Attachment

Caregiver-infant interactions in humans

Reciprocity and Interactional synchrony

Reciprocity

This refers to the turn-taking behaviour that takes place during a conversation. Here, the behaviour of one person results in a response from the other person, even though the behaviours may not necessarily be the same.

Even in the absence of verbal language we see infants and their caregivers demonstrating reciprocity. For example, when a caregiver coos at an infant the infant might respond with a gurgle, and so on.

This behaviour is thought to be hugely important in the development of later communication skills. The regularity of the response allows the caregiver to anticipate the infant’s behaviour and respond appropriately and sensitively. This is the foundation of a secure attachment between infant and caregiver.

Interactional synchrony

This refers to the co-ordinated behaviour we see between an infant and their caregiver. It is broader than reciprocity as it focuses on both behaviour and emotions. The infant and caregiver are said to be in tune with each other.

Not only are interactions reciprocal but the behaviours or actions are often mirrored. For example, when a caregiver smiles at an infant they smile back, when the caregiver sticks their tongue out the infant responds by sticking their tongue out too.

Research: Meltzoff and Moore

Aim – Meltzoff and Moore conducted the first study to investigate interactional synchrony in caregiver-infant interactions.

Procedure – In this controlled observation, an adult model displayed one of three facial expressions or a hand movement. A dummy was placed in the infant’s mouth during the display to prevent a response. The dummy was then removed and the infant’s response was filmed. The film was then judged by an independent observer who made notes on all instances of facial movements.

Findings – They found that there was an association between the infant behaviour and that of the adult model in infants as young as only three days old.

Conclusions – This observation ruled out the possibility of the imitation behaviours being learned overtime, suggesting that the response (interactional synchrony) must be innate.

Evaluation of research into caregiver-infant interactions

• Research studies into caregiver-infant interactions tend to use observations. A strength of this is that it is possible to use well controlled procedures, with both mother and child being filmed, often from multiple angles. This ensures very fine details of behaviour can be recorded and later analysed and so improves the accuracy of the conclusions drawn.

• Furthermore, another strength is that these observations are deemed to very reliable. High inter-observer reliability has been found in some studies – in one analysis, Meltzoff obtained a correlation coefficient of + 0.92. This means that we can be confident that the observations taken were agreed upon by the researchers.

• However, there are reasons why it is not possible to draw firm conclusions from such research about caregiver-infant interactions: One reason is that infants move their mouths and wave their arms constantly (this is because they have very poor motor control when they are born). This is an issue for researchers investigating intentional behaviour. We cannot be certain that the infants are engaging in interactional synchrony or reciprocity, as some of the behaviour may occur by chance and we cannot be certain that the infant is intending to be reciprocal or synchronous. This questions the accuracy of the conclusions drawn in relation to reciprocity and interactional synchrony and suggests that psychologists should be cautious when interpreting findings from this research.

• Another reason why it is difficult to draw firm conclusions about caregiver-infant interactions is that it is impossible for the research to show cause and effect. This is because it would be ethically impossible to manipulate the amount or type of caregiver interaction to determine the effect on the attachment. As a result, researcher have to rely on observations which do not provide us with a cause and effect conclusion and we are therefore uncertain about the impact of caregiver-infant interactions on the attachment bond.

• A final weakness of this observational research is that it is socially sensitive. The research suggests that infants’ social development may be disadvantaged if they lack opportunities to achieve interactional synchrony. This may be the case if mothers return to work shortly after a child is born and she therefore spends less time with her child. This is a weakness because it implies that mothers should not return to work so soon; a socially sensitive implication.

• A strength of research into infant-caregiver interactions is that it has practical applications. Therapists work with parents and infants who have experienced disruption in their attachment formation, such as when children are adopted and attachments with foster carers need to be transferred to adoptive parents. Research has helped to recognise the importance of reciprocity and interactional synchrony in attachments. For example, caregivers are encouraged to mirror and share their child’s emotion by imitating facial expressions and engaging in reciprocal behaviour in response to music, showing the importance of these in healthy caregiver-infant interactions.

Stages of attachment (Schaffer)

Research: Schaffer and Emerson

Aim – Schaffer and Emerson conducted a longitudinal study to investigate the development of attachments.

Procedure –

• Sixty infants from mainly working-class families in Glasgow were studied over the course of their first year.

• The mothers were visited monthly and were asked to report their infant’s response to separation in seven everyday situations (e.g. being left alone or with others).

• They also reported any protest from the infant on these occasions by rating it on a scale and to whom this protest was directed.

Findings – They used the findings from this study to describe how attachment develops. Schaffer identified four stages of attachment (see below).

Conclusions – They concluded that it is the quality of the relationship and interactions that are important to the formation of strong emotional bonds and healthy attachments, not the quantity (amount of time spent with the infant).

The stages of attachment

Schaffer proposed that there are four stages in the development of attachments:

Stage 1: Asocial

From birth until about two months, infants respond in the same way to all objects.

Towards the end of this period, they begin to show a preference for social stimuli (e.g. a smiling face) and seem to be more content when they are with people.

Reciprocity and interactional synchrony play a role in building bonds and relationships with others.

Stage 2: indiscriminate attachments

At around four months infants become much more social; they enjoy being with people.

As well as being able to distinguish between animate and inanimate objects they also recognise familiar people.

However, they show no real preference for anyone in particular and are happy in the presence of strangers.

Stage 3: specific attachment

By seven months infants begin to demonstrate separation anxiety when they are left by a particular person and joy on reunion with that person. They have formed a specific attachment to this primary attachment figure and are most comforted by them. They also begin to display stranger anxiety, another sign that a specific attachment has been formed.

The primary attachment figure is not necessarily the person who spends the most time with the infant but the person who responds quickly and sensitively to the infant’s needs.

Stage 4: multiple attachments

Shortly after the main attachment is established, the infant develops a wider circle of multiple attachments.

These attachments are formed with their other parent, grandparents, siblings, other relatives, and friends/neighbours and can be identified by the separation anxiety that also occurs when left by these people.

By the age of one year, the majority of infants had formed multiple attachments (known as secondary attachments).

