Development psychology

1) Role of mother or other caregivers

2) Childcare and attachment

3) Attachment beyond infancy

Traditionally, mother as a key figure (e.g. Bowlby)

Cultural/social context of child-rearing - more children these days go into childcare at an early age.

Attachment formed to responsive people - anyone who can provide a secure base for the child. Children can form multiple attachments.

Attachments to mother and father are independent.

- Based on relationships unique to that dyad,not traits. About the secure base/insecure relationship between the child and caregiver.

Security is characterisitc of relationship not individual trait (Goldberg, 1991)

Parent characteristics key in determining quality of attachment relationship.

Early entrence to childcare detrimental to the child?

- Belsky(1988) +20 hours per week of non-maternal care in 1st years --> insecure attachment patterns, less compliance, more aggression.

- Acknowledged there are benefits from child care, such as peer relationships, however, could damage attachment relationships.

Clarke-Stewart (1991) - better intellectual and social development from day care than those in home care.

Other studies: no evidence of differences in attachment (e.g. Scarr, 1998)

But, character of mother or father is crucial.

Childcare quality or quantity that is important? - high staff to child ratio, stimulating activities etc.

- Benefit of quality childcare to offset poor parenting?

- Higher quality daycare led to less hostility - should be no damage to attachment relationships.

- Poor quality daycare are more disurptive and low levels of consideration for others.

Attachment type can protect other types of development e.g. infants who have a secure attachment to at least one caregiver are more socially active later in life - popular, confident.

Infants studied from 9-33 months (Kochanska, 2001)

- Assessed in lab episodes stimulated to elicit fear, anger or joy.

- Avoidance (A) infants --> more fearful; Resistant (C) infants --> less joyful; Disorganised (D) infants --> more angry.

- Secure (B) infants shows less fear, anger and distress.

Secure attachment at 12 months --> other positive effects at 2 and 31/2 years.

Further benefits aged 10 and q15 years (Sroufe et al 2005)

Adults assessed through attachment interview - talk about early attachment interview - talk about early attachment with parents/caregivers.

- Adult attachment interview (AAI; George,Kaplan & Main, 1985): semi-structured interview, widely used.

Adult attachment classified:

- Autonomous/secure (B) - open and adjective with recall of childhood even if not favourable.

- Dismissing (A) - adults who dismiss previous attachment to caregiversm do not see them as being crucial.

- Preoccupied/enmeshed (C) - adults are still occupied with the dependency of their parents, getting approval from them.

- Unresolved mourning/loss (D) - an adult has experienced some kind of trauma or loss of a family member and have still not come to terms with it.

Based on adult representation of attachments - good or bad. Not about whether the experience was good or bad but how they reflect on their experiences.

Main et al (1985: AAI & ** links)

Support for 'intergrational transmission' (Ijzendoorn, 1995)

- Internal working models - based on our experiences with others and the relationships we have with them.

- Parental senstivity, responsiveness - informs relationships with potential children.

- Change insecure cycle via reflective self function - parent has been able to change the insecure attachment. Ability for an adult to reflect of their psychological states, it's possible for them to change from an insecure to a secure attachment. Adults are known as earned-secure attachment types. People who have always had a secure attachment are known as continuous-secure.

Autonomous - Secure; Dismissing - Avoidantl; Preoccupied - Ambivalent; Unresolved - Disorganised.

Evidence of continuity, over first few years

- 12 months --> 6 years (Soloman & George, 1999)

Effects of life events (Bar-Heim et al, 2000; Vaughn et al, 1979)

- E.g. secure --> insecure - divorce, death, poverty, abuse, illlness/psychiatric disorder.

Longitudinal study: ** classifications as predictors of adult attachment (Waters et al, 2000)

- Outcome varied, some continuity.

- Discontinuity: negative life events.

What happens if lack of opportunity to form attachments?

'Maternal deprivation' hypothesis (Bowlby, 1953, 1969)

- "Mother love in infancy and childhood is as important for mental health as are vitamins and proteins for physical health" (Bowlby, 1952)

Attachments need to develop within the first 2 and 1/2 years, known as the critical period.

Basics for Bowlby's hypothesis:

1) Critical period for attachment formation - 2 1/2 years. Came about based on evidence from Lorenz imprinting research.

2) Observable distress when a child separated from mother - more common for children to be separated from mother, often when the mother had a second child. Stress was alleviated when the child was reunited with their mothers.

3) Development delays in institutionalised children - these children were found to have lower 10 scores, slower in cognitive and social development. These institutions lacked simulation.

4) Harry's Harlow's isolated rhesus monkeys

5) Delinquency in child who had undergone a 'separation experience'

Isolated 8 new born monkeys from mother, in cage in 2 surrogate mothers (1 cloth, 1 wire)

4 fed by wire mother, 4 by cloth mother.

165 days with surrogate mother

If the monkeys were only isolated for up to 3 months then they could learn to be sociable with other monkeys etc, however if isolated longer the effects were irreversible.

Results

- All monkeys clung to cloth for support.

- Those kept isolated - socially inept (deprivation: Harlow & Harlow, 1962) 

Generally disputed

Positive effects

- Improvements in institutionalised care

- Increased in fostering of children

- Easier parental access to children in hospital.

Induced guilt in working mothers

Erroneously emphasised monotropism, but negative effects of multiple care-giving.

Extreme deprivation and neglect

Twins in Czech Republic reared from 1 1/2 - 7 years by a psychotic stepmother/inadequate father.

- Mother died, 11 months in children's home.

- Father remarried. Twins in isolation, not at school.

- When discovered aged 7: could hardly walk; poor foine motor skills; no spontaneous speech, low IQ for their age.

- Between 7 and 10: rapid movement - entered mainstream school at age 10.

- Tested IQ again at age 14, found to be normal.

- Yet severe deprivation in developing emotional bonds - hard to quantify.

Less successful case was Genie (Curtiss, 1977)

Severely neglected from under 2 years until age 5.

- Daytimes changed to potty, at night tied in sleeping bad, no one spoke to her.

- When found: weighed 59 lbs & 4 ft 6 inches tall.

- Made intelligible sounds, not toilet trained, shuffled feet.

- But good perception and spatial reasoning.

- Learned to walk and use the toilet but not speak

- Developed emotional responses.

Nurturing during first few months.

Not totally isolated - twins had each other.

Discovered relatively young.

Rehabilitation possible under these more favourable circumstances

Maybe Genie's deprivation was to severe?

65 English children raised in residential nurseries from birth - 2 years.

- High quality, well fed, well trained staff, plenty of toys

- But, high staff turnover.

Compared 3 different groups of children

- Returned to family at age 2: adopted between 2-8 years; remained in nursery.

Environmental influences on later outcomes very important.

Evidence to suggest effect of deprivation can be reversed in some circumstances with positive and stimulating environments.

Enriched environment as compensation.

Bowlby's idea of 'critical period' - the twins showed developmental in their language skills and cognitive and social development (and Genie to some extent).

Risk factor for later difficulties? - later delinquency and mental health issues in later life.