Explanations of Attachment - Learning Theory & Monotropy

Learning theory - Classical conditioning

• Through association

• Food (USC) produces a sense of pleasure in the child (UCR)

• The feeder (NS) who feeds the infant originally doesn’t produce any response (NR) , however over time the feeder produces the pleasure associated with food (CR)

• The pleasure becomes the CR and the feeder becomes the CS

• This association between an individual and pleasure is the attachment bond

Learning theory - Operant conditioning

• Attachment is formed through reinforcement

• The primary driver for the baby is hunger

• The mother (secondary reinforcer) provides the food (primary reinforcer), reducing the hunger driver

• The infant wants to be with the person providing the food as they’re a source of reward and the attachment bond is built.

• Negative reinforcement for caregiver = caregiver feeds infant who stops crying, to avoid discomfort or hearing the infant cry.

• Positive reinforcement for caregiver = baby smiles after being fed

1st evaluation point

• Learning theory would predict that the infant monkeys would attach to and spend most time with the one that fed it (the wire monkey)

• Harlow’s monkey study showed that monkeys preferred the towel monkey with no food, showing that comfort is the key to attachment, not food

• Other animal studies have also shown us that young animals don’t necessarily attach to those who feed it. Lorenz’s geese imprinted before they were fed and kept those attachments regardless who fed them

2nd evaluation point

• The learning theory is too simple as an explanation of attachment

• It’s too simplistic to explain a complex concept like attachment by just say it’s learnt through association or reinforcement

• This ignores the importance of interactional synchrony in attachment formation. Research suggests it’s the caregiver’s sensitivity that’s important, directly linking it to the quality of attachment

• If attachment was simply about food then there wouldn’t be any complex interactions. The learning theory is incomplete and can’t explain all aspects of attachment

3rd evaluation point

• The learning theory over emphasizes the importance of nurture in attachment development - it claims attachment develops due to environmental factors

• To best explain attachment, an interactionalist approach should be taken, as looking at nurture is too simplistic to explain development of attachments, which are complex

• Maybe a baby does associate its food with its mother but its a biological drive to survive, and seeking food allows it to do so, suggesting it’s an innate characteristic, and social releasers like smiling condition a mother to attach to her child

Bowlby’s monotropic theory

• Critical period - If the monotropic bond hadn’t formed by 2 years old, it would cause the child to have difficulty forming attachments later in life.

• Innate programming - Attachment is an innate system that’s biologically programmed into babies to help them survive

• Internal working model - The monotropic bond forms a mental representation for what relationships are like, having a powerful effect on the child’s future relationships. Babies with strong attachments are socially and emotionally competent in relationships & with their own children, whereas babies with poor attachments have more social and emotional difficulties in childhood and adulthood

• Monotropy - infants have one special bond (usually the mother) and that this relationship was mrie important than others. The more time spent together, the better

• Proximity - babies instinctively seek proximity to their primary caregiver for safety as it protects them from hazards

• Social releasers - Innate mechanisms like smiling, reaching out, clinging, crying which elicit caregiving from the parents

1st evaluation point

• Harlow’s study supports many concepts of the monotropic theory

• Monkeys instincitvely went to the towel mother (innate programming), monkeys spent 22/24 hours with cloth mother, only leaving to feed (monotropy), some monkeys found it hard to mate or were bad mothers, neglecting their children (poor IWM). In a variation where Harlow showed a scary robot to the monkeys, they appeared very distressed and ran and clung to the cloth mother for safety (proximity).

• This illustrates strong support for the monotropic theory

2nd evaluation point

• The concepts of monotropy is socially sensitive as it has negative implication specifically for mothers

• Bowlby’s WHO report suggested babies need constant care from the mother for healthy social development, which has led to stay at home mothering, and till this day this idea exists amongst some people.

• Erica Burman: says it places a terrible burden of responsibility on mothers, pushing them into certain lifestyles and puts blame on them if anything goes wrong in a child’s life.

• This social sensitivity is an issue with Bowlby’s theory as it puts a lot of pressure on mothers and puts them in difficult situations with little support

3rd evaluation point

• This theory suggests the father can’t be the primary caregiver. Bowlby suggests it has to be a mother or a female in this role

• Leading to stigma and sexism that fathers have faced for over 50 years.

• However this is challenged by research into the role of the father which shows gender isn’t important but the level of sensitivity is, which has the biggest impact on the child’s development

• Therefore, Bowlby’s theory had serious implications for equality in parenting roles

4th evaluation point

• The monotropic theory over emphasizes the importance of nature in attachment developments

• Bowlby’s theory belueves attachment is innate and a baby has a biological drive to survive and attach

• Explaining how attachments are developed is too complex and to simply look at nature is too simplistic

• To best explain attachment, an interactionalist approach should be taken. Maybe a baby does associate its mother with food, but innate programming and social releases elicit caregiving in the parent which allows attachments to form