Evaluation of research into the stages of attachment

• A strength of Schaffer and Emerson’s research is how the data was collected. The study took place in the families’ own homes and most of the observations were done by parents. This is a strength because the babies’ behaviour would be unaffected by the research and there is an excellent chance that the observed behaviours of the infants in the study were natural.

• However, some researchers have suggested that there are methodological issues with Schaffer and Emerson’s research.

One issue is the use of the self-report method to collect data on the development of attachments. The mothers were asked to report their infants’ responses but these reports may not have been accurate. Mothers might have under or overemphasised certain interactions. This is a weakness because the data collected may not be accurate and therefore, the stages of development described by Schaffer may not be correct.

Another issue of this research is that the sample was biased as the study included only working-class mothers and their babies meaning that the sample is not representative of all mothers and their babies. This is a weakness because the findings cannot be confidently generalised to other people eg we can’t be sure that similar patterns in attachment formation would be seen in middle-class mothers and their babies.

Furthermore, we might argue that this research lacks temporal validity. This means that the findings may no longer be meaningful, as the way in which childcare has changed since the research was conducted. One reason why so many of the infants demonstrated a primary attachment to the mother, may be because at this time, many women were discouraged from entering the workforce. This is a weakness as Schaffer and Emerson’s stages of attachment may no longer give us an accurate account of how attachments develop today.

• A further weakness of the research into the development of attachment is that it suffers from cultural bias in that it only applies to western, individualist cultures. In collectivist cultures, there is more emphasis on the needs of the group rather than the individual (as in individualist cultures). In such cultures many things, including child care, are often shared. This is a weakness because the stages of attachment are not universal; they are not true for everyone. In these societies, discriminate (ie specific) attachments are less common and multiple attachments are more likely.

• A final weakness of Schaffer’s research into the stages of attachment is that it could be regarded as being socially sensitive. For example, the model suggests that single attachments come before multiple attachments but in some situations or cultures multiple attachments may come first. This is a problem because families may be unfairly and inaccurately labelled as abnormal by this criterion when in fact they are completely normal.

Multiple attachments

One primary attachment is vital:

Bowlby (1950s) suggested that a single, primary attachment relationship is vital for the healthy psychological development of a child.  He emphasized this as mainly being the role of the mother.

However, we have to remember that Bowlby was working in the 1950s when gender roles were very stereotypical.  Bowlby viewed the father’s main as supporting the mother financially, so that she could devote herself to childcare.  He also suggested that the father should offer emotional support, through love and companionship in order to create the right atmosphere for the baby to thrive. The view that childcare is deemed to be part of a mother’s role can be seen as outdated. Therefore Bowlby’s ideas about multiple attachments could be criticised for lacking temporal validity – the findings don’t really apply in society today.

Multiple attachments are possible:

Not everyone agrees that a single attachment is vital.  Schaffer argues that infants are capable of multiple attachments and suggested that fathers and mothers have an important role to play.

Many of the babies from the Schaffer and Emerson study had multiple attachments by 10 months old, including attachments to mothers, fathers, grandparents, siblings and neighbours. By 18 months 31% had five or more attachments.  The mother was the main attachment figure for about half of the children at 18 months old and the father for most of the others. 

Attachments are often structured in a hierarchy, whereby an infant may have formed three attachments but one may be stronger than the other two, and one may be the weakest.

Multiple attachments with grandparents can be beneficial:

Silverstein and Ruiz (2006) looked at the benefits of having a healthy attachment bond with a grandparent in children who have a mother suffering from depression.

Research has shown that compared to non-depressed mothers, those with depression typically have inconsistent responses to their child’s needs and are less engaged when interacting with their children. Children of mothers with depression are more likely to show depression as adults. Silverstein and Ruiz showed that the stronger the attachment of the grandchild to a grandparent, the less likely the child of a depressed mother is to experience depression in adulthood.

The role of the father

Findings from research into the role of the father are often conflicting.

We can however, identify two main arguments regarding the role played by fathers in their child’s development:

Argument 1. Fathers play a less important role than mothers:

Fathers do form secure attachments with their children, as is the case in single/multiple male parent families. However, Schaffer and Emerson found that fathers were less likely to be primary attachment figures than mothers. There are a number of possible explanations for this:

It has been argued that social factors may play a role. Cultural expectations of male behaviour suggest that it is rather feminine for men to be nurturing and sensitive to the needs of others and therefore discourages men form behaving in this way towards their children. Furthermore, fathers may spend less time with their infants because of their commitments at work. Mothers are more likely to stay at home during the first few years of a child’s life and therefore spend more time with them.

It could also be that biological factors play a role in fathers being less likely to be a primary caregiver. The female hormone, oestrogen, elicits caregiving behaviour. Men produce very little oestrogen in comparison to women so women, generally, are more nurturing than men. This means that fathers are likely to be less sensitive to infant cues than mothers; this sensitivity is important for developing a secure attachment.

Evaluation

• There is supporting evidence for the idea that fathers play a less important role than mothers. In comparison to mothers, Hrdy (1999) found that fathers were less able to detect low levels of infant distress. This difficulty in detecting stress in their children supports the claim that fathers are less important than mothers since it means they are less capable of providing a sensitive and nurturing type of attachment.

• However, Field (1978) challenged the idea that fathers cannot adopt a nurturing role. She conducted research which compared the behaviours of primary caregiver mothers with primary and secondary caregiver fathers. Face-to-face interactions were analysed from video footage with infants at 4 months of age. It was observed that primary caregiver mothers and fathers spent more time smiling, imitating and holding infants than secondary caregiver fathers. These behaviours are important in building attachments. They concluded that it is the level of responsiveness not the gender of the parent that influences the quality of attachment. This study also suggests that fathers, like mothers, can be important, nurturing attachment figures.

Argument 2. Fathers are just as important as mothers but their role is different:

Grossman (2002) conducted a longitudinal study of 44 families which correlated parents’ behaviour and the quality of children’s attachments into their teens. The quality of fathers’ play with infants was related to the quality of children’s attachment in adolescence. Fathers tended to be more physically active with their children and generally better at providing challenging situations and encouraging problem-solving and communication. This is an important part of a child’s cognitive and social development. This suggests that fathers have a different role in attachment which is more to do with play and stimulation, than with nurturing.

