Attachment-

Bp1- Caregiver-Infant interactions-

Reciprocity- This refers to the idea that caregivers and infants interact in a two-way, mutual
interaction. Infants and caregivers are both active contributors in the interaction and are
responding to each other, engaging in mutual responsiveness, eliciting responses from each
other. For example- Smiling- when the caregiver smiles, it will most likely elicit a response of
smiling in the infant too and vice versa.

Interactional synchrony- Two people are said to be synchronised when they carry out the same
action at the same time (simultaneously). Interactional synchrony occurs when mother and
infant interact in such a way that their action and emotions mirror each other.
(MELTZOFF AND MOORE).

Evaluation-

-Reciprocity influences the child’s physical, social and cognitive development. It becomes the
basis for development of basic trust or mistrust, and shapes how the child will relate to the
world, learn, and form relationships throughout life.

-Jaffe et al. said that from birth, babies move in a rhythm when interacting with an adult almost
as if they were taking turns as people do when having a conversation.

-Heimann showed that infants who demonstrate a lot of imitation from birth onwards have been
found to have a better quality of relationship at 3 months. However, it isn’t clear whether the
imitation is a cause or an effect of this early synchrony.

-Many studies involving observation of interactions between mothers and infants have shown
the same patterns of interaction. However, what is being observed is merely hand movements
or changes in expression. It is extremely difficult to be certain, based on these observations,
what is taking place from the infant’s perspective. Is, for example, the infant's imitation of adult
signals conscious and deliberate?

This means that we cannot really know for certain that behaviours seen in mother-infant
interaction have a special meaning.

Observations of mother-infant interactions are generally well-controlled procedures, with both

mother and infant being filmed, often from multiple angles. This ensures that very fine details of
behaviour can be recorded and later analysed.

-Furthermore, babies don’t know or care that they are being observed so their behaviour does
not change in response to controlled observation which is generally a problem for observational
research. This is a strength of this line of research because it means the research has good
validity.
 Stages of attachments- Shaffer and Emerson-
-To investigate the formation of early attachments- the age at which infants become attached,
the emotional intensity of the attachment, who they become attached to, and whether it is
possible to develop multiple attachments.

-A naturalistic observation on 60 Glaswegian infants, for the first 18 months of their lives
(Longitudinal study).

-The babies were visited monthly in their own homes and observed their interactions with their
caregivers.

-Caregivers were also interviewed about the infant’s separation anxiety in everyday situations,
stranger anxiety, as well as the intensity of any protest and who it was directed to.

-Evidence for the development of an attachment was that the baby showed separation anxiety
after a carer left.

Results/Conclusion-

-The first attachment was usually formed between 6 and 8 months of age. The mother was the
main attachment figure for 65% of the children at 18 months old, whilst only 3% of the infants
studied developed a primary attachment to their father. By 18 months old, 31% of the infants
had formed multiple attachments, eg. to Grandparents, siblings etc.

-Attachments were more likely to form with those who responded accurately to the baby’s
signals, not the person they spent most time with. Schaffer and Emerson called this sensitive
responsiveness. The most important factor in forming attachments is not feeds and changes of
the child, but who plays and communicates the most with the child, (Reciprocity). A significant
number of infants form multiple attachments.

Stages- Characteristics of stage- <<

1.Asocial stage (0-6 wks) Smiling and crying, not directed at any Babies respond to people as they would
specific individuals. No apparent respond to balloons, puppets, etc.
recognition of individual people.

2.Indiscriminate Attachment
(6 wks-7mths)
Attention sought from different
individuals. Split into 2 stages-
-6 wks-3 mths- General sociability.
-3-7 mths- Increased distinguishing
between familiar and unfamiliar
people.
Infants distinguish between people and
things and show a general sociability
towards people. As they mature, that
sociability is directed more specifically
towards people they know. Will still allow
strangers to handle them without apparent
distress, provided treated properly.

3.Specific Attachments Strong attachments to one individual. The infant forms a strong emotional bond
Stages- Characteristics of stage- <<

Good attachments to others often with one particular individual, their primary
follow. attachment figure (Not always the mother)
They also show separation protest. Many
children have multiple attachments by 18
months. Stranger anxiety now apparent.

4.Multiple Attachments Strong emotional ties form with other Fear of strangers' responses starts to
major caregivers. (secondary weaken. Mother figure is still the strongest
attachments) and non caregivers attachment.
(similar age children etc).

Evaluation of stage theory-

- Inaccurate methodology- Accuracy of data collection by parents who were keeping daily
diaries whilst clearly being very busy could be questioned. A diary like this is also very
unreliable with demand characteristics and social desirability being major issues. Mothers are
not likely to report negative experiences in their daily write up.

- Low population validity- The Schaffer and Emerson study has low population validity. The
infants in the study all came from Glasgow and were mostly from working class families. In
addition, the small sample size of 60 families reduces the strength of the conclusion we can
draw from the study.

