1b. Evaluation for Animal studies of Attachment

What is one strength of Lorenz’s study?

One strength of Lorenz’s study was research support for the concept of imprinting.

A study by Lucia Regolin and Giorgio Vallortigara (1995) supports Lorenz’s idea of imprinting. Chicks were exposed to simple shape combinations that moved, such as a triangle with a rectangle in front. A range of shape combinations were then moved in front of them and they followed the original most closely.

This supports the view that young animals are born with an innate mechanism to imprint on a moving object present in the critical window of development, as predicted by Lorenz.

What is one limitation of Lorenz’s study?

One limitation of Lorenz’s study was its generalisability from birds to humans.

The mammalian attachment system is quite diff erent and more complex than that in birds. For example, in mammals attachment is a two-way process, so it is not just the young who become attached to their mothers but also the mammalian mothers show an emotional attachment to their young.

This means that it is probably not appropriate to generalise Lorenz’s ideas to humans.

What is one strength of Harlow’s study?

One strength of Harlow’s research is its real-world applications.

For example, it has helped social workers and clinical psychologists understand that a lack of bonding experience may be a risk factor in child development, allowing them to intervene to prevent poor outcomes (Howe 1998). We also now understand the importance of attachment figures for baby monkeys in zoos and breeding programmes in the wild.

This means that the value of Harlow’s research is not just theoretical but also practical.

What is one limitation of Harlow’s study?

One limitation of Harlow’s study is the ability to generalise findings and conclusions from monkeys to humans.

Rhesus monkeys are much more similar to humans than Lorenz’s birds, and all mammals share some common attachment behaviours. However, the human brain and human behaviour is still more complex than that of monkeys.

This means that it may not be appropriate to generalise Harlow’s findings to humans.