Researchers have suggested that fathers set clearer boundaries than mothers and also teach their children to respect other people’s boundaries. Children without fathers often do less well at school and show high levels of risk-taking and aggression.  This again suggests that fathers play a different role in helping to prevent negative developmental outcomes for their children.

Evaluation

• There is supporting evidence for the idea that a father’s role is as important as a mother’s but that their role is different.  Geiger (1996) found that fathers’ play interactions were more exciting in comparison to mothers’ and that the mothers’ play interactions were more affectionate and nurturing. This suggests that the role of the father is as a playmate and not as a sensitive, nurturing parent who responds to the needs of their children. These results also confirm that the mother takes on a different, nurturing role.

Conclusion: This is such a difficult area to research, that drawing a firm conclusion is very problematic.

• A weakness in trying to understand the role of fathers is that there are many factors that influence the role that a father plays and the impact he has on his child's development. Some of these factors include cultural and socio-economic factors, the quality of interaction between the father and child and, the strength of the relationship between the child’s parents. It is also the case that fathers take so many different roles within different family set ups, and that families are changing dramatically- especially with the increasing acceptance of same sex parents. The presence of so many factors means it difficult to make generalisations about the father's role. Rather than trying to identify the specific role a father (and a mother) might adopt, it might be more useful to view the attachment roles of mothers and fathers as complementary, and as determined by the specific needs of each individual family

Animal studies of attachment

Lorenz

Aim:  To investigate the effect of imprinting in newly hatched geese.

Procedure:

• Lorenz divided 12 goose eggs into two groups.

• Group 1 was left with their mother and when they hatched, the first moving object they saw was their mother.  Group 2 was incubated and when they hatched, the first moving object they saw was Lorenz.

• After some time, Lorenz placed both groups of goslings together to see whether the goslings would follow him or their mother.

Findings:

• Group 1 immediately followed the mother around and Group 2 immediately followed Lorenz around.

• When Lorenz placed all the goslings together, they quickly divided themselves up - one group following their natural mother and the other group following Lorenz. The goslings had formed a strong bond with Lorenz in just the few hours after they had hatched. This is known as imprinting.

• Lorenz found that if imprinting did not occur within a few hours after hatching, the chicks did not attach to the mother figure.

Conclusions:

Lorenz concluded that the process of imprinting is limited to a critical period. If the young animal is not exposed to a moving object during this time frame they will not imprint.

He also suggested that the process is irreversible, long-lasting and has an effect on later mate preferences.

Lorenz believed that imprinting is an adaptive behaviour because the young are protected by being close to the mother, promoting the offspring’s survival and future reproduction.

Evaluation of research by Lorenz

• There is supporting evidence for Lorenz’s ideas from other animal studies. For example, other research found that leghorn chicks fed using yellow rubber gloves during their first few weeks, imprinted on the gloves. Adult male chicks later tried to mate with the gloves. This is a strength as it means that we can be more confident that Lorenz’s conclusions are correct; animals will imprint on any moving object during the critical period. This means that the research findings are reliable (consistent)

• However, there is also evidence that challenges the ideas of Lorenz. For example, it was also found that the imprinting that had occurred could be reversed. After spending time with other leghorns, they were able to engage in normal sexual behaviour with other chickens. This shows that Lorenz’s suggestion that the process is irreversible is not entirely accurate.

• Another criticism is that geese and humans are very different and many researchers claim it is inappropriate to generalise (extrapolate) from geese to humans. Human babies are born quite helpless and without the motor skills to move around by themselves, can’t demonstrate imprinting by following their mother around like goslings do.  It is widely accepted that geese imprint, whereas humans attach. This means that the conclusions drawn by Lorenz about imprinting, tell us very little about the attachment process in human infants.

Animal studies of attachment

Harlow

Aim: To investigate whether or not attachment is based on food and being fed.

Procedure:

• 8 newborn rhesus monkeys were taken away from their natural mothers and studied by Harlow for 165 days.

• The monkeys were kept in isolation and given the choice of two surrogate mothers: a wire ‘mother’ with a milk bottle or a wire ‘mother’ covered in a soft cloth.

• Harlow recorded the amount of time the infant monkeys spent with the two different ‘mothers’ and their responses when frightened.

Findings:

• The monkeys spent most of their time with the cloth covered ‘mother’.

• When feeding from the wire ‘mother’ they only spent a minimal amount of time getting milk and then returned to the soft one.

• When they were frightened, they clung to the cloth ‘mother’ and used it as a secure base when playing with new objects.

• There were long-lasting effects of the monkey’s early attachment experiences. Harlow observed that they were unable to socialise with other monkeys (freezing or running away from them) and did not go on to show normal mating behaviour.

Conclusions: Harlow concluded that infants do not develop an attachment to the person who feeds them but the person who offers comfort through contact.

Evaluation of research by Harlow

• Some researchers have suggested that there are methodological issues with Harlow’s research. One significant problem is the potential presence of a confounding variable in the research. The heads of the surrogate mothers were different in that the cloth ‘mother’ had a head with a monkey-like face whereas the wire ‘mother’ didn’t. This is a weakness because it is possible that the infant monkeys spent more time with this ‘mother’ because they found the face more attractive, not because it offered contact comfort.

• Another criticism is that many researchers claim it is inappropriate to generalise from rhesus monkeys to human infants. Although there are similarities between humans and monkeys, humans are very different in that they make conscious decisions. This is a weakness because we cannot confidently say that human infants form attachments in the same way or for the same reasons.

• A final weakness is that the study can be criticised for being unethical. The study caused long-term social and emotional damage to the monkeys, many of which found it difficult to form relationships with their peers. This is a weakness because psychologists have a responsibility to conduct ethical research and it raises questions as to whether research like this should ever be replicated.

• A strength is that this research has a number of practical applications. It suggests that human infants may also need more than just food to be psychologically healthy. This has resulted in policy changes within institutions such as hospitals and children’s homes, leading to more effective care for young children.

