evaluation research into stages of attachment

validity of findings

• strength of research is that the study has mundane realism

• this is because study was carried in homes of the infant, where most observation were done by parents during ordinary activities

• meaning that behaviour of infants was unlikely to be affected by presence of observers, meaning that the infants behaved naturally

• however, some data was based off mothers’ reports, where they might’ve been less sensitive to infant’s protests meaning less likely to report them

• this creates a systematic bias, which challenges the validity of the data

biased sample

• criticism of the research is the sample used

• this is because they used a small sample of 60 infants, and their carers being from the same district and social class

• this is a limitation because child-rearing practices vary from culture to culture

• this research was also conducted in the 60s and parental care has changed considerably

• more women go out to work, so many children are cared for by other family members or day cares

• therefore, this suggests that the findings lack temporal validity AND questions whether the findings can be generalised to other social and historical contexts

assessing multiple attachments

• limitation of research is how multiple attachments are assessed

• just because an infant gets distressed when an individual leaves the room doesn’t mean the individual is a “true” attachment figure

• bowlby(1969) pointed out how children have playmates AND attachment figures, they may be distressed if playmate leaves the room, but this doesn’t signify attachment to them

• this is a limitation because Schaffer and Emerson’s view of stages of attachment doesn’t give a way to distinguish between behaviour shown towards secondary attachment figures and towards playmates

are multiple attachments as important as one primary attachment?

• Schaffer and Emerson’s research suggests infants develop attachment to a single main caregiver before developing multiple attachments, and that this is important for later social and emotional development

• HOWEVER, thomas(1998) suggests that tendency to form a single main attachment isn’t good for healthy psychological development, and that it may be more more desirable to have a variety of different attachments

• additionally, there are cultural differences in formation of attachments, infants tend to form multiple attachments from the onset in collectivist cultures

• this suggests there is mixed evidence for a hierarchal attachment