- Supporting research evidence- The stages are supported by the findings found in Shaffer and
Emerson’s studies that showed that the first infant attachments was usually formed in between 6
to 8 months. The mother was the primary attachment figure for 65% of the children at 18
months old, and that 31% of children had formed multiple attachments with grandparents,
siblings etc, supporting the idea of attachments in children being formed in stages. However, it
could be argued that since the theory was based on the findings of the study, there may be bias
from the researchers.

The role of the father-

- Schaffer and Emerson found that the majority of children (65%) became attached to their
mothers first- (Primary attachment figure). However, 75% of children formed secondary
attachments with their fathers by the age of 18 months. Children may be less likely to form this
primary attachment with the father as the father may have spent less time with their infants.
Nonetheless, Lamb reported that studies have shown little relationship between father
accessibility and infant father attachment.

- Grossman carried out a longitudinal study looking at both parents’ behaviour and its
relationship to the quality of the children's attachment into their teens. Role of father- play and
stimulation rather than nurturing.

Fathers as primary attachment figures-

- Fathers tend not to be the primary attachment figure could simply be due to the possibly that
most men may not be psychologically equipped to form an intense attachment because they
lack the emotional sensitivity that women offer, due to Biological or social factors:

1. Biological- The female hormone oestrogen underlies caring behaviour that may create
higher levels of nurturing in women. Thus women may be biologically predisposed to be
the primary attachment figure.
2. Social- In terms of cultural expectations there continue to be sex-sterotypes that affect
male behaviour, such as it thought of as rather feminine to be sensitive to the needs of
others, and that women are expected to be more caring and nurturing so fathers may
simply not feel they should act like that.

Fathers as secondary attachment figures-

- It is argued that fathers, according to research, are more playful, physically active and
generally better at providing challenging situations for their children.

-A father is an exciting playmate whereas mothers are more conventional and tend to read
stories to their children (Geiger).

Evaluation- role of the father-

- Supporting evidence on father’s role in play and not nurturing- There is support for the view
that the father may have the role of playmate as a secondary attachment figure from Grossman
who found that the quality of the father’s play with infants was related to the adolescent
attachments. Whereas, the quality of infant attachment with mothers was related to the
children’s attachment in adolescence. However, there is refuting evidence, to argue that fathers
can be primary attachment figures. Research shows that men in fact do form secure
attachments with their children, as is the case in single (male) parent families. Moreover,
research has found that in two-parent families where the father is the primary caregiver, both
parents often share the role of primary attachment figure, (Frank et al), so, men can be primary
attachment figures but biological and social factors may discourage this.

- It is possible that most men are just not psychologically equipped to form an intense
attachment because they lack the emotional sensitivity women offer. Oestrogen underlies caring
behaviour and there continues to be sex stereotypes which affect male behaviour. However,
Field found that when fathers have the main caregiver role, they adopt behaviours more typical
of mothers therefore the key to attachment is the level of responsiveness, not the gender of the
parent. This may be why it is shown that same sex parent families do not develop any differently
from those in two parent heterosexual families. This would seem to suggest that the father’s role
as a secondary attachment figure is not important. (McCallum and Golombok).

Bp2- Animal studies of attachment-

Harlow- The origins of love-

- Harlow wanted to study the mechanisms by which the newborn rhesus monkeys bond with
their mothers.

- Harlow using rhesus monkeys studied attachment. 2 wired monkeys with different heads one
wire and other wrapped in cloth, were placed with 8 infant monkeys.

- With 4 of the monkeys, the milk was on the cloth covered wire monkeys and the other 4 the
milk was attached to the plain wire covered monkey.

-The findings concluded that the monkeys spent the majority of their time with the cloth covered
monkey which provided contact comfort.

Evaluation-

- It could be argued that the benefits of the research outweigh the costs (the suffering of the
animals). For example, the research influenced the theoretical work of John Bowlby, the most
important psychologist in attachment theory. It could also be seen as vital in convincing people
about the importance of emotional care in hospitals, children's homes and day care.

- Another criticism of Harlow’s study was the confounding variable present within the study. The
heads of the two wire monkeys within Harlow’s study varied significantly which then acted as a
confounding variable with the independent variable which is whether the monkey is clothed or
not.
- The findings of the study lack internal validity due to the drastic difference of the heads of the
monkey. This could then suggest that the monkeys possibly choose one wire monkey over the
other as they preferred the physical appearance of one monkey over the other.

- Both studies were conducted on animals which raises the question on whether it can be
generalised to human behaviour. Though behaviourists believe that animal behaviour can be
generalised to human behaviour the behaviour displayed by humans differ largely due to
conscious decisions. Schaffer and Emerson within their study found that infants were not
predominantly attached to the person that fed them but the person who responded most
sensitively to their needs. This then suggests that Harlow’s study on rhesus monkeys is not valid
in determining attachment as the cognitive level of humans greatly exceeds that of animals and
in this context, monkeys meaning that the findings Harlow found cannot be generalised to
humans.

Lorenz- Imprinting-

- Lorenz used a clutch of gosling eggs and divided them into two groups- with one half being left
with their mother the other was put in an incubator. When the second group of eggs hatched the
first moving thing they saw was Lorenz.

