Unit 1 - Classic Research: Bowlby (1944) 'Forty-four juvenile thieves: their characters and home-life' (methodologies and procedures)

Where did John Bowlby work during the 1930s and 40s?

A Child Guidance Clinic with children that had social, emotional and behavioural issues. He supported the Freudian belief that traumatic childhood experiences can shape our adult personalities.

What did Bowlby believe that the most traumatic event a young child could experience?

Separation for the primary caregiver during this critical period. According to Bowlby, an infant must form an attachment to its mother before the age of three. If this process of attachment is disrupted by separation the child would suffer emotionally and socially later in life. He called this the ‘maternal deprivation hypothesis’.

What was Bowlby’s research aim?

To support the maternal deprivation hypothesis by asking whether early separation from the mother could be related to behavioural problems later in life.

What type of study was used?

A series of case studies. They were longitudinal and involved interviewing participants as well as their mother’s to gain retrospective accounts. The participants’ school and court reports were also referred to.

Who did the sample consist of?

44 children for whom stealing was a problem and who had been referred to the Child Guidance Clinic. Only a few of them had been charged in court due to their age; over half were under 11. There were 31 boys and 13 girls in the group.

What scale was used to assess the children’s intelligence?

The Binet Scale - 27 had average intelligence, 15 had above average intelligence and 2 had below average intelligence. The IQ for both groups was higher that the average for the population.

How severe was the experimental group’s thievery?

22 of the cases were instances of chronic and serious thieving lasting very long periods (Grade 4).

10 of the cases were persistent but irregular mild thieving (Grade 3).

8 of the cases there had been a few thefts only (Grade 2).

4 of the cases there was only one theft (Grade 1).

Who made up the control group?

44 children from the same clinic who had not stolen. The controls were of similar age, intelligence and economic status as the experimental group. This was a matched pairs design.

Procedure - how was the sample gathered?

Opportunity sampling (1).

What happened upon arrival to the clinic?

Each child was given mental tests by a psychologist to assess their intelligence (2), and the psychologist who conducted the test also noted the emotional attitude of the child (3). At this time a social worker interviewed the child’s mother and recorded preliminary details about the child’s early psychiatric history (4).

What followed the child’s testing and mother’s interview?

Both the psychologist and the social worker reported to the psychiatrist, Bowlby (5). Bowlby then interviewed the child and the mother (6).

What happened after this two hour examination?

The team considered school and other reports and discussed their conclusions (7). Many of the children continued to meet with the psychiatrist weekly over a period of 6 months or more (8), and the mothers talked over their problems with the social worker (9).

What did these meetings and discussions enable?

A detailed case history to be recorded and enabled Bowlby to diagnose the children’s emotional problems (10).