Explanations of attachment

Learning theory

Learning theorists believe that attachment is a set of learned behaviours. They suggest that infants learn and develop attachments with their caregivers as a result of their experiences and interactions. An attachment can be learned through the process of classical and operant conditioning.

Classical conditioning is learning through association. Infants find food, and therefore feeding, a pleasurable and comforting experience. An infant learns to associate feeding/comfort with their primary caregiver because this is the person who feeds them.

Over time, the caregiver acquires comforting properties by association. The infant will experience feelings of pleasure when they are close to the caregiver whether they are feeding them or not. This is how an attachment develops.

Before conditioning:

Unconditioned Stimulus                                                       Unconditioned Response

               ---------------------------------                                                               -------------------------------------------------------

Neutral Stimulus                                            

               ---------------------------------                                                               -------------------------------------------------------

During conditioning:

          Neutral Stimulus          +    Unconditioned Stimulus                                    Unconditioned Response

   ---------------------------------        -------------------------------------                    -------------------------------------------------------

After conditioning:

      Conditioned Stimulus                                                         Conditioned Response

                ---------------------------------                                                               -------------------------------------------------------

After conditioning, the mother (through association) has taken on the properties of the UCS and therefore produces the same response.

Operant conditioning is learning through consequences. Behaviours that are followed by a reward of some kind are said to be reinforced - such behaviours are strengthened and are likely to be repeated. This theory suggests that reinforcement occurs in both the infant and caregiver, illustrating how attachment is a two-way learned behaviour.

For the infant:

Infants learn to cry, smile and coo (attachment behaviours) because when they do it brings about a positive response from their caregivers. This positive response acts to reinforce the behaviour and so the same behaviours are likely to be repeated.

For example, an infant will cry when it is hungry as this is an unpleasant feeling. When the infant is fed, their hunger is reduced and this is a pleasant feeling. This pleasant feeling (the reward) makes the infant more likely to cry again when it is hungry.

For the caregiver:

This theory suggests that caregivers are negatively and positively reinforced.

For example, an infant crying because it is hungry is unpleasant to a caregiver. Caregivers learn that by attending to their child’s needs and feeding it, the infant stops crying. The caregiver is being negatively reinforced by the reduction of unpleasant infant crying.

Furthermore, when an infant is fed and therefore no longer hungry, it smiles and coos with the caregiver. The caregiver is being positively reinforced by the pleasant infant interaction.

Evaluation of learning theory

• A strength of learning theory of attachment is that it can be tested using scientific methods of investigation. For example, attachment can be studied in controlled conditions such as in Harlow’s study of infant monkeys. This is a strength because evidence from research can be confidently used to provide support for or to challenge the theory.

• There is evidence that challenges the learning theory of attachment.

For example, Harlow’s study of infant monkeys found that baby monkeys who were raised with artificial wire mothers did not spend time clinging to the wire mother that dispensed milk and did not run to it when frightened. They preferred the wire mother that did not dispense food but was covered in a soft towel. This is a weakness because it shows that food is not the main factor in forming an attachment as learning theory suggests.

Furthermore, research challenges learning theory’s idea that an attachment develops over time. For example, Schaffer and Emerson found that babies are happy to be looked after by anyone and do not show a preference for an individual carer until they get to about 7 months old. At this age, they suddenly show that they want to be with their main carer and want to stay close to them. This is a weakness because learning theory proposes that the attachment would gradually increase in strength whereas it appears suddenly at the same age in all infants.

• Another weakness of the theory is that there is an alternative explanation for why  attachments form, which is better supported by evidence. Bowlby’s theory of attachment emphasises the importance of evolution in the formation of attachments. This offers a much stronger model of attachment as it is supported by a range of research, such as the attachment suddenly starting at the same time as the infant starts to move independently. This means that the learning theory of attachment has been largely rejected by the scientific community.

Explanations of attachment

Bowlby’s monotropic theory     

Bowlby believed that an attachment forms between a baby and a carer because it is adaptive (increases the chances of survival). An infant who is not attached is less well protected than an infant who has formed an attachment to a caregiver. The drive to form this attachment is innate; an instinct.

Infants display natural behaviours that bring about an instinctive care giving response in adults. These are called social releasers (e.g. smiling, crying and making cooing noises). These social releasers explain how attachments to infants are formed.

Bowlby suggested that there is a critical period for forming attachments.  This is from birth until about 2.5 years of age. If an attachment has not developed during this period, then it will never form. This means that the child will suffer from irreversible developmental consequences, such as reduced intelligence and increased aggression.

A special attachment forms with the person who responds most sensitively to the baby’s needs. This might involve being more responsive, more cooperative and more accessible. The tendency to form one special attachment is called monotropy. The person who provides the best quality care becomes the primary attachment figure and has a special role in the social development of the baby. This primary attachment figure acts as a secure base from which the baby can explore the world around them whilst staying safe.

Bowlby believed that the first primary attachment creates a type of schema for relationships known as the internal working model. This helps the infant understand the behaviour of their caregiver and, in the long-term, acts as a template for all later relationships because it generates expectations about what relationships are like. If a child experiences a warm and close relationship with their mother they will tend to expect and develop similar relationships in later life.  But if the mother is cold and rejecting, the child will develop a negative self-image and low self-esteem, basically see themselves as unlovable and therefore experience unsatisfactory relationships in later life too.  Therefore, Bowlby predicted that emotionally secure infants who have formed strong bonds in infancy would go on to be emotionally secure, trusting and socially confident adults. This is called the continuity hypothesis.

A  S  C  M  I

A  S  C  M  I

Evaluation of Bowlby’s monotropic theory

• A strength of Bowlby’s theory is that there is supporting evidence for many of his ideas and concepts:

There is supporting evidence for the idea that attachment is adaptive. For example, infants form attachments at an age when it is most vital to their survival. Infants begin to crawl from around six months, an activity that could put them in danger and this is also when we tend to see attachments forming. This is a strength as it shows that attachments do serve the purpose of protecting infants from harm and increasing their chances of survival as Bowlby suggested, giving the theory face validity.

