Attachment

Attachment is a close emotional relationship between two people characterised by a desire to maintain proximity and mutual affection. Behaviours include seexing proximiting to caregiver, distress on separation from caregiver, general orientation of behaviour to caregiverand plesure when reuinted to caregiver.

Shaffer &Emerson did longnitudinal study, 60years &measured SP and SA. 4 stages. Separation Protest: amount of distress caused when primary caregiver leaves             Stranger Anxiety: amount of distress when theyre approached by stranger.                        
Pre-attachment phase(0-3m): 6 weeks they treat humans and objects differently by smiling.
Indiscriminate phase(3-7m): they distinguish between un/familar but are happy with anyone.
Discriminate phase(7-9m): know between strangers and show distress if alone(object permanence), have 1 strong attachment and fearful of strangers.                                    Multiple attach phase(9+): develop attachements to others but the first is the strongest

By 18m: 13% had 1 attach, 31% had 5+ attach, 65% had mum as 1st, 30% had joint attach. High EV. Data was collected by mums so subject to bias. E.g. Carpenter showed 2week babies knew mums face and voiced.

Strange Situation by Ainsworth &Bell found 3 attchments. CG, I and R enter. CG and I left to explore. S enters, talks to CG and tries I. CG leaves, S tries to talk to I. CG enters comforting I. CG & S leave, I alone. S enters and tries to interact. S leaves and CG enters and comforts.

Type A: Insecure Avoidant: Ignore caregiver, no distress when cg leaves and ignores upon return. Comforted by anyone but distress if alone. Cg and S treated the same.

Type B: Securely Attached: Play happily around cg, use cg as a safe base. Cry if cg leaves and seeks immediate comfort upon return. Calmed easily, wary of strangers and accepts some comfort.

Type C: Insecure Resistant: Fussy and wary even when cg present, cry the most, hard to use cg as a base, distress when cg leaves and seeks comfort but is resistant and angry. Resists strangers and ambivalent to cg.

Situation was artifical so distort behaviour, demand characteristics and biased. 3 catergories is oversimplified as someone fits into two catergories but one more than other. E.g. Solomon said theres disorganised attachment as not all showed consistent type.

Vaz Ijzendoorn did met-analysis of 32 studies into attachment to see if culture attach is same. Looked at relationship of mum and child under 2 years of age. Looked at 8 countries, both collectivist and individualistic cultures. He found secure atttachment was the most common in all 8 but distribution of IR and IA varied. Western cultures had IA and Non-Western was IR. Variations in cultures were wider than in countries.

Similarities show cg and i interactions have universal characteristics so partly innate. Cultural variations are due to child rearing practices and sub cultural differences eg. social class.

It doesnt tell us why there are these patterns, we can speculate but no concrete grounding. May be culturally biased as strange situation was from USA so culturally biased as in Japan showing IR is a good thing unlike USA. Only focused on up to 2 years so no info about elder.

Sagi did strange situation in US, Israel, Japan and Germany. USA: 70S, 20R, 10A. Israel: 60%S, 35R, 5A. This is as kids in Kibbitzu didnt interact with strangers thats why alot were R. Japan: 70S, 30R, 0A. Mothers rarely left their kids which is why none were avoidant. Germany: 40S, 50R, 10A. Kids encouraged to be independent, being SA wasnt rewarded.

All behaviour is learned than being innate or inherited. Classical and Operant Conditioning.

Classical: Learnt by association. Infants are born with reflex reponses. Stimulus of e.g. food is an unconditioned stimulus, this produces the reflex of e.g. pleasure. The person e.g. providing food is an neutral stimulus and become associated and becomes conditioned stimulus that produced a conditioned response.

Operant: Learnt by reinforcement. Positive: A rewards given when desired behaviours shown. Negative: An aversive stimulus thaat continues until desired behaviours displayed. Punishment: An averisve stimulus when shown undesired behaviour.              
All humans possess human desires or motives and were driven to satisfy them. Stimuli that satisfy them are primary reinforcers. People who provide the primary reinforcer are the secondary reinforcer. E.g. infants seek to the secondary as theyre the cg who is a reward to the I now.

Learning theory is a reductioninst, explains behaviour oversimplisticly. E.g. Harlow separated monkeys on birth and put in cages, one wire mesh for milk and cloth for comfort. Always cling to cloth for comfort than food so its not as important. It was unethical as deliberate distress and cant generalise. E.g. Schaffer found babies attach to players.

