Ainsworth strange situation

Ainsworth strange situation

1. mary Ainsworth 1969

   • observed key attachment behaviours by assessing quality of child attachment to the caregiver

2. procedure

   • controlled observation in a lab with a two-way mirror
   • proximity seeking
   • exploration/ safe base
   • stranger anxiety
   • separation anxiety
   • response to reunion
   • 7 stages which each lasts 3 minutes

3. findings 1978

   • secure
     • explores and comes back to the caregiver
     • moderate separation/strange anxiety
     • requires comfort when reunited
   • insecure avoidant
     • explores freely/ doesn't see proximity
     • little to no reaction in separation and little contact when reunited
     • doesn't require comfort at reunion
   • insecure resistant
     • sees greater proximity and little exploration
     • shows separation and stranger anxiety/ resists comfort when reunited

4. evaluations

   • good inter-rater reliability
     • individuals watched the same children and came to the same conclusions of attachment type. it takes place under controlled conditions and the behavioural categories are easily observed Bick et al 2012 observed a 94% agreement on the attachment type. this then shows the attachment type of the child doesn't depend on who is observing them
   • culture bound
     • there are cultural differences in childhood experiences so the children may respond differently as caregivers from different cultures behave differently. Takahashi 1990- sugegsted that it can't be applied in Japan as babies are rearly separated and so leads to high separation anxiety. also at the reunion stage the motehrs rushed to the babies and so it was hard to observe the babies reaction
   • what does it measure
     • measures childs responses to anxiety produced by being in an unfamiliar environment. this is seen as controversial as Kagan 1982 sugegsted their temperament (their genetically influenced personality has an imprtance influence on behvaiour ratehr than attachment maing the child's temperament a confounding variable
   • support for validity
     • the attachment type can predict future development. for example a secure attachment can lead to better outcomes in school/ relationships whereas insecure (Kokkion's 2007) can lead to bullying and ward et al 2006 said it can lead to mental health problems. This supports the validity as it can explain subsequent outcomes