Learning theory

Learning theory

A set of theories from the behaviourist approach to psychology, that emphasise the role of learning in the acquisition of behaviour. Explanations from learning theory include classical and operant conditioning

Dollard and Miller 1950

Proposed that caregiver infant attachment can be explained by learning theory. Their approach is sometimes called a ‘cupboard love‘ approach because it emphasises the importance of the attachment figure as a provider of food.

Classical conditioning

Learning to associate two stimuli together. For attachment, the stimuli are food and the caregiver.

Unconditioned Stimulus (Food) = Unconditioned response (Pleasure)

UCS + Neutral Stimulus (Caregiver) = UCR

Conditioned Stimulus (Caregiver) = Conditioned Response (Pleasure)

NS becomes CS as step 2 repeats and baby associates Caregiver with food.

When the baby sees this person there is an expectation of food or pleasure

Operant conditioning

Learning from the consequences of behaviour. If a behaviour gives a pleasant consequence then will be repeated and is reinforced. If the behaviour gives an unpleasant consequence it won’t be repeated.

Explains why babies cry for food, an important behaviour in the building attachment. Crying leads to a response from the caregiver. So crying is reinforced as it gives a desirable consequence. This means it will be repeated.

Operant conditioning linked to attachment

PR: When a baby cries it gets food. Crying is then reinforced by the reward of food being supplied by the caregiver

NR: When the child is fed, the unpleasant sensation of hunger stops. The crying also stops so the mum is negatively reinforced e.g. escaping from something nasty.

Attachment as a secondary drive

As well as conditioning, LT draws on the concept of drive reduction. Hunger is thought of as a primary drive, an innate biological motivator. We are motivated to eat to reduce the hunger drive

Sears 1957 suggested that as caregivers provide food the primary drive of hunger becomes associated with them. Attachment is a secondary drive learned by an association between the caregiver and the satisfaction of our primary drive

W Animal studies

Lorenz’s geese imprinted on the first moving object they saw, even if it was food.

For Harlow’s research, there is no importance of food. The monkeys were more attached to the soft surrogate mother rather than the wire one which provided milk.

This suggests that factors other than association with food are important in the formation of attachment

W Schaffer + Emerson

Studied mother-baby interactions for 18 months made and note of separation and stranger anxiety. Babies follow their main attachment to their mother regardless of who fed them.

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

S Bosmans

Safety conditioning may be a role in attachment

Classical conditioning occurs when attachment figure is associated with low anxiety. Operant conditioning occurs when attachment behaviour is rewarded with anxiety reduction.

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

W Feldman + Eidelman

Both classical and operant conditioning see the baby being passive in attachment development, responding to things with comfort or reward.

Research shows that babies are an active partner in the interactions with their caregiver.

Mothers are very alert to their babies’ active signalling, so babies are not the passive recipient proposed by learning theory.

This means that LT doesn’t explain all aspects of attachment