Institutionalisation and Later Relationships

Institutionalisation and Later Relationships

1. Privation

   • Rutter criticised bowlby for using deprivation to explain too many things, he proposed that if an attachment was never formed this should be called "privation"
     • Rutter (1981) claimed that privation is much more serious than deprivation, evidence comes from case studies
       • Curtiss (1977) Genie - girl called genie who experience extreme cruelty by parents and never formed an attachment, she was kept strapped to a highchair with a potty for most of her childhood and was beaten if she made sounds. she was discovered at age 13 (she was physically underdeveloped and could only make animal-like sounds) after some training she learnt some basic language but her social and intellectual skills never developed.
   • Long-term effects of disrupted attachments
     • Affectionless psychopathy: very little empathy or remorse for others
     • anaclitic depression: appetite loss, sleeplessness, impaired social and intellectual development
     • deprivation dwarfism: physically underdeveloped due to emotional deprivation
     • delinquency - minor crimes
     • reduced intelligence: infants don't develop as fast as peers

2. Institutionalisation

   • Romanian orphanages did the bare minimum due to overcrowding, kids did not have any form of sensitive care and didn't have the chance to form any form of attachment.
     • Rutter (2007) Romanian orphan studies - Method: 111 romanian orphans adopted by brits compared to 52 uk adoptees over a long period of time (some children were adopted before 6 months and some weren't) each child was assessed at age 4,6 and 11. Results: children adopted before 6 months had same level of emotional development as british counterparts, children adopted after 6 months showed signs of insecure attachment and social problems (their british counterparts didn't). Conclusion: effects of privation can be reversed if attachment starts to form before 6 months, after 6 months problems start to become permanent (this also illustrates how maternal deprivation doesn't cause permanent effects as UK kids had been separated but didn't show any problems.
       • results with older kids may be due to lack of intellectual stimulation at orphanage and not privation
       • longitudinal study so shows long term effects well
       • colleceted only qualitative data which is detailed but very hard to generalise into laws of theories
       • Rutter's work built on findings by hodges and tizard
   • Hodges and Tizard (1989) - Method: longitudinal study of 65 children placed in a residential nursery before 4 months (had no opportunity to form close attachments with anyone). by age 4 some had been returned to parents, some adopted and some still there. Results: at 16 adopted had strong family relationships (however weak when compared to control). those who were returned to mothers or stayed in nursery had weaker familial and social relationships than those who were adopted. Conclusion: children can recover from privation if they have a good quality and loving home environment (social development may not be as good as those who have never suffered privation.
     • Natural observation so high ecological validity
     • sample small (20 kids couldn't even be located by the end) so hard to generalise results
     • institutionalised children are often underfed with a lack of stimulation, these factors may have influenced behaviour just as much as privation
       • low control of extraneous variables

3. Internal working model: if child is securely attached this will act as template for secure relationships in future, if insecurely attached then they are likely to form insecure relationships.

   • Hazan and Shaver (1987) - Method: conducted "love quiz" in local newspaper; 2 parts, 1st assessed attachment type and 2nd assessed current beliefs about love. Results: 620 responses, found correlation between attachment types and current views on love (secure = happy and trusting relationships, insecure avoidant feared intimacy, insecure resistant feared they weren't loved in their relationships. Conclusion: their findings provide support and build on bowlby's internal working model, early attachments do influence relationships.
     • study relied on recall of childhood which isn't always accurate
     • relied on volunteer sample, certain type of person might be more likely to respond (not representative, hard to generalise)
     • people may have answered untruthfully
     • demand characteristics
     • Reliable results as performed a 2nd study in 2003 and found similar results
     • Big sample; increases generalisabilty, external validity
     • relies on self report

4. a way to scientifically assess link between childhood attachment and future relationships was created, based on ideology that it doesn't really matter what childhood attachment was; instead it's how it's remembered

   • Main et al (1985) adult attachment interview - semi-structured interview; asked series of questions: asked to give 5 adjectives describing relationship with both parents, then asked why they chose the adjectives, asked about times they got upset, felt rejected and how they believe their early attachments shaped future relationships. results classified by trained coders into 4 categories: secure, dismissing, preoccupied, unresolved/disorganised.
     • Main et al (1985) showed categories of adult relationships could be predicted from recall of childhood attachments
     • relies on coding of qualitative data which usually can be hard to generalise into set laws or theories like Main has done

5. long term effects of privation

   • Quinton et al (1984) - comparison of 50 women who had been institutionalised as kids to 50 who hadn't; found those who had were more likely to have parenting difficulties, suggests "cycle of privation", women who experienced privation go on to be less caring parents, their children are deprived of strong attachment so the cycle continues.
   • Parker and Forrest (1993) reactive attachment disorder - children who are permanently damaged by privation (or other things) may develop this syndrome. symptoms are: inability to receive or give affection, dishonesty, poor social relationships, involvement in crime
   • Freud and Dann (1951) - studied 6 kids who were orphaned by WW2 and raised in deportation camp by passing jews (cos they were going to concentration camps they formed no strong attachment to jews) they formed attachments to eachother, when war ended they were adopted by brits; showed few signs of troubled upbringing, had a normal level of intelligence and relationships