|
AdvantagesGetting Started
- Lorenz supports the evolutionary approach as his geese imprinted on the first thing they saw to be kept safe.
- Sroufe et al. Securely attached infants were rated more popular, socially competent and had higher self esteem as teenagers-supports continuity hypothesis.
- Hodges and Tizard. Supports that once the sensitive period had passed it is difficult to form attachments. Found that children who had formed no attachments had difficulties with peers.
- Tronick et al. African tribe. Different caregivers looking after infants and even breastfeeding, but they still showed one primary attachment. Supports monotrophy
- Schaffer and Emmerson. Children show many attachments, but one primary attachment. Observed that mothers who responded to infants demands and more interaction have a stronger attachment.
- Harlow. Monkeys spend most of their time with the cloth monkey. Needed comfort as well as food.
- Minnesota Longitudinal Study. Followed from infancy to adolescence. Found continuity between early attachment to later behavioral and emotional behaviour
|
Disadvantages
- Thomas and Chess. Children are born with innate temperamental differences
- Rutter et al (1998) contradicts
Bowlby’s idea of a critical period as it shows adoptees can form attachment
after their first birthday. Can form attachment after critical period.
Therefore, it is suggested critical period should be called sensitive period as
attachments are quicker formed then but
can still be formed after this period; just takes longer
- Bowlby’s theory cannot explain
how some children suffer the long term consequences of not being able to form
attachment while other children don’t as they are able to cope with poor
attachment experiences
- Schaffer and Emmerson found that children form many attachments
- Harlow's monkeys bought up in isolation showed no issues in later life even though they did not have one primary attachment, but with each other.
|
Comments
No comments have yet been made