Attachment and parenting

Ainsworth & Bell (1970): an affectional tie that one person or animal forms between themselves and another specific one - a tie that binds them together in space and endures over time.

Attachment does not have to be reciprocal. One person may have an attachment to an individual which is not shared. Attachment is characterised by specific behaviours in children, such as seeking proximity to the attachment figure when upset or threatened (Bowlby, 1969).

Key characteristics

• Emotional intensity
• Proximity maintenance
• Specificity of attachment figure
• Distress upon separation

Biological theory of attachment: children come into the world biologically pre-programmed to form attachments with others, as this will help them survive. Lorenz's geese: Lorenz found that geese follow the first moving object they see, during a 12-17 hour critical period after hatching. The process is known as imprinting, and suggests that attachment is innate and programmed genetically. Imprinting has consequences both for short-term survival and in the longer term forming internal templates for later relationships. 

Learning/behaviourist theory of attachment: attachment is a set of learned behaviours. The basis for learning of attachments is the provision of food. An infant will initially form an attachment to whoever feeds it. They learn to associate the feeder (generally the mother) with the comfort of being fed, and through the process of classical conditioning, begin to find the mother comforting.

Attachment is selective - focuses on specific individuals. It involves physical proximity seeking, provides comfort and security, and produces separation anxiety/distress.

Development of attachment

• Pre-attachment (0-2 months): preference for social stimuli, indiscriminate social responsiveness, crying, smiling etc. elicits caregiver behaviour
• Attachment in the making (2-7 months): visual recognition (3 months) across a room (5-6 months). More discrimination between carer and strangers
• Clear-cut attachment (7-24 months): separation protest, stranger wariness
• Goal-corrected partnership (24+ months): increasingly reciprocal, understanding self and others

Security of attachment in 1-2 year olds were investigated using the strange situation paradigm (developed by Mary Ainsworth (1971, 1978), in order to determine the nature of attachment and styles of attachment. Procedure as follows: (1)experiment begins with mother, baby, and experimenter in the room -> (2)mother and baby alone -> (3)stranger joins the mother and infant -> (4)mother leaves baby and stranger alone -> (5)mother returns and stranger leaves -> (6)mother leaves, infant is alone -> (7)stranger returns -> (8)mother returns and stranger leaves.

Children were scored primarily on 4 interaction behaviours directed toward the mother: (1) proximity and contact seeking, (2) contact maintaining, (3) avoidance of proximity and contact, (4) resistance to contact and comforting.

Ainsworth (1970) identified 3 main attachment styles: secure, insecure avoidant, and insecure ambivalent/resistant. She concluded that these attachment styles were the result of early interactions with the mother. A 4th attachment style known as disorganised was later identified (Main & Solomon, 1990)

Secure attachment: securely attached children comprised the majority of the sample in Ainsworth's studies. These children feel confident their attachment figure will meet their needs. They use the attachment figure as a safe base to explore their environment, and seek the AF in times of distress. These children are easily soothed by the AF when upset. Infants develop a secure attachment when the caregiver is sensitive to their signals, and responds appropriately to their needs.

Insecure avoidant: do not orientate to their AF while investigating their environment. Very independent of the AF both physically and emotionally. Don't seek contact with the AF when distressed. These children are likely to have a caregiver who is insensitive and rejecting of their needs, and is often unavailable during times of emotional distress

Insecure ambivalent/resistant: children adopt an ambivalent behavioural style towards the AF. Will exhibit clingy and dependent behaviour, but will be rejecting of the AF when they engage in interaction. The child fails to develop any feelings of security from the attachment figure. They are difficult to soothe when distressed, and are not comforted by interaction with the AF. This behaviour results from an inconsistent level of response to their needs from the primary caregiver

Secure attachments have been shown to predict: curiosity and problem solving, social confidence at nursery, and empathy and independence (Oppenheim et al, 1988). Lack of behavioural problems (Lewis et al, 1984) and decreased risk of anxiety disorders (Warren et al, 1997).

 Evaluation of strange situation:

• Very 'mother based', attachment type commonly not the same with fathers or grandparents. This means it lacks validity, as it doesn't measure the general attachment style, rather an attachment specific to the mother
• Implications that mothers should stay at home
• Role of depression little considered
• Different cultural norms can lead infants to behave differently when confronted with a stranger
• Prediction not always found (McCartney et al, 2004: no prediction of behaviour problems at 3 years)

Attachment theory proposes: carers' sensitive caregiving, not children's endogenous characteristics determine attachment security. Experiences of carer (in)sensitivity are encoded by children into an internal working model encompassing view of the self, others, and the nature of relationships.

The blank slate notion is considered doubtful - nature and nurture and their interplay are very important. Infants come into the world with reflexive, sensory, perceptual, and affective capabilities. This allows them to play a central role in forming their social relationships, including relationships with carers.

Rudimentary ability to reciprocate expressions early (Meltzoff & Moore, 1977). Emotional resonance early too: neonates (under 36 hours old) discriminated by diminished visual fixation on each face over trials and renewed fixations to the presentation of a different face.

Children elicit environmental experience due to their own genetically influenced traits; there is gene-environment interplay.

Biological bases of temperament or social competence - likely that there are biological bases that relate to how easy a child finds it to develop an attachment

Temperament known to affect carer sensitivity (Kochanska et al, 2005). Kagan (1984) suggests that the temperament of the child is actually what leads to the different attachment types. Children with different innate temperaments will have different attachment types. This theory is supported by Fox (1989) who found that babies with an 'easy' temperament (those who eat and sleep regularly, and accept new experiences) are likely to develop secure attachments. Babies with a 'slow to warm up' temperament (those who took a while to get used to new experiences) are likely to have insecure-avoidant attachments. Babies with a 'difficult' temperament (those who eat and sleep irregularly and who reject new experiences) are likely to have insecure/ambivalent attachments

Belsky & Rovine (1987): a child's attachment type is a result of both the child's innate temperament and also how the parent responds to them.