Ainsworth - Strange Situation

Ainsworth - Strange Situation

1. AO1

   • Controlled observation
     • 100 middle-class American infants
       • 3 variables
         • Separation anxiety
         • Stranger anxiety
         • Reunion behaviour
   • Procedure
     • PCG + child, child explores for 3 mins
       • Stranger enter, PCG talks
         • PCG leaves, stranger stays (separation anxiety)
           • PCG returns, stranger leaves. PCG settles child, PCG leaves again
             • Stranger returns (Stranger anxiety)
               • PCG returns, stranger leaves (Reunion behaviour)
   • Findings
     • Secure = 66%
       • Insecure - Avoidant = 22%
         • Insecure - Resistant = 12%
     • Reactions
       • Separation anxiety
         • S - upset; I(A) - unconcerned; I(R) - intensely distressed
       • Stranger anxiety
         • S - avoidant but friendly (when PCG there); I(A) - strongly avoidant; I(R) - fear
       • Reunion behaviour
         • S - instantly soothed; I(A) - unresponsive; I(R) - clinginess mixed with rejection
       • PCG characteristics
         • S - sensitive and responsive
         • I(A) - unresponsive
         • I(R) - inconsistent

2. AO2

   • Lacks ecological validity
     • Artificial environment with fake task
       • Therefore means it is difficult to generalise the findings of the 3 attachment styles beyond the study setting to how other child's attachment styles develop in the real world
   • SS tool criticised for imposed etic
     • Based solely on individualistic, western child-rearing practices ignoring cultural norms and practices in other collectivist cultures
       • Therefore must take caution when using SS in cultures not designed for
         • As may not be appropriate or suitable to measure attachments in these other cultures using SS
   • Low population validity
     • Only 100 middle class American infants
       • Difficult to generalise findings of the 3 attachment styles to rest of the target population
   • Criticised for being over-simplified in belief that all children can be put into 1 of 3 attachment styles
     • Other studies suggested that there are large individual differences between children within attachment style
       • Limits the value of the insight her theory gives us when explaining children's development

3. AO2 cont. - Reliability/Validity

   • Test Re-Test Reliability
     • Main et al.
       • 18 months and 6 y/o
         • 100% secure babies same
           • 75% avoidant babies same
   • High Inter-Rater Reliability
   • Argued SS only measures relationship between child and 1 other person (mother) so instead of measuring attachment type it is simply measuring relationship
   • Lamb
     • SS assesses only attachment to the person the child is with at the time
       • Ignores other attachments e.g. the father
   • Hazan and Shaver and Sroufe's research supports predictive validity of the SS
     • As secure = happy, long-lasting relationships in adulthood
       • Childhood attachment style mirrors adulthood relationships