Attachment: Summaries

?
  • Created by: maisyw
  • Created on: 30-05-18 18:43

Interactions: Reciprocity, Interactional Synchrony

An attachment is an emotional bond between two people that grows over time. This leads to e.g. clinging, proximity-seeking, and is for the protection of the infant.

Reciprocity is an interaction between caregiver and infant in which the actions of one elecits a response in the other. This is much like a conversation where each take turns to respond. Sensitivity to recripocity can effect attachment through giving caregivers anticipation of the infants behaviour and be able to appropriately respond. and the behaviour of the infant helps them to understand others and have social relationships.

Interactional Synchrony is a different type of interaction starting from days old which is a tendency to imitate the behaviour, actions, facial expressions or emotions of another person in a co-ordinated way during interaction. 

However, evaluation: there are problems testing the reliability of these interactions because infants are always moving - yawning, tongue out, smiling - and we therefore cannot be certain of whether this is general or intentional behaviours.

1 of 9

Developing: Schaffer's Attachment Stages

This study was conducted with 60 infants from Glasgow middle class families in a longitudinal year long study. The mother was visited monthly to report on responses to separation and intensity of protests as well as who it was towards (e.g. mother/father). It was found for primary attachments it was 65% mother, 5% dad and 30% joint.

The first stage Schaffer identified was the asocial stage lasting up to 2 months. This is where the infant gives similar responses to anything including objects with a preference for social stimuli such as faces and people (interactions).

The second stage is indiscriminate from 4 months where the infant is more social and may distinguish familiar and unfamiliar faces however still find comfort from anyone, and enjoy company - prefer humans.

The third stage is specific attachment from 7 months where a primary attachment may be formed leading to protests as they leave - separation anxiety - and joy on return, as well as stranger anxiety. This is who they look to for comfort and safety. Attachment may depend on quality of relationship through interaction over time spent with infant.

The final stage is multiple attachments. These form after 1 year and specificially shortly after primary attachments are formed. These are known as secondary attachments for example with family members, neighbours, etc. as the infant gains more independence. 

One issue is data collection. Because the mothers were reporting on their infants, social desirability may have played a role upon reports causing them to be unreliable: through lack of reporting e.g. less sensitive responses don't write down (systematic bias), or exaggerations, causing a lack in validity.

Another issue with this study is with the sampling with may be bias: culturally, collectivist cultures would produce different results following more multiple attachments as care is distributed as a group: this was supported amongst meta-analysis (kibbutz). Parental care roles have also changed considerably since this study, meaning the temporal validity may be lower as there are more stay at home fathers - however it is shown that men may lack sensitivity and be a more important role in play aspects.

2 of 9

Animal Studies: Harlow, Lorenz

In Lorenz's study on attachment he divided a group of geese eggs and split them into a control group (where eggs saw mother first) and experimental group (where eggs saw Lorenz first) to test imprinting. He studied which they attached to by putting the geese altogether and separating from the mother, in which the geese divided back into the original groups they had imprinted into. This happened within a critical period of 32 hours and Lorenz concluded this was due to a natural instinct for food and protection.

There is research support for imprinting which supports Lorenz's conclusions demonstrated with other animals. This was copied using chicks and rubber gloves as the first moving object they saw and they imprinted on this, showing a predisposition to imprint on anything to increase chances of survival. This also means the study is replicable - however we  can't generalise to humans: our behaviour is more emotionally/consciously driven.

Harlow countered theories that infants attach for food etc. and studied attachment and comfort. He did this using 8 monkeys split into two groups: a control group where both wire mothers had bottles however one had cloth, and an experimental group where only one had cloth and the other had a bottle. He measured time spent with each monkey and which they'd go to for protection. He found all spent most time with cloth mother, and only a short time feeding before return: this suggests infants attach for comfort.

Here there are also issues with generalising to humans, however evidence suggests this does mirror human behaviour (Schaffer attachment not for food). The long lasting consequences of their early experiences with attachment led to poor parenting and social abnormalities which has affected real life applications and understanding with improving care for infants, which may counter the ethics through protection of harm.

3 of 9

Explanations: Learning Theory

The learning theory explains our behaviour to be learnt through classical  and operant conditioning. This means the route of attachment for infants would start at classical conditioning with an Unconditioned Stimulus of food, and an Unconditioned Response of pleasure. The caregiver would be a Neutral Stimulus involved in feeding the infant and therefore through time and this being repeated consistently, the infant would associate the caregiver with the UCS and would turn into a Conditioned Stimulus that gives a Conditioned Response as the infant associates the caregiver with food.

Operant conditioning would reinforce the attachment, because when the baby has a negative stimulus of hunger, the food would be a positive reinforcement as it reduces this. The food would be a primary reinforcement as this is what gives the reward, and the caregiver would be associated as the secondary reinforcer as they are supplying the food.

However, most research for the learning theory has animal samples which is not as complex as human behaviours and therefore may lack validity and be ungeneralisable.

There is also counter evidence (Harlow) that claims comfort may be a bigger factor than food in forming attachments, and although this is also done with animal sampling, it has further research support through Schaffer's study making it more valid.

4 of 9

Explanations: Bowlby Monotropic

Bowlby suggests we attach for adaptive reasons, for protection and survival. He claims we also have a critical period of 3-6 months in which we should attach unless future attachments will be more difficult. He believed sensitivity to infant behaviours increased attachments: for example social releasers such as smiling or crying to elecit care increased relationships. He also says we form one primary attachment - monotropy - then form secondary attachments.