Bowlby combined Freuds views of maternal care and ethologist. Ethologist had been documenting imprinting. He thought that forming attach was instinctive aswell. Principle was that attachment is innate and adaptive behaviour is in parents and children. Attachments evolved and increased chances of survival, true in environment evolutionary adaptation. Attachement in infants promote safety, emotional relationships(internal working model) and a secure base for exploration.

Social releasers, babies use them to get humans to respond to them. Humans dont like them so they alleviate the distress. Parents have instincts to protect their children. Montropy is when babies instinctivly form one attachment which is more important than all others. Must be formed before sensitive period. First attachment is a model of how loving we are and trustworthy others are. Early attach affect adult relationships, comonity hypothesis.

Tizard and Hodges found if adopted after 4 years you can still form relationship. Bowlby cant generalise birds and humans and cant test argument of evolution of attachment. Schaffer and Emerson found multiple attachments are more common than single ones. Hazan found attach as a kid predict relationships: secure as a kid then parents divorce cause insecure.

Separation: absence of caregiver for a short period of time                                                Deprivation: loss of a caregiver for a prolonged period of time

PDD model by Robertson. STAGE ONE: PROTEST, child clings to the caregiver, preventing them from leaving. Theyll scream, shout and become panick when theyve left. STAGE TWO: DESPAIR, child sinks into depression and become uninterested in surroundings. Engage in self comforting and still angry. STAGE THREE: DETACHMENT, theyre no longer distressed and lose interest in people. Doesnt show any interest when caregiver returns. E.g. Douglas said separation for kids below for of less than week had behavioural difficulties. E.g. Quinton said behavioural problems widespread in adolescents who were separatted during first five years than those who didnt experience.

Maternal Deprivation Hypothesis: Long term breaking of bond in first few years can affect intellectual, social and emotional development. Irreversible and permanent. 25% chance. E.g. Bowlby found 32% juvenile theifs were affectionless psychopaths and 86% experienced separation at young age. MDH is reversinle as Tizard Hodges formed attach after age of 4. Bowlby didnt distinguish between privation and deprivation. E.g. Goldfarb said those who spent first 3 years and 3 months in orphanage, 3 years less emotional,, less intelligent and more agressive but could be due to orphanage.

Privation is when a child has never made a close attachment to anyone, due to neglect.

Koluchova; twin boys were locked in a cellar by their stepmum at 18m for 5 years. The cellar unheated, they were beaten and starved. They were unable to talk so communicated via own sign language. They were terrified of adults and had health problems. They were placed in foster with two loving sisters and by 14 they were normal and by 20 they were above their intellgence expected of them and formed strong attachments.
Scutter; Tom was alone in a room until 10 years of age where after he was placed in treatment for 8 years. He went to study at university and he had several close friends. His face registered emotions and social behaviour was good for his age.
Rymer; Genie spent 13 years in a room alone, tied to a potty. Her father thought was retarded. When she was found she had malnutrition, she couldnt stand properly and no social skills. She was sent to hospital & after 3 months knew 100 words, the left side of her brain was inactive so never developed a language or attachment. She went to a home for retarded adults, she was *****. Unsure of her recovery.
Can form attachments after sensitive period, longer privation, harder to reverse but can overcome with love. Case studies cant generalise, not all went through full privation and hard to separate individ diff and privation effect.

Institutional care: children are raised in institutions due to cirumstances or inadequate parents. Tizard & Hodges investigaed IC on attachment. Followed 65kids from 4m-4years. Looked at an IC where had good staff who discouraged from attaching. By 2 had 24 attachments. At 4year, 24 were given to birth parent, 33 adopted and 7 remain IC. Followed up at 8 & 16. By 8 adopted had close relationships unlike birth kids. At 16 adopted and control had the same relationship but birth didnt show affection. Birth and adopted were attention sekers and struggled with peers. Some effects are reversible and can form attach after sensitive period. X - some children werent followed all till 16, differences for those adopt and not coulve been individual and biased to the homecare.
Amount of time spent in IC depends on if can recover. Need quality emotional care in IC and after leaving IC. E.g. Rutter found if adpoted after 6m show disinhibited attachment.
Long Term Effect: E.g. Smkye compared Romanian kids and found orphanage had severe cognitive delay, poor physical growth, less social competence. E.g. Rutter found if adopted before 2, by 4 your more physically and mentally developed. Adopted kids were attention seeking and had social problems.
Reactive Attachment disorder: If cycle of mum attending a kids needs is broken the kid doesnt form another bond as loses trust. Dont trust others and try to control everything, detroy all that hinders their control. Come sociopaths. They damadge, destroy and steal.

