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

involves learning to associate two stimuli together in the case of attachment that you stimuli our food under the caregiver.

Food serves as an unconditioned stimulus. being fat gives us pleasure, we don’t have to learn it, therefore it is an unconditioned response.

A caregiver starts as a neutral stimulus (produces no response). However, overtime the caregiver becomes associated with food so the neutral stimulus has become a condition stimulus.

produces no response). However, overtime the caregiver becomes associated with food so the neutral stimulus has become a condition stimulus.

When the when the baby sees this person there is an expectation of food or pleasure (caregiver produces a condition response of pleasure)

(caregiver produces a condition response of pleasure)

To a learning theorist this condition pleasure response is love (and attachment is formed under the caregiver becomes an attachment figure)

Operant conditioning

Involves learning from the consequences of behaviour. If a behaviour produces a pleasant consequence then it is likely to be repeated. The behaviour is reinforced. If the behaviour produces an unpleasant consequence it is less likely to be repeated.

Can explain why babies cry for food, an important behaviour in the building attachment. Crying leads to a response from the caregiver for example feeding. As long as the caregiver provides the design response crying is reinforced because it produces a pleasurable consequence.

this reinforcement is a two-way process. At the same time as the baby is reinforced crying the keg of a receives a negative reinforcement because the crying stops. This interplay of mutual reinforcement strengthens and attachment

Attachment as a secondary drive

as well as conditioning, learning theory draws on the concept of Drive reduction. Hunger can be thought of as a primary drive, it’s an innate biological motivator. We are motivated to eat in order to reduce the hunger drive

it’s an innate biological motivator. We are motivated to eat in order to reduce the hunger drive

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

Lack of support from animal studies

Lorenz’s geese imprinted on the first moving object they saw regardless of whether this object was associated with food.

If we consider Harlow’s research with monkeys, there is no support for the importance of food. When given a choice, Harlow’s monkeys displayed attachment behaviour towards a soft surrogate mother in preference to a wire one which provided milk.

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

Lack of support from human studies

Schaffer and Emerson 1964 studied mother baby interactions by observing them over a period of 18 months and interviewing the mothers about the baby separation anxiety and strange anxiety. Found that babies tend to follow their main attachment to their mother’s regardless of whether she was the one who usually fed them.

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

Bosmans 2020

Evidence for safety conditioning

May play a role in attachment

Bosmans suggests that classical conditioning occurs when the attachment figure becomes associated with low anxiety. Operant conditioning occurs when attachment behaviour is rewarded with anxiety reduction.

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

Contradiction to Bosmans

Both classical and operant conditioning explanation see the baby playing a relatively passive role in attachment development, responding to associations with comfort or reward.

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

Feldman and Eidelman 2007 found that mothers are very alert to their babies’ active signalling, which means that babies are not the passive recipient proposed by learning theory.

This means that learning theory may not explain all aspects of attachment

Social learning theory

Hay and Vespo 1988 suggest that social learning theory could explain attachment processes better than learning the theory.

Parents can teach children to love them by demonstrating attachment behaviours like hugging. SLT can also explain some aspects of attachment like the active role of the infant.

However SLT does not explain easily cross cultural universals in both parent and infant attachment behaviour