There is also supporting evidence for the concept of monotropy. For example, Schaffer and Emerson found that babies do from a specific attachment to a primary attachment figure even though they also formed several other attachments within their families. This is a strength as it suggests that Bowlby’s theory of monotropy is accurate and that infants form an important bond with the person who responds most sensitively to their needs.

Furthermore, there is supporting evidence for the concept of the internal working model and the continuity hypothesis. For example, one study found that those who had secure relationships as babies had happier and more trusting romantic relationships as adults. Another found that children who had the most secure (closest) relationship with their mothers as babies formed better friendships with other children than those who were less securely attached. This is a strength as it suggests that Bowlby’s theory that the first attachment sets the pattern for all other relationships is correct.

• However, there is evidence that challenges Bowlby’s suggestion of a critical period for the development of attachments. Studies of children in institutions who failed to form attachments during the critical period found that it is possible to form attachments and develop normally. This is a weakness because it challenges the suggestion that attachments will be impossible if they are not formed during this time. Psychologists now prefer to refer to this time as the sensitive period; where children are at their most receptive to the formation of attachments. Bowlby himself, later proposed a sensitive period of up to 5 years.

Types of attachment

Researchers have identified different types of attachment. The ideal for future development is a secure attachment. Individuals can also show a less-ideal type of attachment known as an insecure attachment. There are different forms of insecure attachment.

Secure attachment     

This is a strong, emotional bond experienced by an infant towards the caregiver. They tend to have harmonious and cooperative interactions with their caregiver. This type of attachment is characterised by a desire to remain physically close to the carer when distressed but usually the infant will use them as a secure base from which to explore. Infants show secure attachment by showing some distress when separated from the caregiver, showing pleasure and being easily soothed when reunited with them. Securely attached infants are likely to be wary of strangers. Secure attachments are thought to enable an infant to develop good relationships in later life.

Insecure attachment                                

The emotional bond is weaker than in secure attachments and the relationship between an infant and the carer is more anxious and uncertain. Insecure attachments may result in a negative self-image and a poor inner working model of relationships. There are two main types of insecure attachment, avoidant and resistant attachments.

An insecure-avoidant attachment is characterised by the avoidance of interaction and intimacy with their caregiver and other people. They are happy to explore their surroundings with or without the presence of their caregiver. Insecure-avoidant attachments are shown by little or no sign of distress when the carer leaves the infant and little show of pleasure when the carer returns (they not seek comfort from them). The infant is generally rather unresponsive to both the carer and strangers. This type of attachment is thought to develop due to the caregiver ignoring the infant and therefore the infant expects little from caregiver and becomes an independent, self-reliant individual (in a negative way!).

An insecure-resistant attachment is demonstrated by both seeking and resisting interaction and intimacy with their caregiver. Infants with an insecure-resistant attachment show extreme and immediate distress when the carer leaves them alone and when they are with a stranger. When reunited with their caregiver they demonstrate a conflicting desire for and anger toward being comforted when the carer returns (e.g. angrily resist being picked up but maintain proximity and need soothing). This type of attachment is thought to develop due to an inconsistent caregiver; the infant is therefore unsure whether or not the caregiver will respond to their needs.

Types of attachment

Ainsworth’s Strange Situation

Aim – Mary Ainsworth investigated differences in types of attachment by putting babies under conditions of mild stress in an unfamiliar setting known as The Strange Situation.

Procedure – About 100 middle class American mothers and their babies took part in a controlled observation. Each infant was observed with its mother in a specially arranged room with play materials as a series of prearranged activities took place.

The infant’s responses to the following were noted by the observers;

• A stranger entering the room (response to stranger)

• The mother leaving the child alone and with the stranger (separation anxiety)

• The mother returning to the room (reunion)

Findings – From the observations of the infants’ responses, their attachments were classified into 3 types.

Conclusions –

• There are individual differences in the types of attachment that infants form

• The majority of American children are securely attached

• The mother’s behaviour is important in the type of attachment that the baby forms

Evaluation of Ainsworth’s Findings and Conclusions

• A strength of Ainsworth’s research is that the research has high inter-observer reliability. In observational studies such as this one, inter-observer reliability can be assessed by comparing the ratings made by different observers. Ainsworth found very high levels of agreement between observers in her research. This is a strength because conclusions drawn from the observations can be accepted as being consistent.

• However, there is evidence that challenges Ainsworth’s research. Later studies of attachment using the Strange Situation suggested that another type of attachment may have been overlooked. Main & Weston found a fourth group of infants with an insecure-disorganised attachment. These infants lack any consistent pattern of attachment behaviour. This is a weakness because it reduces the confidence we can have in Ainsworth’s original findings, suggesting that her findings might lack validity, as they did not fully explain what she had set out to explain.

• Another strength is that the research offers important practical applications. In situations where insecure attachments begin to form between infants and their caregivers, appropriate interventions can be put in place. For example, the Circle of Security Project teaches parents how to better understand their child’s needs. This is a strength because the research in this area can be used to improve children’s lives and futures.

Evaluation of the Strange Situation as a research tool

• A criticism is that the Strange Situation may have lacked validity (it may not have tested what it set out to test) for the following reasons:

• Using an overt observation may have influenced the mothers’ behaviour. The mothers in the study were aware that they were being observed and that their interactions were being judged by experts. This could affect the way that they interact with their child, for example, they may have been more attentive/ sensitive in an attempt to appear to be a ‘good mother’. This would, in turn, affect the child’s behaviour too. This is a weakness because the categorisation of their attachment type may not be accurate.

• Another reason that the Strange Situation may have lacked validity is because it was such an artificial setting. The observations were made in a laboratory setting and the infant was put under artificial stressful situations. This means that the findings may not be generalised to other, perhaps more real life settings. As a result, this study may be argued to lack ecological validity.

• Another reason that the Strange Situation may have lacked validity is because it was only originally conducted on American infants. As such the classifications may only be relevant to this particular group and cannot be generalised to wider populations. As a result, this study may be argued to lack population validity (another term for generalisability)

• A strength is that research using the Strange Situation has led to further research into attachment. Mary Ainsworth created a tool that can be used to measure attachment types in other research, not just her own. The Strange Situation has been used in numerous studies around the world and is still used today. This is a strength because it has allowed psychologists to further their understanding of this important developmental stage.