-The group 2 goslings followed Lorenz around. When they put with the other goslings and their
mother, the group 2 goslings left their mother and followed Lorenz. This phenomenon is called
‘imprinting’- whereby bird species that are mobile from birth attach themselves and follow the
first moving object they see.

- Imprinting is restricted to a very definite period of the young animal’s life- The critical period. If
a young animal is not exposed to a moving object during this early critical period the animal will
not imprint.

Evaluation-

- A strength of Lorenz’s study is that its findings have been highly influential within the field of
developmental psychology. For example, the fact that imprinting is seen to be irreversible (as
suggested in Lorenz’s study) suggests that attachment formation is under biological control and
that attachment formation happens within a specific time frame. This is a strength because it
lead developmental psychologists (such as Bowlby) to develop well recognised theories of
attachment suggesting the attachment formation takes place during a critical period and is a
biological process. Such theories have been highly influential in the way child care is
administered today.
-A weakness of Lorenz’s study is that it can be criticised for extrapolation. Lorenz conducted his
study on imprinting on animals- geese. This is a weakness because humans and animals (in
this case, geese) are physiologically different.. The way a human infant develops an attachment
with their primary caregiver could be very different and a much more complex process to the
way geese form an attachment with their primary caregiver, therefore the findings cannot be
generalised.

Bp3- Explanations of attachment-

Learning theory of attachment-

-The learning theory assumes that all behaviour is learned. According to these theories, Infants
form attachments primarily because they need an adult to feed them; they are thus more likely
to become attached to the person who provides them with food.

-These have therefore become known as ‘cupboard love’ theories of attachment. Learning
theory suggests two important processes are involved in learning- classical and operant
conditioning.

Classical Conditioning-

-This is learning to associate two stimuli together, we respond in the same way to both.

-This stems from research from Pavlov who noticed dogs salivate before food arrives.

-He ‘conditioned’ dogs to salivate to a sound of a bell- dogs learn to associate the bell with food.
This occurs in 3 stages.

UCS (food) = UCR (salivation)

UCS (food) + NS (bell) = UCR (salivation)

CS (bell) = CR (salivation)

Classical conditioning explaining attachments-

The stimulus of food (UCS) provides a response of pleasure (UCR). The person providing the
food, usually the mother (NS) becomes associated with the food (UCS) and thus the pleasure
the mother becomes the conditioned stimulus. The food- giver (mother) then becomes the
source of pleasure (CR), independent of whether food is provided or not.
Operant Conditioning-

-This is when we learn through the consequences of our actions.

-This could be through punishment or through reward.

-If we were rewarded for our behaviour we are more likely to repeat the behaviour.

-Rewards are referred to as reinforcement.

-Reinforcement can be positive (a behaviour that has a positive effect is more likely to be
repeated) or negative (escape from some kind of unpleasant behaviour acts as a reward).

How does Operant Conditioning explain attachments-

Dollard and Miller- state that infants, when hungry, enter a drive state, which motivates the infant
to find some way to lessen the discomfort of hunger. When this state is satisfied with food the
infant feels rewards. So the food is a primary reinforcer (avoiding discomfort is the reward) . The
caregivers becomes the secondary reinforcers as they are the source of the food (reward), the
infant therefore becomes attached to the secondary reinforcer (mother) and therefore
attachment itself becomes rewarding. The parents give the child the food due to negative
reinforcement (stop baby crying). These principles hold a similar presumption, that food is a
predominant factor in the development of attachment relationships.

Evaluation of learning theory of attachment-

-Supporting research- Schaffer and Emerson found less than half of infants had a primary
attachment to the person who usually fed them, which shows there is supporting evidence of
food being a reinforcer of attachments. However, there is also conflicting research to the SLT of
attachment. Harlow’s study suggests that food is not the associating factor in attachment, rather
it is comfort. This is supported by the fact that infant monkeys were attracted more to the cloth
wired mothers than the ones with food, suggesting comfort is the basis of attachment, rather
than food. However, it could be argued that, with Harlow’s study, as well as many other animal
studies, like that of Lorenz, there is an issue of extrapolation, compared to those studies on
human infants, like Shaffer and Emerson, which may have higher generalisability, and reliability.
(CC).
- The Learning theory can also be argued to be reductionist in explaining attachment- The
learning theory provides useful information as it explains that infants learn through association
and reinforcement. However, it is reductionist in this opinion, failing to take into account the
attention and responsiveness from the caregiver that allows an attachment to be created. As
well as that, the learning theory of attachment puts the caregiver giving the child food at the
forefront of attachment relationships, which is often the mother in early childhood (in this critical
period), this theory may therefore explain the attachments made with the mother and infant,
(often the primary attachment), but it does not explain the secondary attachments that are
created as a result of the infant interactions with secondary attachment figures, eg. with siblings,
Grandparents.

-In contrast to the learning theory, which focuses entirely on nurture, Bowlby’s evolutionary
theory or the theory of imprinting by Lorenz, both suggest that attachments between an infant
an and the mother are not learnt, rather exist from the moment of birth, explaining the
development of birthing practices such as skin to skin contact between the mother and infant.
Another opposing argument explains attachments between an infant and its mother as being
innate, as the child is born with an innate predisposition and want/need to learn an attachment,
suggesting the possibility if both theories can be combined to explain a more holistic explanation
to attachment, as compared to the learning theory alone.