This primary attachment forms an internal working model that acts as a template for future relationships and expectations for the infant as it grows up. Strong attachments lead to social & emotional competence whereas weaker lead to this being more difficult. This is the continuity hypothesis.

The hypothesis is testible and has research support where infants were followed up to adults and more securely attached individuals had more empathy, popularity and were less isolated. There is also proof of social releasers as when infants are ignored they tend to stop or curl up. However there is mixed evidence for monotropy as Schaffer argues that 30% of infants first attachment was joint, with multiple attachments forming later.

5 of 9

Types: Ainsworth Strange Sit., Cultural Variants

Ainsworth studied types of attachments through looking at stranger anxietyseparation anxietyexploration (secure base) and reunion behaviours in 8 stages.

P1: p & i play. / P2: p sits, i play. (secure base) / P3: s enter. (str anx) / P4: p exit. (sep anx) / P5: p enter, s exit. (reunion) / P6: p exit, i alone. (sep anx) / P7: s enter. (str anx) / P8: p enter. (reunion)

Ainsworth found 3 types of attachment patterns. Type A is Insecure-Avoidant, this is when the infant is more independent at 22%: high exploration, low stranger anxiety, separation anxiety and reunion behaviours. Type B is Secure attachment at 66% which has high exploration and reunion behaviours, however is moderate for stranger and separation anxiety and easy to soothe. The last type is C which is Insecure-Resistent at 12% and more in introverted: low exploration and avoids reunion behaviour, high stranger and separation anxiety. 

This study has high inter-rater reliability with observers agreeing up to 90% to attachment type of infants meaning the study is reliable. However some psychologists claim there should be a Type D insecure-disorganised type as not all the infants fit into the 3/were consistent. This was supported in a meta-analysis finding different results when considering D with 15% fitting.

Cultural variations were studied between 8 countries in a meta-analysis that found little differences between countries: secure was always most common suggesting this is the healthiest type, other than Isreal high type C collectivist as dependent, and Germany high Type A as independance (differences in child rearing: seen as less healthy).

6 of 9

Theory: Bowlby Maternal Deprivation

With deprivation meaning a long term loss of emotional care, separation as short term and privation as never forming an attachments, Bowbly's theory of maternal deprivation explains for ideal mental health we need a good relationship with a carer - not just given food or safety - and if this is broken there will be major emotional effects. If an infant is separated before 2-5 years old (critical period), there is risk of these effects unless the carer is subsituted/infant is adopted.

Bowbly tested this using with 44 thieves and 44 control juveniles that all were emotionally maladjusted. Thieves that showed characteristics of affectionless psychopathy - no affection, shame or responsibilities which allowed them to steal - reported frequent early separations (90%). From the control group 95% reported no separations and none had AP. This suggests that lack of continuous care may cause AP aka emotional maladjustment/disorders.

This study has research support for the long term effects of separation where women were studied on effects from separation. Those separated 25% prior critical period developed mental disorders more compared to a no separation control group 15%, concluding separation = higher vulnerability. The findings from these studies have had real life applications leading to social change in child care in hospitals: used to be separated from parents but now can visit to stop separations.

7 of 9

Orphan Studies: Romanian Institutionalisation

Romanian orphan studies have shown the effects of institutionalisation: how lack of care/attachments in orphanages affect cognitive, physical and social development. This was studied using a sample of 165 Romanian orphans <6 mnths compared to British orphans >6mnths. They were tested regularly to assess the differences in developments: Romanians fell behind unless adopted early, then they could catch up by 4 years old. Therefore it suggests those that had a replacement of a carer had less severe effects of institutionalisation. However those in care for longer showed disinhibited attachments (asocial), underdevelopment physically, cognitively and mentally, as well as turned out to later on have difficulty parenting due to no experience - mirroring Harlow's studys long term effects.

One issue with this study is the validity: when studying Romanian orphans there are multiple other variables affecting the development that won't be in British institutes: for example Romanians had poor conditions, no cognitive stimuli and poor quality of care which may make the study less valid and more of an extreme case. It was also shown in other research that not all children in orphanages are affected the same, some experiences more early experiences of attachments than others or coped differently, meaning there are individual differences.

However the research has positive effects of real life applications improving understanding of the importance of infants being adopted early and cared for: nowadays most adopted within the first week and are able to form strong secure attachments.

8 of 9

Influence: Early / Internal Working Model

The internal working model is a mental model based off our early experiences with attachments so that holds expectations of future relationships. This starts as an infant forms an attachment and learns what a relationship is and how each other behaves, and uses this to predict how other relationhips work. A love quiz study looked at different attachment types attitudes towards love, finding Secure B's concept was trusting, accepting and happy - so Secure had a positive  model to reference their relationships: and led longer relationships than insecurely attached.

The behaviours affected by the internal working model include childhood friendships, with secure having the most social competance due to high expectations that people will be nice and romantic relationships lasted longer for securely attached people with positive expectations. Having a lack of reference through not attaching meant that this model would not develop, leading to poor parenting as shown in Harlow's study and real life difficulties in relating to own children, and mental attachment disorders as a lack of a model meant no expectations on how to form relationships, relate or interact with others.

There is longitudinal study research support which strengthens the validity and shows also that securely attached infants grow to be more socially competent and have better relations, suggesting early attachments does affect later life: however other research argues against this saying not all insecurely attached grow up to have poor relationships and therefore early attachment doesn't determine future relationships. The love quiz study is also correlational and therefore cannot claim early attachment and future relations are a cause and effect as there may be other intervening variables.

9 of 9

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Psychology resources:

See all Psychology resources »See all Attachment resources »