Types of Attachment; Ainsworth's strange situation

What was the aim of Ainsworth’s study

To assess the strength of attachment between an infant and others

• To see how infants behave under conditions of mild stress & novelty 

What was the setting of Ainsworth’s study

• Set up in a novel environment / lab w. a 2 way mirror which psychologists could observe the infants’ behaviour

  • Could also use a video recorder, may have also used 1 way mirror

• Controlled observation

• 5 key behaviours observed & scored for intensity on scale 1 to 7

5 key behaviours observed in Ainsworth’s Strange Situation

1. Separation anxiety

2. Response to reunion 

3. Stranger anxiety 

4. Exploration & secure base behaviour 

5. Proximity seeking 

ASS procedure

8 episodes, each 3 mins

1. Parent & infant play 

2. Parent sits, child plays (parent as secure base)

3. Stranger enters & talks to parent (stranger anxiety) 

4. Parent leaves, infant plays, stranger offers comfort if needed (separation anxiety)

5. Parent returns, greet infants, offers comfort if needed, stranger leaves (reunion behaviour)

6. Parent leaves, infant alone (separation anxiety) 

7. Stranger enters & offers comfort (stranger anxiety)

8. Parent returns, greets infant, offers comfort (reunion behaviour) 

Findings

• Ainsworth et al combined data from several studies; 106 infants middle-class infants studied in the strange situation 

• Found 3 main patterns of consistent behaviour observed, categorised them as type A,B,C

Secure attachment

• Type B

• Willingness to explore: High

• Stranger anxiety: Moderate

• Separation anxiety: Moderate / Some easy to soothe

• Reunion behaviour: Enthusiastic

• Amount of infants: 66%

Insecure-Avoidant

• Type A

• Willingness to explore: High

• Stranger anxiety: Low

• Separation anxiety: Indifferent / Low

• Reunion behaviour: Avoids contact

• Amount of infants: 22%

Insecure-resistant

• Type C

• Willingness to explore: Low

• Stranger anxiety: High

• Separation anxiety: High / distressed

• Reunion behaviour: Seeks & rejects

• Amount of infants: 12%

AD1: Observations had high reliability

P: Ainsworth et al had almost perfect agreement when rating exploratory behaviour

Ev: Found 0.94 agreement between rater (1.00 is perfect) 

Ex: Measurements are confirmed as meaningful if there’s high inter-observer reliability, determined by comparing ratings made by a panel of experienced judges

L: This means that the observations made by Ainsworth et al can be accepted as being reliable 

DIS1: Other types of attachment

P: Subsequent research found that Ainsworth et al’s analysis overlooked a 4th type of attachment

Ev: Main & Solomon (1986) analysed over 200 Strange Situation videotapes & proposed the insecure-disorganised type D, characterised by a lack of consistent social behaviour 

Ex: Some infants don’t have a consistent type of attachment & lack a coherent strategy for dealing w. the stress of separation; they show v. strong attachment behaviour, suddenly followed by avoidance or looking fearful towards their caregiver. Supported by Van Ijzendoorn et al w. meta analysis of approx. 80 studies in US

L: Suggests Ainsworth’s original conclusions were oversimplified & don’t account for all attachment behaviours 

AD2: Real World application

P: A strength is that intervention strategies can be developed to tackle situations where disordered patterns of attachment develop between infant & caregiver 

Ev: Circle of Security project (Cooper et al, 2005) teaches caregivers to better understand their infants’ signals of distress & to increase their understanding of what it’s like to experience anxiety. 

Ex: Project showed decrease in no. of caregivers classified as disordered (60-15%) & an increase in infants classed as securely attached (32-40%)

L: This supports the research on attachment types as such research can be used to improve children’s lives 

DISC2: Low internal validity 

P: A criticism of ASS is whether it measures the attachment type of a child, or whether it measures the quality of 1 particular relationship

Ev: Main & Weston (1981) found out children behave differently depending on which parent they’re with.

Ex: This suggests that the classification of an attachment type may not be valid cos what we’re measuring is 1 relationship, rather than a personal characteristic lodged in the individual.

C: Bowlby’s monotropic theory claims the attachment type is largely related to 1 special relationship. Main (1999) tested a group of kids & reassessed them at 9 yrs using AA1, finding attachment type is mainly influenced by the mother.

L: This supports Bowlby’s concept of monotropy & the internal validity of the Strange Situation.