Bp4- Bolwby’s Evolutionary theory-

-The basic principle of this theory is that attachment is ‘innate and adaptive’.

-Bowlby’s theory may be considered as an evolutionary perspective as it encourages the belief

that attachment behaviours occur to promote survival. Newborns are completely helpless
therefore, they are pre-programmed to behave in a way that ensures survival. For example, an
attachment relationship will keep them safe from danger from predators.

Main Features of Bowlby’s Theory-

-Innate Proximity- Bowlby saw the key of attachment to be proximity. This is a two way process,
with both the infant and caregiver genetically programmed to maintain proximity. Both develop
behaviours and characteristics which keep them physically close, and adverse effects to
distance, eg. Human separation leads to feelings of anxiety in both the infant and caregiver,
therefore maintaining proximity. From the physical bond/proximity comes the emotional bond,
between the infant and the caregiver, which Bowlby explained to be essential for the
development of the child.
-Monotropy- Bowlby believed that human infants have innate tendencies to become attached to
one particular person- Monotropy. Bowlby recognised that infants eventually form many
attachments- to parents and siblings, grandparents etc. However, he believed the primary
attachment relationship was essential for the healthy development of the child.

-Internal Working model- Bowlby believed that a child forms a mental representation of their
relationship with the mother, providing a model or template for what future relationships are like.
He called this model the internal working model, developing from the primary attachment
relationship. For example- If a child experiences a warm, close relationship with their mother,
they will tend to expect and develop similar relationships in later life. The primary attachment
relationship also provides a model for the child’s self image. For example, if the mother is cold
and rejecting, the child will tend to develop a negative self image and experience low self
esteem and lack of worth. This may lead to unsatisfactory relationships in later life, in which they
expect poor treatment or treat others in that way. More importantly, the internal working model
affects the child’s later ability to be a parent themselves. People tend to base their parenting
behaviour on their own experiences of being parented. This explains why children from
functional families tend to have similar families themselves.

-Critical Period- Bowlby believed there was a critical period for a monotropic relationship being
established. For most children, it takes place during their first 12 months. Mothering delayed
until after 2 ½ - 3 yrs is useless.

-Social releasers- Bowlby suggested that babies are born programmed to behave in ways that
are encouraged and provide attention from adults. These behaviours may include smiling,
gesturing etc. Named social releasers according to Bowlby, as their purpose is to release
instinctive parenting behaviours in adults.

-Continuity hypothesis- This proposes that individuals who are strongly attracted in infancy
continue to be socially and emotionally component whereas infants who are not strongly
attached have more social and emotional difficulties in childhood and adulthood.

Evaluation-

-Research support for the Internal working model- Mary Ainsworth's Strange Situation study
provides evidence for the existence of the internal working model. A secure child will develop a
positive internal working model of itself because it has received sensitive emotional care from its
primary attachment figure. An insecure-avoidant child will develop an internal working model in
which it sees itself as unworthy because its primary attachment figure has reacted negatively to
it during the sensitive period for attachment formation.

-Practical application- It is widely acknowledged through the evidence of a critical period in

Bowlby’s research, that attachments should take place early in life. This has an effect on the
practices of, who try to place children with families as early as possible so that healthy
attachments can be made and there are no negative effects on the child’s relationships made in
the future- Internal working model.

-Feminisms would argue that mothers are blamed for future relationship issues in the child’s
lives, and this pushes mothers to make decisions pertaining their lifestyle that may in fact have
more negative effects on the child, eg. causing the mother to not return to work when a baby is
born, as they may fear of unhealthy attachments being made, if the mother returns to work in
the critical period, as it is not yet over. This may have negative effects a the mother may in fact
need to go to work to earn the means to care for and provide for her child, especially that of
single working mothers. This theory therefore can be argued to be pessimistic and accusatory to
mothers not spending all their time with their child, especially during the critical period. (ethical
implications). (Also blames mother for irreversible damage to the child’s future and their
relationships (Hazen and Shaver).

Bp5- Ainsworth’s strange situation-

-Controlled observation on 106 Middle class American infants (12-18 months) and their
mothers.

- Ainsworth observed the infants with their mothers in a set of predetermined set activities.
Observing 4 categories especially- The child’s willingness to explore, their separation anxiety
when their mother is not in the room, reunion behaviour when the mother comes back into the
room and finally stranger anxiety when a stranger enters the room. 5 behaviours- Proximity and
contact-seeking behaviour, contact maintenance with mother, proximity and contact-avoiding
behaviour, contact resistance with mother and search behaviours.

-Ainsworths’ observations (through a one-way mirror) caused her to create a 3 group

classification for the infants-

Behaviour of child-

Type- Separation Stranger Reunion Willingness to

anxiety- anxiety- behaviour- explore-
 B-Secure (70%) Some distress, Moderate Enthusiastic high
easy to soothe.

