Attachment

Attachment

1. Interactions

   • Reciprocity
     • take turns responding to each other
   • Interactional synchrony
     • mimic each other's actions simultaneously
     • Isabella observed behaviour of adults & infants, found level of interaction sychrony associated with better relationship
   • AO3
     • W: difficult to understand baby's perspective
     • S: observational research controlled
     • S: supporting research - Isabella found correlation between IS and attachment quality suggesting its important

2. Figures

   • Mother
     • Schaffer and Emerson: babies attach to mothers first around 7 months, then 75% attached to father by 18 months
   • Father
     • Grossman - longitudinal, relationship between early attachments and teenage friendship quality
       • Quality of mother attachment linked but not father attachment, however fathers play linked - role is "play and stimuation"
   • AO3
     • W: role of father unclear - conflicting results because different research questions/approaches (primary attachment figure vs secondary attachment figure)
     • W: traditional gender roles could cause less primary attachment with father
   • Field filmed and compared baby-carer interaction (primary mother, primary father and secondary father). Found carer's responsiveness more important than gender

3. Schaffer's stages of attachment

   • Schaffer and Emerson (1964)
     • 60 Glasgow babies visited monthly for a year then again at 18 months. Mothers answered questionnaire on stranger anxiety and separation anxiety in different situations. 25 - 32 weeks 50% had separation anxiety about most responsive carer (mostly mother). By 40 weeks, 80% had specific attachments and 30% multiple attachments
     • AO3
       • S: high external validity - observations by parents so babies' behaviour not affected by unnatural situation
       • W: low population validity - all same culture and class (working)
   • Stages
     • Asocial stage
       • 0-2 months: quite indifferent to human presence
     • Indiscriminate attachments
       • 2-7 months: preference for people, no one person
     • Specific attachments
       • 7 months: stranger anxiety and anxiety separated from attachment figure
     • Multiple attachments
       • 8 months - 1 yr: form secondary attachments
     • AO3
       • W: hard to assess infant behaviour at asocial stage because coordination bad anyway
       • W: limited measurement of attachment - used simple behavioural categories like stranger anxiety

4. Animal Studies

   • Lorenz
     • Incubator group followed Lorenz, who they first saw. Control group followed mother, who they first saw.
     • Critical period (imprinting) = few hours (after hatch)
   • Harlow
     • Baby monkeys fed from milk-dispensing mother but attached to cloth-covered monkey. So contact comfort more important for attachment than feeding.
     • Critical period = 90 days (for normal mother attachment)
     • Maternally-deprived monkeys were aggressive, antisocial and neglected own children
   • AO3
     • W: Low generaliseability - Lorenz studied birds
     • W: Ethical issues - Harlow criticised for monkeys suffering (human-like)
     • S: Harlow shaped understanding of attachments - showed it develops through contact comfort more than feeding

5. Learning Theory

   • Classical conditioning
     • During: UCS + NS => UCR
     • Before: NS => NR, UCS => UCR
     • Can apply Pavlov's model to mother, baby, food and happy response
     • After: CS => CR
   • behaviourist approach - emphasises learning behaviour
   • Operant conditioning
     • Learning from consequences to repeat / not repeat behaviour
     • positively reinforcement = reward for doing = repeated
     • negative reinforcement = punished for not doing = repeated
     • punishment = punished for doing = not repeated
     • 2-way: child also conditioning mother (e.g. crying = punishment)
   • Attachment is secondary drive to satisfy primary drive: hunger
   • AO3
     • W: Conflicting research - Isabella et al (IS) - suggests Learning Theory is reductionist, attachments more complex
     • W: Conflicting research - Schaffer and Emerson - babies also attach to parents that don't feed

