-rearing practices vary from one culture to another and one historical period to another. For instance, more women now go out to work so many children are cared for outside of the home, and more fathers choose to stay at home and care for their children.
• What does Schaffer and Emerson's study being biased suggest?

  Therefore, the results of the study do not necessarily generalise well

  to other social and historical contexts (so potentially lack both

  population and temporal validity), meaning that they may not tell us

  as much about how and when attachments develop today.
• What is a counterargument for Schaffer and Emerson's study being biased?

  the sample size of 60 babies and their carers was good considering the

  large volume of data gathered on each participant. Therefore, the results may have some generalisability/population validity and so tell us something about how and when attachments develop.
• A limitation of the data is that it is based on mothers’ reports of their infants.

  • Some mothers may have been less sensitive to their infants’ protests and therefore were less likely to report them.
  • They may have also wanted to appear to be “good mothers” and so report behaviour differently to how it actually occurred.
• What are the implications for the data being based on the mothers' reports?

  This would mean that the results lack internal validity and so may not tell us as much about how and when attachments develop as was previously thought.
• A problem with Schaffer’s Stages of Attachment is that they fail to take into account cultural differences.


  For example, in collectivist cultures (e.g. Asia, Africa) people are more focused on the needs of the group rather than the individuals (unlike individualist cultures like ours) with people sharing many things like possessions and childcare. In such societies, we might expect multiple attachments to be more common.
• What implication does Schaffer's study not taking cultural differences into account have?

  This suggests that the stage model applies specifically to individualist cultures and so arguably tells us less about how attachments develop in other cultures.