Caregiver- infant ineractions

Caregiver- infant ineractions

1. Reciprocity

   • Responding to the action of another with a similar action
   • Reaction from one parent elicits a response from infant
   • EG. dad smiles at child, child smiles back
   • Like a conversation

2. Interaction synchrony

   • infant coordinates their behaviour with the caregiver
   • Mirroring
   • EG. Mum leans forward while child leans backwards
   • Happens at the same time

3. Meltzoff and Moore

   • AMRC
     • Aim: investigate interactional synchrony
     • Results: There was an association between the baby and the adults model. The babies imitate the behaviour of the adult
     • Conclusions: interactional synchrony is innate, and not a learned behaviour
     • Method:
       • Babies shown 3 facial expressions (tongue protruding, lips protruding, opening mouth) and one hand gesture
         • Baby first shown expressions with a dummy in their mouth. Dummy then removed and shown the same expressions
           • Babies reactions recorded
             • shown to independent observer, who couldn't see the adults model and took note of babies behaviour
               • Observed by more than one independent judge
                 • Inter observer reliability
       • Experiment
         • Lab experiment- IV controlled and DV observed in the experiment
         • Independent variable; Facial expressions
         • Dependant variable; babies reaction
       • Participants
         • Babies from 3 weeks old
   • Evaluation
     • Problem with testing infants behaviour (internal validity)
       • Infants mouths constantly in motion so difficult to differentiate between specific behaviour and general activity
         • therefore conclusions not valid
           • M&M- "behaviour was judged by an independent observer who didn't know what action the infant was immitating
     • failrue to replcate
       • Koepkes experiment didn't have the same findings
         • Results unreliable, leding to incoorect conclusiom
           • M&M-"didn't dins same results because the experiment was less carefully controlled
     • Individual differences (externous variables)
       • Isabella (1989) founds that more strongly attached infant- cargeiver pair showed greater interactional synchrony
         • Effects levels of ineraction, therefore disproves the 'like me' hypothesis
   • Evaluation2
     • Intentional behaviour (internal validity
       • Research showed that babies didn't respond to inanimate objects
         • showed the babies response was specific to the human and not just anything, which supports the 'like me' hypothesis
     • Research valuable later in life
       • Developed 'like me' hypothesis. The idea that attachment forms the basis of social development- understanding what peple are thinking and feeling
         • Emphasises the importance of attachement as understanding what others think and feel is important for social development