Types of attachment

Cultural variations in attachment

The Strange Situation has been used in various cultures to assess whether there is a difference in the attachment types of infants compared to what was found in the US.

Research: Van Ijzendoorn

Aim – To investigate whether there are differences in attachment behaviour between and within different countries/cultures.

Procedure – Van Ijzendoorn conducted a meta-analysis of 32 studies of attachment (using The Strange Situation) in 8 different countries. The findings from these 2,000 Strange Situation classifications were analysed.

Findings – Differences between the countries were generally small. Secure attachments were the most common type in every country. Insecure-avoidant attachment was the next most common in all the countries except for Japan and Israel. There was more variation in attachment types within the different countries than between them.

• What was the most common attachment type across all countries?

• Which country had the highest % of insecure avoidant attachment?

• Which country had the highest % of insecure resistant attachment?

Conclusions – It was concluded that secure attachments are the ‘norm’ in all countries suggesting that it is the best for healthy social and emotional development. These similarities also support the idea that attachment is an innate process, as suggested by Bowlby.

Other research into cultural variations in attachment

Japan: 60 middle class Japanese mothers and babies were observed using the procedures of the Strange Situation.  The results were that almost the same proportion of children showed secure attachment as in the US (68% compared to 66%). However, there was a higher proportion of insecure resistant in Japan (32% compared to 12% in the US) and no babies were classified as insecure avoidant in Japan compared to 22% in US.

Germany: Using the Strange Situation, research studies have found that although the majority showed secure attachment (57%), there was a higher percentage of insecure avoidant (35%) compared to in the US (22%).

Evaluation of research into cultural variations in attachment

• A strength of Van Ijzendoorn’s research is the large sample size. Van Ijzendoorn combined the results of studies carried out in different countries (a meta-analysis) which resulted in a total of 2000 infants and their caregivers being analysed. This is a strength because such a large sample size reduces the impact of anomalous results and therefore increases the accuracy of the findings, allowing them to be generalised to a large number of people.

• Some researchers have criticised the accuracy of the conclusions drawn by Van Ijzendoorn. This is because it claims to be investigating cultural variations in attachment whereas it is really comparing the percentage of attachment types in different countries. Since any country will be made up of a number of cultures, it can be considered inappropriate for Van Ijzendoorn to draw conclusions about cultural variations in attachment. As this may not be investigating culture, but country, this research may be argued to lack validity.

• Another criticism is that the research only included 8 countries. Some researchers have argued that this is not a large enough selection of countries to draw conclusions about ‘cultural variations’ based on only 8 countries. Furthermore, 18/32 of the studies were from America. Again, this is means that there is not enough variation to draw large scale conclusions about types of attachments across different cultures.

• Others have criticised the use of the Strange Situation to assess attachment type when researching cultural variations in attachment type.

Firstly, this assessment tool uses controlled observation whereby the mothers are aware that they are being observed and that their interactions are being judged by experts. This could affect the way that they interact with their child. This would, in turn, affect the child’s behaviour too. This is a weakness because the categorisation of the infants’ attachment types may not be accurate.

Secondly, the Strange Situation as a tool to assess attachment type is culturally biased. The Strange Situation does not differentiate between different types of upbringing. Japanese infants rarely leave their mothers so appear to have insecure resistant attachment in the Strange Situation because of their extreme distress when separated. German children are brought up to be self-reliant and independent so appear to have avoidant attachment in the Strange Situation because they do not show much concern. This is a weakness because the responses are strongly influenced by the children’s upbringing rather than being a sign of their attachment type, meaning that the Strange Situation is only a valid way to measure attachment types in cultures similar to the US.

Bowlby’s theory of maternal deprivation        

In the past, it was assumed that a good standard of food and physical care was central to good child rearing. However, Bowlby believed that this wasn’t enough and that children also needed emotional care to ensure normal mental health. He believed that ‘mother love in infancy was as important for mental health as are vitamins and protein for physical health’. Therefore, if children were separated from their caregivers, keeping them fed, safe and warm was not enough.

When a child and their caregiver are separated repeatedly or for prolonged periods of time the attachment becomes disrupted by not being physically together – Bowlby referred to this as maternal deprivation.  Examples of situations causing separation are the infant going to hospital or day care, or the primary caregiver going to work or, going into hospital or prison, or losing contact with the child through divorce, etc. In these situations, the child is deprived of the emotional care that is normally provided by their primary caregiver. Bowlby proposed that this would have long-term consequences in terms of the child’s emotional and social development (eg delinquency, affectionless psychopathy).

However, separation will only have this effect if it takes place during a critical period (before the age of two and a half years of age). Furthermore, deprivation and its long-term effects can be avoided if suitable substitute emotional care is provided.

C   I   M   I   C

C   I   M   I   C

Research: Bowlby’s 44 thieves study

Aim – To investigate the long term effects of early deprivation on social and emotional development.

Procedure – 88 children between 5 and 16 had been referred to a clinic for behaviour problems. 44 of them were thieves and 14 of these were described as being “affectionless psychopaths” (no sense of guilt, no shame and no social conscience). The remaining 44 were emotionally disturbed but had committed no anti-social acts. The children and their parents were interviewed to find out about their early lives.

Findings – Bowlby found that 86% of the thieves who were “affectionless psychopaths” (12 out of the 14) had experienced early, prolonged separations from their mothers compared to just 17 % (5 out of 30) of the other thieves. Only a few (4%) of the children who were not thieves had experienced such separations.

Conclusions – Early separations from the mother are associated with later problems in social and emotional development. Being deprived of emotional care can lead to extremely anti-social behaviour in the form of affectionless psychopathy.

Evaluation of Bowlby’s theory of maternal deprivation

• There is supporting evidence for Bowlby’s maternal deprivation theory.  For example, Bowlby’s 44 Thieves study found a link between early separations from the mother and later problems in social and emotional development. This is a strength because it shows that being deprived of emotional care does have long-term consequences as suggested by Bowlby.

