Evaluations - A03

• Strength of animal studies - support for Lorenz's research in imprinting of animals. Guiton found that leghorn chicks exposed to yellow rubber gloves that used to feed them became imprinted to the gloves. Later found male chicks tried to mate with gloves. Shows impact of sexual imprinting and supports view that young animals not only born with innate ability to imprint to specific animal but will bond with any moving thing present during their critical period. Imprinting increases chances of survival and affects characteristics of desirable mate thus increasing validity of Lorenz research.
• Limitation of animal studies - difficult to extrapolate findings to humans. Humans more complex than animals (e.g. show greater emotional attachments to adults). Additionally, critical period appears to be different in infants (0-24 months) compared to rhesus monkeys (90 days) and geese (up to 2 days). Lorenz and Harlow's findings may not be useful in terms of trying to understand human attachment behaviour because there is major problems in generalising findings of birds and monkeys to humans. Thus, reducing validity of Lorenz and Harlow's research.
• Limitation of animal studies - evidence that effects of imprinting not as permanent as Lorenz believed. Imprinting now thought to be a 'plastic' or flexible mechanism (Hoffman). For example, Guiton found he could reverse imprinting in chickens who tried to mate with gloves, found that after spending time with own species, able to engage in normal sexual behaviour with other chickens. Suggests impact of imprinting on mating behaviour not fixed and can be changed with experience. Thus, Lorenz overestimated importance of imprinting and effect on development on sexual and attachment behaviour.
• Limitation of animal studies - Harlow's research faced severe criticism on ethical grounds. The monkeys suffered due to procedures of the experiment both physically and emotionally e.g. when Harlow deliberately scared them. Monkeys similar to humans thus suffering considered quite serious; damage caused was long term since many monkeys could not have normal sexual or social activity when older. Shows that Harlow's research caused serious physical and psychological harm to monkeys, thus diminishes credibility of research.