Learning theory

What idea did Dollard and Miller (1950) propose?

Cupboard theory

What is cupboard theory?

Children learn love based on who provides them with food

How can cupboard theory be explained through classical conditioning?

• Food is an unconditioned stimulus - eating food innately gives us pleasure.

• Caregiver starts as a neutral stimulus - when they provide food they get associated with food over time.

• The caregiver becomes a conditioned stimulus - seeing the caregiver brings an expectation of food - the response is a conditioned response of pleasure.

• Learning theorists see the conditioned pleasure as love.

How can attachment be explained through operant conditioning?

• If a behaviour produces a pleasant consequence, that behaviour is likely to be repeated - behaviour is reinforced.

• When babies cry and the caregiver comforts them, the crying is reinforced.

How does mutual reinforcement strengthen attachment?

Two way process - baby is reinforced for crying, caregiver receives negative reinforcement because the crying stops - escaping from something unpleasant is reinforcement

Why is attachment a ‘secondary drive’?

• Hunger is a primary drive - innate

• Sears et al. (1957) suggests that as caregivers provide food, primary drive of hunger becomes generalised.

• Therefore, attachment is a secondary drive, learned from association between the caregiver and pleasure from the primary drive

How is learning theory useful for understanding developments in attachment?

A baby may associate feeling warm and comfortable with a particular adult, which may influence their baby’s choice of main attachment figure

How does learning theory show how attachment can form through reciprocity?

• Hay & Vespo (1988) suggest parents teach children to love them by modelling attachment behaviours.

• Parents also reinforce loving behaviour by showing approval when babies display their own attachment behaviour

• Two-way interaction shows importance of reciprocity

What counter-evidence is there from animal studies?

• Lorenz’ geese imprinted on the first moving object they saw, regardless of whether it was associated with food or not.

• Harlow’s monkeys chose contact comfort over food.

• Shows other factors than food may be more important in the formation of attachments.

Why does food as a factor lack human research support?

• Schaffer & Emerson (1964) found that babies tend to form their main attachment to their mother regardless of who feeds them.

• Isabella et al. (1989) found that high levels of interactional synchrony predicted the quality of attachment - unrelated to food.

• Suggests food is not a significant factor in the formation of human attachments.

Why may conditioning not be an adequate explanation for attachment?

• Classical + operant conditioning sees the baby playing a passive role in attachment, simply responding to associations with comfort or reward.

• However, Feldman & Eidelman (2007) show that babies take a very active role.