• However, there is evidence that challenges Bowlby’s claim that without substitute emotional care, maternal deprivation inevitably leads to maladjustment. For example, one study looked at children who were under the age of four when they were hospitalised due to tuberculosis. In the TB clinic, there were strict regimes, very little emotional care and only weekly visits from parents. No differences were found in terms of delinquency or problems in forming social relationships between these children and a control group who had not been in hospital. This is a weakness because it suggests that maternal deprivation does not necessarily have harmful effects.

• Furthermore, there is an alternative explanation for the long-term effects seen in Bowlby’s 44 Thieves study. Michael Rutter suggested that the negative effects of separation depend more upon the reasons for being parted from the caregiver rather than separation alone. He found that if separation occurs because of family conflict then behaviour problems are more likely to occur. This challenges Bowlby’s maternal deprivation hypothesis as it suggests that the delinquency and emotional maladjustment may be due more to difficult family circumstances in early life, than simply from maternal deprivation.

• Rutter added a further criticism of Bowlby’s theory of maternal deprivation. Rutter claimed that Bowlby’s theory failed to distinguish between the effects of deprivation (the loss of the primary attachment figure after an attachment bond has formed) and privation (the failure to form any attachment bond). The effects of privation tend to be much more severe than the effects of deprivation. Many of Bowlby’s 44 thieves had moved from home to home during early childhood and so may not have had the opportunity to form an attachment. Privation, rather than maternal deprivation could therefore be the cause of their affectionless psychopathy. This is a criticism as it questions the accuracy of Bowlby’s theory of maternal deprivation.

• Despite criticisms of the maternal deprivation hypothesis, Bowlby’s ideas had a huge impact on the way children were treated and therefore his research has useful practical applications. For example, prior to the 1950s parents were discouraged from visiting their children in hospital as it was believed it would delay their child’s medical recovery. Bowlby’s work led to major changes in policies and practices in the care of children in hospitals such as encouraging parents to stay overnight because it was recognised that this prevents emotional deprivation and promotes quicker recovery through reduced anxiety. This is a strength because research has been used to improve the lives of children and families in the real world.

Romanian orphan studies: effects of institutionalisation

As mentioned previously, Michael Rutter had some issues with Bowlby’s maternal deprivation hypothesis. Rutter suggested that it may be more appropriate to study privation (lack of attachment) rather than deprivation (loss of attachment).

This suggestion is supported by evidence based on longitudinal studies of children raised in institutional care who experienced privation. Institutional care means being brought up in a children’s home or an orphanage rather than within a family. In the past such institutions offered little in the way of individual attention or emotional care so children were unlikely to form attachments. Institutions today try to avoid this; however, in some countries limited resources mean that it still may not be possible to offer the level of emotional care that children need.

Some psychologists believe that not forming an attachment during the first 2 or 3 years of life, means that a child will be unable to form any close relationships at all in the rest of their life and that they would experience permanent emotional, social and cognitive problems. The effect of institutional care can be referred to as institutionalisation.

Events in Romania offered psychologists an opportunity to study the effects of institutional care. From 1966 to 1989, the Romanian government attempted to increase the population by forcing women to have many children. This resulted in many families having children that they couldn’t care for and more than 100,000 orphans being cared for in state-run orphanages.

Romania

Romania

Research: Rutter et al

Aim: to investigate the effects of institutional care on the physical, cognitive and social development of children.

Procedure:

This natural experiment involved the study of 165 Romanian children who spent their early lives in orphanages before being adopted by British families. Some of the children spent longer in the institutions than others (ie were adopted later).

Their physical, social and cognitive development was assessed at ages 4, 6, 11 and 15.

They were compared to a control group of British children adopted in the UK around the same time.

Findings:

At the time of adoption, the Romanian orphans’ development was behind that of the British group. They were smaller, weighed less and had significant cognitive impairment.

Almost all the Romanian children who were adopted before the age of 6 months caught up with the British group in terms of their physical and cognitive development. It was very rare for this group of children to exhibit a disinhibited attachment and their mean IQ score was 102 (100 is average)

Many of the Romanian orphans adopted after the age of 6 months old showed disinhibited attachment (NOT a ‘type’ of attachment but a disorder whereby a child shows behaviours such as attention seeking behaviour towards all adults, lack of fear of strangers, inappropriate physical contact, lack of checking back to the parent in stressful situations, etc) and had problems with peers. This effect was most pronounced in those children who were adopted after 2 years, with much more common incidence of a disinhibited attachment, and an average IQ score of 77.

Conclusions:

This study suggests that institutionalisation can have some short term negative effects.

These effects may persist long term, in particular where children do not have the opportunity to form a substitute attachment.

Where children have the chance to form substitute attachments, especially before the age of 6 months, development may be normal.

Research: Zeanah et al

This study compared the attachment types (using the Strange Situation) of a group of Romanian children aged 12-31 months who had spent about 90% of their lives in an institution to a control group of Romanian children who had never been in an institution.

74% of the control group were assessed as being securely attached compared to only 19% of the institutionalised group.

44% of the institutionalised group were assessed as showing disinhibited attachment compared to less than 20% of the control group.

In summary, Romanian orphan studies have suggested that the effects of institutionalisation can include:

• Disinhibited attachment (Rutter et al and Zeanah et al)

• Problems with their peers (emotional and social problems) (Rutter et al)

• Physical underdevelopment (Rutter et al)

• Cognitive impairment (Rutter et al)

• Lack of a secure attachment (Zeanah)

• Problems with language

Evaluation of research into the effects of institutionalisation

• A strength of this research is that the findings have practical applications. Rutter’s findings have led to changes in adoption policies and practices. For example, in the past mothers were encouraged to feed their babies for some time before giving them up whereas today most babies are adopted in the first week of birth. This is a strength because the research has been used to improve the lives of children and families in the real-world.

• However there are methodological issues with many of these Romanian orphan studies.

One issue is that of confounding variables. The research focus was on the effects of the emotional deprivation experienced in institutions due to the lack of emotional care, but the Romanian orphans were faced with much more than this. They were also subjected to poor physical conditions and a lack of cognitive stimulation. This is a weakness because we cannot confidently say that any long-term consequences found by Rutter or other researchers were due to the lack of early attachment bonds or these other factors.