A- Avoidant Indifferent low low Avoid contact high

(15%)

C- Resistant Distressed high High Sees + reject low

-It shows that most American children are securely attached and that infants vary in the way
they behave, showing individual differences which may be related to the behaviour of the
caregiver.

Types of attachment-
Secure attachment- Infants are upset when left alone by mother, Infants are happy when mother
returns and seeks contact with the mother, Infants avoid the stranger when alone but are
friendly when mother is present and finally, the infants use the mother as a safe base to explore
their environment. (Mother meets the emotional needs of the infant).

Insecure avoidant- Infants are unconcerned by the mothers absence when she leaves the room,
Infants show little interest when reunited with the mother, infants are strongly avoidant of mother
and stranger, showing no interest in interacting with either. The stranger is treated similar to the
mother (does not seek contact). (Mother ignores the emotional needs of the infant).

Insecure resistant- Infants are clingy to their mothers in new situations and are not willing to
explore, they are extremely disturbed when left alone by their mother, cannot be comforted by
the stranger and will not interact with them, treat the mother and stranger very differently. When
the mother returns, they are pleased to see her and go to her for comfort (seek) but cannot be
comforted and show signs of anger towards her (reject). (Mother sometimes meets the needs of
the infants and sometimes ignores their emotional needs- inconsistent behaviour).

Evaluation of the stranger situation-

-Ainsworth’s observations were done in a very controlled manner, with replicable conditions, this
means that her study has high internal reliability, as measured using inter rater reliability.
Ainsworth found .94 agreement between the raters suggesting the study is a consistent one with
high reliability. However, it can be argued that the study has issues of ethnocentrism and that
the results cannot be generalised to all cultures. Although the Germany study may have had
similar results. Ainsworth’s study suggested that secure attachment styles are the best types of
attachment, however this may not be true of all cultures and may just be that of the American
culture. For example, in more familistic cultures (compared to American individualistic culture)
such as Japanese and Indian cultures, the inconsistent resistant attachment style may be more
common, and secure attachment styles may not be the best.

-Ainsworth’s research is applicable in many parenting practices- This is because Ainsworth’s

study suggests that the mothers behaviour in the first place and her attending to the infants
emotional needs is what causes the attachment style. This means that parents are
recommended to be more responsive and communicate positively with their child,
understanding what they need and responding well to their needs, not letting the child sort it out
for themselves. This research has also evoked interest of other psychologists such as Hazen
and Shaver, who have tried to research the link between early attachment types and future
relationships. Research like Ainsworth, therefore, is useful in parenting, but also in
understanding people a lot better.

-The validity could be argued to be flawed in the research- Ainsworth’s study lacks ecological
validity, as it takes place in a lab, or a setting unfamiliar to the child and caregiver, this means
the events set out are also artificially set and can be argued to great unnatural behaviour from
both the infant and caregiver. As well as that, the caregiver is aware that they are being
observed, although it may just be a one way mirror that they are observed through. This may
elicit demand characteristics, from the caregiver, acting in a way that may subconsciously make
them seem better than they may be.

-Ethical Issues- The strange situation experiment involves putting the baby in a stressful and
distressing situation which makes it ethically questionable. The study also has ethical
implications for the participants, labelling them in certain ways and perhaps even attaching
stigma to the infants, which could in fact affect their future relationships (SFP). 20% of infants
cried intensely. Use with caution.

Bp6- Cultural variations in attachment- Van Ijzendoorn and kroonenberg-

-Meta-analysis of 32 ss studies in 8 countries. Calculated an average of each attachment type

in each country.

-Western cultures- UK,USA, Germany, and non-western cultures- Japan,China and Israel.

-Secure attachment was the most common attachment type in all 8 nations. Insecure
attachments had a significant distribution. In western cultures, the dominant insecure type.

-In China, both were equally distributed.

-1.5 times greater variation within cultures than between cultures- one culture may comprise of
many subcultures.

-Global pattern cultures is similar to the US- secure attachment is the norm, the most common
form of attachment, supporting the idea that secure attachment is the best for healthy social and
emotional development.

-Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg suggest that cross-cultural similarities might be explained by
the effects of mass media (eg. tv and media), which spreads ideas about parenting so that all
children across the world are exposed to similar experiences.

-Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg report that differences in the attachments within a culture are
far greater than those found between cultures.

-They concluded that it is wrong to think of everyone in a culture having the same practices.
Within a culture, there are many subcultures, all with their own ways of rearing children. There
may be ethnically or racially based but may also be class specific. For example, in the UK,
middle classes may have different child-rearing techniques to the working class. The upper
classes traditionally leave child rearing to nannies or au pairs.

-Israel- Secure- 64%, Avoidant- 7%, Resistant- 29%.

In Israel, children are raised in a Kibbutzim, which encourages a traditional system of communal
child-rearing. The kibbutz is a self-contained community which is like a large extended family,
children are thus seen as ‘children of the kibbutzim. Therefore, children have little contact with
strangers, which would account for the high levels of insecure-resistant children. Show extreme
anxiety upon the appearance of the stranger in the SSC, as they are not used to strangers.

