Behaviourist - Learning Theory (Dollard and Miller, 1950)

Behaviourism and Learning Theory ::

What do behaviourists believe about human behaviour? :: Behaviourists believe that we are all born as blank slates (tabula rasa) and all our behaviour is learned through experience

What do behaviourists focus on studying? :: They focused on studying observable behaviour, often studying animals, not underlying thought processes

What does Learning Theory say about attachment? :: Learning theory says that attachment is driven by being fed hence why its also referred to as the ‘Cupboard Love Theory’

Classical Conditioning and Attachment ::

How does classical conditioning explain attachment? :: Food produces a sense of pleasure. Over time, the ‘feeder’ becomes associated with the food. The ‘feeder’ then produces the pleasure associated with the food. This association between the ‘feeder’ and pleasure is the attachment bond

Operant Conditioning and Attachment - Dollard and Miller (1950) ::

What is operant conditioning? :: Operant conditioning involves learning from the consequences of behaviour. Behaviour is likely to be reinforced when it produces a pleasant consequence. Unpleasant consequences (punishment) cause behaviour to be less likely to be repeated

How does operant conditioning explain why babies cry for comfort? :: Crying leads to a desired response from the caregiver like feeding. The reinforcement is a two-way process. At the same time as the baby is positively reinforced for crying, the caregiver receives negative reinforcement because the crying stops. When the infant is fed pleasure is produced (a reward/positive reinforcement). The caregiver also experiences this when the crying stops. This sense of pleasure creates the attachment bond

Evaluation ::

Why is Learning Theory too reductionist? :: Learning theory can be criticised for reducing complex human behaviour down to oversimplified ideas such as stimulus-response learning, ignoring factors associated with the quality of attachment including developing reciprocity and good levels of interactional synchrony. Isabella et al. (1989) study shows that the best quality attachments are formed with carers that pick up infant signals and respond appropriately

What evidence suggests food is not the main factor in human attachment? :: Schaffer and Emerson (1964) found babies tended to form their main attachment to their mother whether she was the one who usually fed them or not. Isabella et al. (1989) found high levels of interactional synchrony predicted quality of attachment

What evidence from animal studies challenges Learning Theory? :: Lorenz’s geese imprinted on the first moving object they saw regardless of food association. Harlow’s research on monkeys found no support for the importance of food

Why is Bowlby’s evolutionary theory considered better than Learning Theory? :: Bowlby's theory can explain WHY attachments form but learning theory can only explain how they might form. It can explain Schaffer and Emerson's findings that infants are not always most strongly attached to the person who feeds them. Learning theory offers no explanation of the strengths of attachment but according to Bowlby's theory, strengths include protection from harm and this increased chances of survival. Therefore, Bowlby's theory offers a more complete explanation of attachment than Learning Theory

Why does Behaviourism/learning theory lack validity? :: Learning theory is largely based on studies with non-human animals as Behaviourists believe humans are no different from other animals in terms of how they learn. Our behaviour patterns are constructed from the same basic building blocks of stimulus and response so it is argued if it is legitimate to generalise animal studies to human behaviour. However, not all human behaviour can be explained by conditioning, especially attachment a complex behaviour. Non-behaviourists argue attachment involves innate predispositions and mental activity that could not be explained by conditioning. Behaviourism lacks validity because they oversimplify human behaviour