Shaffer and Emerson - development of attachment

What was the AIM of Schaffer and Emerson’s 1964 study?

To investigate the way infant behaviours change action

and how old infants are when they first become attached

What was the PROCEDURE of the study?

Studied 60 infants from mainly working-class homes in Glasgow.

Youngest was 5 weeks, oldest was 23 weeks at the start of the study.

They were studied until the age of one year. The mothers were visited every 4 weeks.

At each visit, the mother reported the infant’s response to separation in recent separation situations in detail.

What were the FINDINGS of the experiment?

Age of first attachment - half of the children between 6 and 8 months old.

Fear of strangers happened a month later for all children.

Strength of attachment peaked in the first month after attachment behaviour first appeared.

What were the conclusions of the study?

Soon after the first attachment is formed, infants become attached to other people.

What were the criticisms of the study?

Data is unreliable as it was based on mothers’ reports. Biased, low validity.

Outdated as was in the 60s - not relevant today.

Youngest was 5 weeks, oldest was 23 weeks, so big age difference.

Findings may only apply to working-class families. So is a Generalisation.

Schaffer and Emerson used their findings to construct a description of how attachment develops. Explain stage 1.

Stage 1 - asocial stage. Infants produce similar responses to all objects whether animate or inanimate.

From birth until 2 months.

Towards the end of this period, infants begin to show a greater preference for social stimuli (eg a smiling face).

Reciprocity and interactional synchrony play a role in establishing the infant’s relationship with others in this period.

Explain stage 2.

Stage 2 - presocial (discriminate) stage.

Happens around 2 months old.

In this stage, infants become more social and start to enjoy human company over inanimate objects.

They begin to distinguish between familiar and unfamiliar people, but do not yet have stranger anxiety.

Explain stage 3.

Stage 3 - specific attachment.

Happens at around 7 months.

Here the infant starts to show separation anxiety, stranger anxiety and joyful reunion behaviour.

They have now formed a specific attachment to one person - their primary caregiver.

Explain stage 4.

Stage 4 - multiple attachments

These are formed after the main attachment is formed

Amount depends on how many consistent relationships the infant has

What did Schafer and Emerson conclude about primary attachments?

They are not always formed with the person who spends the most time with the child.

What did they conclude about intensely attached infants and poorly attached infants?

Intensely attached infants - have mothers who respond quickly and sensitively to their signals and who offered their child lots of interaction.

Poorly attached infants - have mothers who fail to interact.

What did Schaffer and Emerson therefore conclude?

That it is the quality of the relationship that matters most in the formation of attachment, not the quantity.

What percentage of children studied by Schaffer and Emerson had what first specific attachment?

65% - mother was first specific attachment, 30% of them was the first joint object of attachment.

3% - father was first sole object of attachment, but 27% of them were the joint first object.

What did Schaffer and Emerson find relating to multiple attachments?

Within the first month of being attached, 29% of infants had multiple attachments to other people.

Within 6 months this had risen to 78%.

What are these other attachments called?

Secondary attachments.

Infants also display separation anxiety in these relationships.

Theses attachments can be to their other parent, grandparents, siblings, other relatives, friends and/or neighbours.

The role of the father - why did Schaffer and Emerson find that fathers were less likely to be primary attachment figures than mothers?

Because they spend less time with their infants.

What is the evidence for this?

Lamb (1997) found that studies have shown little relationship between father accessibility (amount of time) and infant-father attachment.

Other explanation for why fathers are less likely to be primary attachment figures than mothers

Men aren’t as psychologically equipped to form an intense attachment because they lack the emotional sensitivity that women offer.

This is due to biological and social factors.

Biological - female hormone oestrogen underlies caring behaviour. So women are generally more orientated towards interpersonal goals than men.

Cultural/social - sex stereotypes affect male behaviour, such as the thought that it’s feminine to be sensitive to the needs of others.

What did Frodi find in his 1978 study?

Frodi showed videotapes of infants crying.

He found no differences in the physiological responses of men and women.

This goes against the cultural and biological explanations.

How do we know that men can form a secure attachments with their children?

This is seen in male single parent families.

What is the difference between primary caregiver and primary attachment figure?

Primary caregiver - The person who has the biggest role in looking after the child.

Primary attachment figure - the person to whom the child is most intensely attached. This is the person who the child responds to most intensely at separation.

What has research shown about two parent families where the father is the primary caregiver? (Frank, 1997)

Both parents often share the role of primary attachment figure.

So men can be primary attachment figures, but biological and social factors may discourage this.

What is the main role of fathers?

They are important secondary attachment figures.

What has research by Geiger (1996) found about the child’s relationship with fathers vs mothers?

Fathers tend to be more playful, physically active and better at providing challenging situations for their children.

So a father is an exciting playmate to the child, whereas the mothers are more conventional.

Why might the lack of sensitivity from fathers be seen as positive?

This fosters problem solving by making greater communicative and cognitive demands on children (White and Woollet, 1992).

Positive eval

Disproves Bowlby’s monotropy theory - Schaffer and Emerson found that infants form multiple attachments. Siblings and fathers are important to infant development in their own way.

Useful, new information - stages of attachment help parents understand their infants better, and know what to expect.

Negative eval - development of attachments study

Unreliable data in development of attachments study - was based on mother’s reports on their infants. There is bias and low validity here, because of the Hawthorne effect and the factor of social desirability.

Biased sample - working-class population findings can’t be generalised to other social groups. Also, the sample is outdated as it was from the 60s. So lacks temporal validity - parental care of children has changed considerably since then.

Negative eval for stages of attachment

Cultural differences - stages of attachment model only applies to individualist cultures (concerned with own needs) rather than collectivist cultures (concerned with needs of the group, sharing. Multiple attachment is also more common in collectivist societies.

Stages of attachment theory is reductionist - suggests development of infants is inflexible. Fails to consider individual differences.