-Japan- Secure- 68%. Avoidant- 0%, Resistant- 32%

In Japan, children never leave their mother’s side until they are a few years old, accounting for
the high level of insecure resistant children. The child would be angry for the mother leaving
them but would still go to them to seek comfort (simultaneously seeking and rejecting comfort).
Avoidant behaviour is seen as being rude and therefore, discouraged. As the child-rearing
practices do not encourage separation when the mother leaves the child in the SSC there are
extreme levels of distress shown.

Evaluation-

-imposed etic…
-With Meta-analysis, the information is easily accessible. If this analysis is created by others
already, so the information is easy and quick to collect, as it is often quantitative. This makes the
validity of the study high.

- Applying Strange Situation procedures and behavioural categories is ethnocentric –

Cross-cultural research using the Strange Situation judges and categorises infant behaviour
according to behavioural categories that were developed following observations of middle-class
American infants. This means that when researchers interpret non-American infant behaviour, it
is being judged against an American standard. Eg. an infant exploring the playroom by
themselves would be classed as avoidant based on American standards but is valued as
reflecting independence in Germany.

-The study was not globally representative -Van Ijzendoorn & Kroonenberg recognised that data
from less Western-oriented cultures were required to establish a more global perspective
attachment classifications, pointing out that Africa, South America, and Eastern European
socialist countries were not represented

-There is significant variation of attachments within cultures: Van Ijzendoorn looked at multiple
studies in each country, and found that every study produced different levels of each attachment
classification. This intra-cultural variation suggests that it is an oversimplification to assume all
children are brought up in the same way in a particular country.

Bp7- Bowlby’s theory of Maternal Deprivation-

- Bowlby’s theory of Maternal Deprivation suggests that continual disruption of the attachment
between the infant and the primary caregiver could result in long-term cognitive, social and
emotional difficulties, that would be irreversible and permanent.

- He argued that the first 2.5 years / 30 months of life are the critical period, which are critical
years in which the presence of a primary attachment figure is very crucial to the development of
the child. If a child underwent prolonged separation from the mother at this age, with the
absence of suitable substitute care (eg. from a nanny), then the emotional deprivation caused
by this prolonged separation would inevitably cause psychological damage.

-ADDIDDAS- Effects of maternal deprivation- Either emotional or intellectual- Aggression,

Delinquency, Dwarfism, Intellectual retardation, Depression, Affectionless psychopathy and
social maladjustment.

Bowlby- The 44 Juvenile thieves-

-Opportunity sample of 88 boys completed IQ tests and had a psychiatric assessment.

-Unstructured interviews were conducted with 44 adolescents who had been referred to the
Tavistock child guidance clinic where Bowlby worked because they’d be stealing.

-They were matched with a control group of 44 ‘emotionally disturbed’ adolescents who had not
committed any crimes.

-He interviewed the parents from both groups to state whether their children had experienced
separation during the critical period and for how long.

-17 of the thieves had experienced frequent separations from their mothers before the age of 2,
compared with 2 in the control group.

-14 of the thieves were diagnosed as ‘affectionless psychopaths’- they didn’t care about how
their actions affected others. 12 out of 14 had experienced separation from their mothers.

Separations from mother before the age of 2

Frequent None- Total-

Affectionless thieves- 12 (86%) 2 (14%) 14

Other thieves- 5 (17%) 25 (83%) 30

All thieves- 17 (39%) 27 (67%) 44

Control Participants- 2 (4%) 42 (96%) 44

-Early separations are linked to affectionless psychopathy. Ie. The lack of continuous care may
well cause emotional maladjustment or other mental disorders. Bowlby concluded that the
reason for the anti-social behaviour and emotional problems in the thieves was due to maternal
deprivation.

Evaluation of Bowlby’s theory of Maternal Deprivation-

- Bowlby's Maternal Deprivation is supported by Harlow's research with monkeys. He showed

that monkeys reared in isolation from their mother suffered emotional and social problems in
older age. The monkey's never formed an attachment (privation) and as such grew up to be
aggressive and had problems interacting with other monkeys. (cc- Issues of extrapolation +
generalisability).

- Due to Bowlby’s theory a number of real-life applications have been made: In orphanages now
they have to take account of emotional needs, and fostered children have to be kept in one
stable home rather than being moved around. In maternity units, mothers are now allowed to
spend more time with their babies as well as if they have a sick child the visiting hours in the
hospital have been extended, and parents can even stay overnight if they wish.

-Privitation vs deprivation- Critics such as Rutter have also accused Bowlby of not distinguishing
between deprivation and privation – the complete lack of an attachment bond, rather than its
loss. Rutter stresses that the quality of the attachment bond is the most important factor, rather
than just deprivation in the critical period.

-Bowlby assumed that physical separation on its own could lead to deprivation but Rutter
argues that it is the disruption of the attachment bond rather than the physical separation. This
is supported by Radke-Yarrow (1985) who found that 52% of children whose mothers suffered
from depression were insecurely attached. This figure raised to 80% when this occurred in the
context of poverty (Lyons-Ruth,1988).