Day care is temp care given to children outside the home, provided by non family members and those who dont know the child. Some parents feel strongly as its run by motivated trained people who provide stimulating environment. There are different activities to ones at home and a chance to socialise and interact, it helps reduce stress of mum so interact with child healthily. Some dont like it as can cause separation in ST and LT.

Centre based: nurseries provide structured activies with other children and caregivers to play with. They learn how to share and cooperate. Recieve less attention so come agressive.  Home based: childs looked after by a nanny or childminer. Get more attention and develop languages earlier but less social development.

Social behaviour is child behaviour in relation to others. MDH interpreted saying day care would be detrimental to childs social and emotional development. People argue for day care for social development. USA had move towards preschool for disadvantaged kids.

E.g. Erel meta analysis and found DC no effect on social interactions, attachment behaviours, mother child interactions. Belsky found increase risk of insecure if were in day care for 4m+ before first bday. Kagan set up nursery and followed for 2 year, no diff in social achievement. Roggerman found no ill effect from attending DC from young age.

Peer relations are the childs ability to make friends and play cooperatively. DC is positive.

Shea videotaped 3&4 year olds in playground during first 10weeks of nursery. Saw over time distance between one another decreased and interactions increased. Sociability was increasing over the time and was larger in those who attended 5 days of DC before 2years.

Anderson studied social and cognitive process in DC in Sweden. If went DC they got on more and were more sociable but cant generalise it as theyre known for good care but same Shea.

Schindler investigated 57 children in US for 2weeks. Amount of time spent playing and cooperating was measured. Positive correlation between amount time spent and cooperation but it couldve been due to age. Other studies found a negative correlation.

Day care isnt always positive. If theyre shy and unsociable then it can be threatening and have a negative effect on future career. E.g. Erels meta analysis showed DC had no effect on peer interactions despite the time spent. Finding a correlation doesnt always prove positive, most studies do show high DC is better for interactions but it could be down to the care they recieve at home. Hard to determin what the actual cause is.

Aggression is intentional infliction of pain onto another person or property. Reason 1: In DC you spend alot of time with peers therefore there is an increased opportunity than at home but at DC you learn there are ways to resolve. Reason 2: Aggression reaches a peak and thats when children go to day care so it can be a factor for anti social behaviour.

Cambell compared kids in Sweden who went DC at 18m-3.5y and followed till 15y. If spent long time before 3.5, they had negative interaction and less socially competent as they were tired and frustrated. Cant generalise as Swedens know for high quality DC.

Borge compared aggression in Canadian 2-3 year olds looked after by mother or DC. If looked after by mum, showed high aggression and were twice as likely to be socially disadvantaged. If only socially disadv kids looked at, DC still showed less aggression. If no focus on disadv, no diff in aggression. Only socially disadv would benefit from day care.

E.g. Clarke-Stewart said there was no distinction between aggression, disobedience and assertiveness. NICHD said assertiveness and agression higher in DC kids. E.g. Belksy said time in day care didnt predict aggression so DC effects arent long term. Behavioural problems at 12 caused by cedntre care. Kids come aggressive due to family factors.

Adverse effect of DC caused by poor quality DC than separation. No effects if had good DC. The govt like Bowlby theory so put in a law to improve day care and ensure theres benefits. High quality day care includes good interactions, appropriate curriculum, staff training, child kid ratio, low staff turnover and consistent care.

Training staff to be more sensitive increases quality so improve security of kids. After 6months, training increased, sensitivity and security increased too. It was better than a control group. E.g. Howes found in Florida there was low CG;I ratio. This was good as improved social and intellectual development as the CG were more responsible and used less negative techniques. High quality care for insecure as they have difficulty being accepted so find hard to cope with peers. Belksy found kids at 15 attached showed more social competence.

Must take into account the childs needs e.g. whether theyre socially disadvantaged send to day care, if they have siblings send to day care for interactions, if theyre aggressive send to home based and if theyre insecure dont send to day care.

Tizard Hodges found kids didnt form attach in IC as no.of CG they had. Kagan said give good emotional care. NICHD said ratio should be 1:3 for good interactions and sensitivity.