Explanations of attachment: Learning theory

Define ‘classical conditioning’

• Involves learning to associate two stimuli (food & caregiver) together. Food (Unconditioned stimuli) & being fed gives us pleasure (Unconditioned response) resulting in a conditioned response.

Describe the process of classical conditioning

1. Caregiver begins as neutral stimulus

2. Food begins as an unconditioned stimulus

3. Caregiver associated with food → Conditioned stimulus

4. Baby views caregiver as an expectation of food/pleasure → Conditioned response of pleasure

5. An attachment is formed & caregiver becomes an attachment figure

Define operant conditioning

• Involves learning from the consequences of behaviour

Describe operant conditioning

• If a behaviour produces a pleasant consequence → Likely to be repeated → Positive reinforcement

• If a behaviour produces an unpleasant consequence (Punishment) → Behaviour declines → Negative reinforcement

How does operant conditioning result in attachment?

• Reinforcement is a two-way process. Baby is crying, caregiver receives negative reinforcement so feeds baby to stop crying → Produces a desired response when crying stops (Positive reinforcement).

• Interplay of mutual reinforcement strengthens an attachment

Describe attachment as a secondary drive

• Learning theory draws on the concept of drive reduction

• Hunger is primary drive → It’s an innate, biological motivation that motivates individuals to eat to reduce hunger drive

• Robert sears et al 1957 suggested that as caregivers provide food, primary drive of hunger becomes generalised to them

• Attachment is thus a secondary drive learned by an association between caregiver & satisfaction of primary drive

Evaluation - lack of support from animal studies

• One limitation of learning theory explanations for attachment is lack of support from studies conducted by animals

• For example, Lorenz’s geese imprinted on first mobile object they saw, regardless of whether this object was associated with food

• Also when given a choice, Harlow’s monkeys displayed attachment behaviour towards a soft surrogate ‘mother’ in preference to a wire one which provided milk

• This suggests food is not the main factor in the formation of attachments

Evaluation - Lack of support from human studies

• One limitation is lack of support from studies of human babies

• E.g Scaffer & Emerson (1964) studied mother-baby interactions over 18 months & interviewed mothers about baby’s separation & stranger anxiety

• They discovered babies tended to form their main attachment to a mother regardless of whether she was the primary provider of food

• This suggests that attachment is based on emotional care rather than food, challenging learning theory’s explanation of attachment.

Evaluation - conditioning may still be involved + Counterpoint

• One strength is that there is evidence for ‘safety conditioning’

• Guy Bosman et al (2020) suggest classical conditioning occurs when attachment figure becomes associated with low anxiety

• Operant conditioning occurs when attachment behaviour is rewarded with anxiety reduction

• This means that learning theory may be useful in understanding the development of attachments

Counterpoint:

• Both classical & operant conditioning explanations view the baby playing a relatively passive role in attachment development, simply responding to associations with comfort & reward

• Feldman & Eidelman (2007) discovered mothers are very alert to their babies’ active signalling, meaning babies are not the passive recipient proposed by learning theory

• This means that learning theory may not explain all aspects of attachment