Bp8- Romanian orphan studies- Effects of Institutionalisation-

-The theory of maternal deprivation predicted long-term negative effects result from early
deprivation. This can be studied in the context of institutionalisation care. An institution refers to
that which is created for a particular task, such as housing and caring for children awaiting
adoption, or caring for mentally ill patients, etc. It entails the person being housed there for long
periods of time.

-Maternal deprivation research has turned to orphan studies, which are such circumstances that
are unethical to replicate, but very insightful to understand normal and possibly abnormal
attachment patterns and the effects on later relationships in the child’s life.

-In the 1900s, the former Romanian president required all women to have 5 children, however
many could not afford to provide for all their children, and so, many ended up in huge, poorly
kept orphanages.

Rutter et al- English and Romainian Adoptees-

-Natural, longitudinal study on 111 Romanian orphans that were adopted into British families.

-3 groups- Adopted before the age of 6 months, between 6 months and 2 years and after the
age of 2 (late adoptees).

-Tested at ages 4,6,11 and 15 to access their cognitive and social development.
-Control group- 52 British children adopted in the UK before the age of 6 months.

The researchers found that:

-At the time of adoption, the Romanian orphans lagged behind their British counterparts on all
measures of cognitive, social and physical development. They were smaller, weighed less and
were classified as mentally retarded.

-By the age of 4, some children had caught up to their British counterparts, true for most of the
children adopted before the age of 6 months.

-Subsequent follow-ups have confirmed that significant deficits remain in a substantial minority
of individuals adopted after 6 months- showing disinhibited attachments and had problems with
peer relationships.

-Disinhibited attachment- ‘a pattern of attention-seeking behaviours with a relative lack of

selectivity in social relationships’ - making inappropriate physical contact and seeking attention
from everyone, even strangers, without checking back to their parent in a stressful situation.

-This suggests that Long-term consequences may be less severe than one thought if children
have the opportunity to form attachments. However, when children do not form attachments
(continuously failing to do so) then the consequences are likely to be severe.

Evaluation-

- Practical Applications- The use of such studies in orphans is to help us to better understand
the lives of those kept in the care of such institutions. The study into Romanian orphans outlines
the importance of putting children into care as early as possible to reduce the effects of
disinhibited attachments on the social, physical and cognitive development of the child. At one
point in time, children were put up for adoption once they had passed the sensitive period to
make healthy attachments, creating negative effects for their futures. Nowadays, children are
usually adopted within the first week of their birth, which means adoptive mothers (+other family
members) are able to create as secure attachments as non-adoptive families would.

-Research would suggest that those children that do not create a secure primary attachment
within the critical period would be irreversible and unable to recover, causing long-term
psychological issues, however, this is not true for all children who experience institutionalisation.
In most studies, like that of Bowlby’s studies in maternal deprivation, not all children are as
strongly affected by the deprivation as others were in the study. Ie. There are individual
differences. It can be argued some children were better treated in the institutions as they may
have treated the staff better, eg. They smiled more and may have gotten special attention as a
result of this, contributing to some small but significant early attachment experiences. As well as
that, Bowlby et al’s study of children hospitalised with TB, showed that there were individual
differences in the way children coped, with maternal deprivation.

-Increased internal validity- In most institutional studies, the children involved are often those
with existing trauma or grieving loss before institutionalisation, this means there are confounding
variables that could affect the research outcome/results, ie. The way the children are attached to
their primary/secondary caregivers. It would be difficult to study the effects of institutionalisation,
in addition to such confounding variables. However, in the case of this study on Romanian
orphans, there is no pre existing confounding variables and institutionalisation is the only
affecting variable on the children’s abilities to create secure attachments. This means that the
study creates highly reliable data/results.

-Romanian orphans are not typical of usual institutions- Although much useful data about
institutionalisation has come out of Romanian orphan studies, it is possible that conditions were
so bad that results cannot be applied to understanding the impact of better quality institutional
care or indeed any situation where children experience deprivation. For example, Romanian
orphanages had particularly poor standards of care, especially when it came to forming any
relationship with the children, and extremely low levels of intellectual stimulation. This is a
limitation of the Romanian orphan studies because the unusual situational variables mean the
studies may after all lack generalisability, especially with institutes existing today of much higher
standards. (Lacks temporal validity).

Bp9- The influence of early attachment on later relationship-

- Bowlby’s theory of attachment proposed that early attachments have lifelong consequences.

-He proposed that the quality of an infant’s primary attachment would have a positive correlation
with the quality of later attachments.

-The key to this correlation is the internal working model which is acquired through interactions
with the child’s primary attachment figure and then applied to subsequent relationships with
friends, boyfriends, long-term partners and eventually their own children.

The role of the Internal Working Model-

-Bowlby suggested that a child having their first relationship with their primary attachment figure
forms a mental representation of their relationship.
-This internal working model acts as a template for future relationships.

-The quality of the child’s first attachment is crucial because this template will powerfully affect
the nature of their future relationships.

-A child whose first experience is of a loving relationship with a reliable caregiver will tend to
assume that this is how relationships are meant to be.