6. Bowlby

   • Monotropic theory
     • Monotropy
       • Rejects learning theory, instead explanation that attachment evolved to protect infant from dangers
       • Emphasis on one carer (mother)
       • Social releasers - 'cute' behaviours help carer love infant, strengthening attachment
       • Law of continuity = strength of attachment related to consistency of carer and time spent with infant
       • Law of accumulated separation = negative effects from separation add up
     • Critical period
       • Relationship builds from start
       • 2 years - maximum attachment sensitivity, decreases after this
     • Internal Working Model
       • Infant's mental model of how attachments should be, based on primary attachment
       • 'Working' because it changes over time with new relationships
       • Affects future relationships and parenting
     • AO3
       • W: temperament can replace WMM as explanation for relationship-patterns
       • W: Conflicting research - Schaffer and Emerson found some infants form multiple attachments first
       • S: Supporting research - Bailey found those with poor attachments to their parents often then have poor attachments with children - (interview)
   • Bowlby's Theory of Maternal Deprivation
     • Effects on development
       • Intellectual: Goldfarb found lower IQ in isolated children
       • Emotional: more likely to be affectionless psychopath
         • Bowlby's 44 Thieves
           • Teen thieves and families interviewed: 14/44 affectionless psychopaths, 12/14 of those experienced maternal deprivation
           • Control: 44 non-criminal emotionally disturbed
     • Critical period = 30 months. Prolonged separation during this time = psychological damage
     • AO3
       • W: contradicting research - Lewis partially replicated 44 thieves, found maternal deprivation not linked to criminality or psychopathy - Bowlby assessed psychopathy himself (flawed)
       • W: no distinction between deprivation and privation - Rutter said deprivation is loss of carer after attachment formed, privation is no attachment from beginning
       • W: Goldfarb didnt control for variables that could also affect intelligence, like that institutionalised could = less stimulation

7. The Strange Situation

   • Ainsworth et al
   • Stages
     • 1) mother and child
     • 2) stranger enters and tries interaction
     • 3) mother leaves and stranger tries interaction
     • 4) mother returns and comforts child, stranger leaves
     • 5) mother leaves child alone
     • 6) stranger enters and tries interaction
     • 7) mother returns and comforts child
   • Two-way mirror for controlled observation
   • Assesses proximity-seeking, exploration/secure-base, separation and stranger anxiety, reunion response
   • Types
     • A = Insecure-avoidant
       • Independent: caregiver consistently neglectful
         • indifferent to mother and stranger
     • B = Secure
       • Trusting: caregiver consistently caring
         • explores + stranger anxiety, happy on reunion
     • C = Insecure-resistant
       • Confused: caregiver inconsistent
         • clingy + high stranger anxiety + reunion = angry with mother
   • AO3
     • S: supporting research - Kokkinos - insecure-resistant later bullied and mental health problems
     • W: Takahashi - doesn't work in Japan (stranger anxiety too high) - culturally bound (western)
     • W: Confounding variable - Kagan suggested temperament more important
   • infant 12-18 months

8. Cultural Variations

   • Van Ijzendoorn & Kroonenberg
     • 32 studies meta-analysis on proportions of attachment type in countries
     • Most secure = UK (75%)
     • Least secure = China (50%)
     • Least resistant = UK (3%)
     • Most avoidant = Germany
     • Most resistant = Israel
     • variation within cultures greater than between cultures
   • Jin et al (Korea)
     • 87 children - normal secure proportion, most (except 1) insecure were resistant
     • Similar distribution to Japan - similar culture
   • AO3
     • S: Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg large sample size
     • W: May be western cultural bias (imposed etic) - eg idea stranger anxiety = insecure
     • W: Kagan suggested temperament may cause differences

9. Institutionalisation

   • Rutter et al
     • Followed Romanian Orphans adopted to UK at different ages, assessment found IQ lower if adopted after 6 months
   • Effects
     • Disinhibited attachment: equally affectionate to everyone
       • Rutter explained as adaption to multiple caregivers
     • Intellectual impairment
       • Abnormally low IQ - adoption before 8mo to prevent
   • AO3
     • S: less extraneous variables than other orphan studies - eg trauma
     • W: less generaliseable - Romanian Orphanages have uniquely poor care
     • W: low IQ could have been due to low intellectual stimulation rather than privation

10. Later Relationships

    • Hazan & Shaver
      • Love Quiz in US newspaper - adult relationships and attachment type found 56% secure, 25% avoidant, 19% resistant
      • Secure most likely to have good relationships
      • Avoidant => jealousy and fear of intimacy
    • Bailey - found those with poor attachments to their parents often then have poor attachments with children - (interview)
    • AO3
      • W: Conflicting research - Zimmerman found little relationship between parenting across generations
      • W: association doesn't mean causation - temperament could be confounding