Caregiver-infant interactions in humans

reciprocity and interactional synchrony. stages of attachment identified by Schaffer. multiple attachments and the role of the father

what is reciprocity

responding to an action with another action where one partner’s actions elicit a response from the other partner. the partners responses are not necessarily similar unlike interactional synchrony

what is interactional synchrony

when 2 people interact they tend to mirror what the other is doing in terms of facial and body movements, emotions, behaviours. synchrony is when 2 or more things move in the same pattern. in a study by Meltzoff and Moore they found infants 3 days old demonstrate interactional synchrony appearing to rule out the possibility that imitation behaviours are learnt so they must be innate

who investigated interactional synchrony

Meltzoff and Moore (1977) conducted the first systematic study of interactional synchrony

what are caregiver-infant interactions

interactions between the caregiver and infant help form the basis of attachment. its how the child and parent communicate. the more sensitive a parents response to the child, the deeper their relationship

stages of attachment identified by Schaffer

lesson pending?

multiple attachements

lesson pending

the role of the father

lesson pending

Meltzoff and Moore Still Face experiment method

controlled observation: adult model displays 3 facial expressions or hand movements in a sequence. a pacifier is placed in infant’s mouth during initial display of expression by the adult to prevent response. then pacifier removed and the child’s expression is

Meltzoff and Moore Still Face experiment findings

found an association between the infant’s and adult model’s behaviour. infants as young as 2 to 3 weeks imitated specific facial and hand gestures

caregiver-infant interactions A03 - research support for intentional imitation

strength - a method of testing the intentionality of infant behaviour is to observe how they respond to inanimate objects. Abravanel and DeYong (1991) observed infant behaviour when interacting with 2 objects: one simulating tounge movements and one simulating the mouth opening or closing. They found infant of 5 to 12 weeks made little response to the objects. This suggests infants do not just imitate anything they see, it is a special social response to other humans.

caregiver-infant interactions A03 - individual differences

limitation - there is variation between infants for example Isabella et al found more strongly attached infant-caregiver pairs are the greater interactional synchrony demonstrated by infant. Heimann found infants who demonstrate a lot of imitation from birth onwards have a better quality of relationship at 3months. However, its not clear if imitation is a cause or effect of interactional synchrony. This research shows there are significant individual differences between infants which could reduce the accuracy of studies investigating interactional synchrony like Meltzoff and Moore.

caregiver-infant interactions A03 -

caregiver-infant interactions A03 -

what is pseudo-imitation

Schaffer and Emerson research (1964) exploring the role of the father

findings - By 18 months, 75% of infants in their study had formed secondary attachments to their fathers, indicating the importance of paternal involvement in child development.

explanation - This challenges the traditional view of fathers as secondary caregivers and highlights their role in providing emotional support and engaging in play. 

evaluate research exploring the role of the father AO3 - children without fathers develop no differently

limitation - a weakness of research into the role of the father is it does not explain why children without fathers develop no differently. macCallum and Golombok (2004) found children growing up in a same-sex household or with a single parent do not develop any differently than those growing up in a 2 parent heterosexual household. SUGGESTS that the father’s role as a secondary caregiver is not important.

evaluate research exploring the role of the father AO3 - inconsistent findings

limitation - research into the role of the father on attachment has inconsistent findings that could be due to researchers being interested in different research questions as some scientists are interested in understanding the role of the father as a secondary attachment while others interested in their role as a primary caregiver. This is a problem because psychologists cannot easily answer what is the role of the father.

evaluate research exploring the role of the father AO3 - fathers not become primary attachment figures is not explained

limitation - research into the role of the father does not explain why fathers generally do not become primary attachment figures. This could be due to traditional gender roles where women are expected to be more nurturing than men therefore fathers feel like they shouldn’t act nurturing. On the other hand female hormones like oestrogen could create high levels of nurturing making females biologically predisposed to become the primary attachment figure.

evaluate research exploring the role of the father AO3 - numerous influences on child’s attachment

limitation - there are numerous influences which might impact a child’s emotional development. For example, their culture, beliefs, father’s age/sensitivity, amount of time the father spends away from home. Its difficult to control all of these variables therefore difficult to draw conclusions about the role of the father.