Another issue is that the sample is unrepresentative of the target population. All of the Romanian orphans in Rutter’s study were adopted but not all institutionalised children are adopted. The adopted orphans may have been chosen by their adoptive families because they were coping better with the effects of institutionalisation and therefore looked happier and healthier. This is a weakness because the conclusion that long-term consequences of institutional care may be less damaging than once thought, might not be true for every child who has experienced institutional care.

• A further criticism is that Rutter conducted a longitudinal study and this type of research often suffers from attrition. Rutter’s original sample of Romanian orphans reduced over time as some participants withdrew from the study. It is possible that the children who withdrew from the study were those who were struggling to form attachments in their families. This leads to a biased sample as the participants that remain do not display a representative reflection of the effects of institutionalisation. This is a weakness because the findings can’t be generalised to all Romanian orphans because we can’t be sure that they would be affected by institutional care in the same way.

The influence of early attachment on childhood relationships, including the role of an internal working model

Bowlby

One feature of Bowlby’s theory of attachment is that infant attachments correlate with later attachments (the continuity hypothesis). He predicted that emotionally secure infants who have formed strong bonds in infancy would go on to be emotionally secure, trusting and socially confident throughout childhood.

The key to this continuity is the internal working model which forms in childhood through interaction with the child’s primary attachment figure. The infant learns what relationships are and how people in a relationship should behave towards one another. This ‘template’ is then applied to future relationships and influences the interactions that we have. Therefore, the internal working model could influence children’s relationships with others.

Kerns (1994): Peer relations in childhood

Kerns found a correlation between attachment type and the quality of peer relationships in childhood. Securely attached children tend to go on to form the best quality childhood friendships. Insecurely attached children tend to have later friendship difficulties.

Sroufe (2005) followed participants from infancy to late adolescence and found continuity between the classification of an early attachment and social competence in later childhood.

Those who were previously classified as securely attached were less isolated, more popular with peers and more empathic as older children than those classified as insecurely attached.

Myron-Wilson and Smith (1998): Bullying

They used standard questionnaires in 196 children aged 7-11 in London.

They found that securely attached children were less likely to be involved in bullying. Insecure avoidant children were most likely to be victims of bullying. Insecure resistant children were most likely to be bullies.

The influence of early attachment on adult relationships, including the role of an internal working model

Bowlby

As stated above, Bowlby’s continuity hypothesis predicted that emotionally secure infants who have formed strong bonds in infancy would go on to be emotionally secure, trusting and socially confident children. He suggested that this would also continue into adulthood.

The child’s internal working model is applied to future relationships and influences the interactions that we have. Therefore, the internal working model could influence an adult’s relationships with friends and romantic partners, relationships with their own children, and their mental health.

Hazan and Shaver

Aim: To investigate the internal working model and the influence of early attachment on adult relationships.

Procedure:

• A ‘Love Quiz’ was placed in a local newspaper of a small American town. Researchers analysed 620 responses from both men and women. The quiz contained three sections. Participants were given descriptions of relationships and asked to indicate how well or poorly each description corresponded to how they felt in romantic relationships. They also answered a variety of specific questions about their romantic experiences. Finally, there were questions about relationships with their parents to determine their attachment type.

Findings:

• A positive correlation between attachment type and love experiences was found. 56% of participants were classified as securely attached. They described their love experiences as positive, happy and trusting and their relationships were more enduring in comparison to insecure-avoidant and insecure-resistant participants. 25% of participants were classified as insecure-avoidant. They tended to reveal jealousy and fear of intimacy.

• Hazan and Shaver also found a positive correlation between the internal working model and attachment type. Securely attached participants tended to have a positive internal working model.

Conclusions: These findings suggest that Bowlby’s concept of the internal working model and the continuity hypothesis are correct and emphasise the importance of healthy, strong attachments being formed in childhood.

McCarthy (1999): Friendships and romantic relationships

Studied 40 adult women who had been assessed when they were infants to establish their attachment type.

He found a correlation between attachment type and maintaining friendships. They also found a correlation between attachment type and intimacy in romantic relationships. Individuals with a secure attachment reported the best friendships and romantic relationships. Individuals with an insecure-resistant attachment reported problems maintaining friendships. Individuals with an insecure-avoidant attachment struggled with intimacy in romantic relationships.

Bailey et al (2007): Parenting

Looked at the attachments of 99 mothers to their babies and to their own mothers. Mother-baby attachment was assessed using the Strange Situation and mother-own mother was assessed using an adult attachment interview.

The majority of the women had the same attachment classification both to their babies and their own mothers. Support was found for the internal working model.

Evaluation: influence of early attachment on childhood and adult relationships, including the role of an internal working model

• There is evidence that challenges the findings obtained by Hazan and Shaver. A study that assessed attachment in infancy and then quality of friendships and romantic relationships up to 20 years later found only very weak correlations (as low as 0.1). This is a weakness because it suggests that we cannot be confident that the conclusions drawn by Hazan and Shaver are accurate.

• Another criticism of research in this area is that it is correlational. For example, Hazan and Shaver found a positive correlation between attachment types and love experiences, not a causal relationship. This is a weakness because we cannot say that love style or the quality of our romantic relationships are directly caused by the internal working model and our early attachment experiences, only that they are linked. There could be factors other than early experiences that influence our later relationships.

• One such factor is an individual’s temperament. The temperament hypothesis is an alternative explanation which suggests that some infants are born trusting and friendly. This is why they become securely attached infants and why they later form secure relationships as children and adults. This is a weakness because it reduces the strength of Bowlby’s continuity hypothesis and conclusions drawn from research in this area.

• A weakness of the research in this area is that it is determinist. It has been suggested that early experiences and attachments have a fixed effect on later childhood and adult relationships. Therefore, if an infant has formed an insecure attachment they are doomed to experience unhealthy relationships as children and adults. This is a weakness because psychologists favour the view that humans have free will – that they can influence their own behaviour and therefore change potential negative outcomes.