Explinations of attachment

Explinations of attachment

1. BOWLBY'S THEORY

   • I.S.C.M.I.
     • innate, within us from birth designed to aid survival
     • genetically programmed with social releaser behaviours e.g. crying and adults designed to respond.
     • Critical period of 2 and a half years to form and attachment, if not no attachments will be formed in the future.
     • Babies show monotropy, a special attachment with main caregiver.
     • said attachment forms the internal working model, which is what future relationships are based on
   • Lorenz and his geece provides evidence for some of bowlbys theory.
     • he was the first thing they saw and followed him around and directing mating rituals towards him in later life showing the internal working model.
     • if geece didn't form an attachment in 16 hours no others were formed showing the critical period.
   • Minnesota study found that attachment shape development, securely attached children were more popular than insecurely attached
     • HOWEVER - study was correlational and we cannot be sure that the attachment was the cause of the popularity and a third variable may have been present.
   • Bowlbys theory suggests that an attachment with the primary caregiver is important for healthy development whereas other research suggests that multiple attachments are necessary.

2. LEARNING THEORY

   • classical conditioning
     • the process of learning to associate food and a care giver with the feeling of satisfaction.
       • food (Unconditioned Stimulus) = pleasure (Unconitioned Response) food (US) + caregiver (CR) = pleasure (UR) caregiver (CS) = pleasure (CR)
   • operant conditioning
     • A baby learns that certain behaviours earn certain reactions/attention so they learn to repeat them.
       • eg a smile at caregiver brings rewards
   • Harlows study with rhesus monkeys.
     • he put baby monkeys in a cage with a wire mother providing food and a cloth mother providing comfort.
       • the monkeys spent most of the time with the cloth mother suggesting that food cannot be the reason we form attachments.
   • Schaffer and Emerson
     • they found that 39% of the time the mother was not the main attachment figure suggesting that the food cannot explain why we form attachments.