Attachment

Lorenz (1930)

Investigated imprinting on geese. His study backs Bowlby’s Monotropic Theory

• Found that goslings have had to imprint within 16 hours or no attachment would be formed (critical period).

• Found that goslings made one special bond (monotropy)

• Found that goslings’ drive to form attachments was innate (attachment is innate).

Harlow

Investigated attachment in monkeys using a wire mother and a cloth mother. His study back Bowlby’s Monotropic Theory.

• Found monkeys spent 1hour with wire mother and 17hours with cloth mother per day.

• The monkeys also went to the cloth mother for comfort in new environments - secure base behaviour (monotropy).

• The monkeys also abused and killed their offspring later on (Internal working model)

Bowlby

Monotropic Theory of Attachment

• Monotropy

• Critical period

• Social releasers

• Attachment is innate

• Internal working model

Monotropy

Infants form one special, primary attachment (usually to their mother) which is more important for the child’s emotional development

Critical period

A period of time in which attachments must be formed. If attachments aren’t formed within this period, attachments child may not be able to form any other attachments in the future (or will find great difficulty in doing so). The critical period for humans is 2.5 years

Social releasers

Innate behaviours or features that activate the attachment system in adults, triggering caregiving responses

Attachment is innate

Human attachment behaviours are the product of natural selection due to it serving a survival purpose

Internal working model (IWM)

A cognitive framework helping children to understand relationships, thus forming the foundation for all the child’s future relationships. The child’s relationship with their primary caregiver allows for the formation of the IWM.

Tronick et al.

Still face experiment - Evidence of social releasers

Bailey et al. (2007)

Assessed the relationships between 99 mothers and their infants and the relationships between the 99 mothers and their mothers - Evidence of IWM

Learning Theory

Suggests that babies form attachments due to them associating mothers (or other primary caregivers) with food

Classical conditioning

Learning through association

Operant conditioning

Learning through consequences

How is positive reinforcement used in the formation of attachment between mother and child?

The baby cries, the mum gives baby food. The baby has been rewarded so the baby is more likely to cry when hungry

How is negative reinforcement used in the formation of attachment between mother and child?

Mum feeds baby, baby stops crying. Something negative has been stopped so mum is more likely to feed the baby in the future

Does animal research support learning theory?

No

• Lorenz’s study suggests that attachments are innate, not the product of learning

• Harlow’s study revealed monkey’s preferred comfort over food suggesting that comfort is more valuable in attachment forming

Schaffer and Emerson

The Glasgow Babies Study - Observed 60 babies monthly and found the baby’s primary attachment not to be the person who fed the baby in around half the cases. Sensitive responses seem to be more important.

Isabella et al. (1989)

Studied 30 mothers and their infants and found that higher interactional synchrony was associated with stronger attachment

Interactional synchrony

A form of caregiver-infant interaction where the mother and infant reflect each other’s actions and emotions in a coordinated and rhythmic way

Ainsworth et al (1970s)

The strange Situation - A procedure developed in order to assess and test attachment by putting a child through 8 “episodes” which test different aspects of attachment relationships

Led to the agreement of 3 main attachment types: Secure, insecure avoidant, insecure ambivalent/resistant

Secure attachment

Caregiver: warm response and provides comfort

IWM: child learns that in times of need, the caregiver will respond by providing comfort

Attachment behaviour: secure base behaviour and actively seeks out caregiver

Insecure avoidant attachment

Caregiver: rejects child and responds with annoyance when child attempts to seek comfort

IWM: child learns that caregiver will not provide emotional support in times of need

Attachment behaviour: child avoids caregiver and avoids displaying negative emotions in their presence

Insecure ambivalent/resistant

Caregiver: inconsistent and may prioritise their own emotional needs

IWM: child learns that attention is valuable but can be unreliable in its quality

Attachment behaviour: reacts with intense displays of negative emotion when in need of comfort to overcompensate. However, the child is cautious to seek or sustain the comfort they crave (seek and reject behaviour)

Predictive validity

How well a test can accurately predict a related test in the future

Kokkinos (2007)

Found that the attachment type of a child predicted peer relations in elementary school:

• Secure attachment = Good relationships ( neither bully nor victim)

• Insecure avoidant attachment = More likely to be a bully

• Insecure ambivalent/resistant = More likely to be a victim of bullying

This means the strange situation has good predictive validity

Reliability

Consistency

Bick et al. (2012)

Found that observers agreed on infants’ attachment types 94% of the time which suggests that the strange situation is a highly reliable measure

The fourth attachment type

Disorganised attachment - A child who does not have a consistent response to stress. They display both avoidant and ambivalent behvaiours

What is cultural bias in reference to The Strange Situation

The Strange Situation was designed and tested in the USA. This means it may not be appropriate to use to assess attachments in other cultures, where they may have other rearing practices.

Main and Solomon (1986)

Revisited tapes from Ainsworth’s original research and the proposed a fourth attachment style: disorganised attachment

Separation

Being physically apart from mother

Deprivation

An element of maternal care is lost

What did Bowlby state that deprivation during one’s critical period would cause?

Inevitable and irreversible psychological damage

The effects of deprivation

• Inability to form attachments later in life

• Delinquency

• Cognitive deficit

• Affectionless psychopathy

Characteristics of psychopathy

• Impulsivity and thrill seeking

• Lack of empathy towards others

• Narcissism

• Glibness (superficial charm)

Bowlby’s 44 thieves study(1944)

44 thieves

• 14 affectionless psychopaths

• 30 NOT affectionless psychopaths

• 12/14 (85%) psychopaths had experienced maternal deprivation

• 5/30 (15%) non-psychopaths had experienced maternal deprivation