-They will then seek out functional relationships and behave functionally within them, ie. without
being too uninvolved or being too emotionally involved. (Type A behaviour) or being too
controlling and argumentative (Type C).

-A child with bad experiences of their primary attachment will bring these bad experiences to
bear on later relationships.

-This may mean that they struggle to form relationships in the first place or they may not behave
appropriately when they have them, displaying Type A or C behaviour towards friends and
partners.

Relationships in later childhood-

Friendships- The Minnesota child-parent study found continuity between early attachment and
later emotional/social behaviour.

-Individuals who were classified as securely attached in infancy were highest rated for social
competence later in childhood, were less isolated and more popular and more empathetic.

-This can be explained in terms of the internal working model because securely attached infants
have higher expectations that others are friendly and trusting, and this would enable easier
relationships with others.

Bullying- Bullying behaviour can be predicted by attachment type.

-Wilson and Smith assessed attachment type and bullying involvement using standard
questionnaires in 196 children aged 7-11 from London

-Secure children were very unlikely to be involved in bullying.

-Insecure-avoidant children were the mostly likely to be victims and insecure-resistant children
were most likely to be bullies.

Relationships in Adulthood-
Parenting- Internal working models also affect the child’s ability to parent their own children.

-People tend to base their parenting style on their internal working model so attachment type
tends to be passed on through generations of a family.

-Bailey et al considered 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
attachment was assessed using an adult attachment interview.

-The Majority of Women have the same attachment classification both to their babies and their
own mothers.

-Harlow’s research with monkeys also demonstrated a link between poor attachment and later
difficulties with parenting.

Romantic relationships- Hazen and Shaver- Demonstrated a link between early attachment type
and later relationships. Individuals who were securely attached had longer-lasting romantic
relationships.

Hazen and Shaver- The Love Quiz-

-Used a questionnaire- called ‘The Love quiz’ to examine current attachment experiences and
earlier adult and childhood attachment history

-Newspaper ad- 620 people responded.

The researchers found-

-Researchers classified 56% of participants as having secure adult attachments. They were
more likely to have balanced and longer- lasting romantic relationships. They describe their
romantic relationships as positive, happy, friendly and trusting.

-19% of the participants were classified as insecure-resistant. They reported they experience
love as a compulsive commitment. They constantly worried about their partner’s love because
they feared they would abandon them.

-The final 25% of participants were insecure-avoidant people who feared closeness and did not
believe they needed love to be happy.

-Hazen and Shaver found that the prevalence of the 3 attachment styles were the same in
adulthood as in childhood. In addition, the results supported the concept that the internal
working model has a lifelong effect.
-The research was the first to support the continuity hypothesis that our attachment styles in
childhood predict our romantic relationship style in adulthood.

Evaluation of research into the influences of early attachment-

-Research support for the continuity hypothesis/internal working model- for the idea that a
person will experience the same bond/attachment they experience with their caregiver, with a
partner in the future. Hazen and Shaver found that those that were securely attached infants
had a more functional and secure relationship, viewing their relationship in a positive and
friendly light. Whereas, those that were insecurely avoidant or resistant infants, had more
obsessive viewpoints to their relationships (resistant) and would avoid closeness as a result of
the negative fears and feelings they held of their relationships (avoidant). This research
alongside many more studies, supports the idea of the Internal working model,being created
from an infants’ primary attachment, affecting all future relationships, eliciting certain behaviours
from them and creating problems of intimacy and avoidance in these relationships.

-Contradictory evidence- One weakness of internal working model is that there is contradictory
evidence.Internal working models predict that attachment type in infancy is usually the same as
that characterising the person’s future relationships.However Zimmerman (2000) accessed
infant attachment type and adolescent attachment to parents.There was very little relationships
between quality of infant and adolescent attachment.This is a limitation because it is not what
we would expect if internal working models were important in development therefore reducing
the reliability of the internal working model.

- This research can be argued to be deterministic/ reductionist- This research suggests that very
early experiences of attachment have a fixed/irreversible effect on later adult relationships, and
therefore, those children that are insecurely attached before the age of 1, or those who have
disinhibited attachments are destined to have emotionally unsatisfactory relationships as adults.
However, researchers have found plenty of instances where participants were experiencing
happy adult relationships despite not having been securely attached as infants. Simpson et al
conclude, the research does not suggest that ‘an individual’s past unalterably determines the
future course of his/her relationship’

-Correlational research- The research linking the internal working memory/early attachment with
later relationship experiences is correlational (to find the link between the two variables), often
with a hypothesis created beforehand, rather than experimental. This means we cannot identify
cause and effect of eg. love styles and attachment styles, rather it is more likely that both
variables are affected by another variable, eg. innate temperament (Kagan-temperament) An
infants’ temperament is likely to affect the way the parent responds, which may be a determining
factor in infant attachment types. The individuals’ temperament may also explain their future
relationships (whether healthy or even unhealthy). This intervening variable may cause more of
an effect on attachment styles, and future relationships than their effect on each other alone.
This discounts the usefulness of such research.