Attachment
Paper 1
Caregiver-infant interactions
AO1
Reciprocity
-
Reciprocity is where each party responds to the other’s signals to sustain interaction. It can be seen as turn-taking or like a non-verbal conversation. The behaviour of each party elicits a response from the other.
-
Traditional views saw the baby as passive and the receivers of care. Modern research sees babies as active participants and take turns in interacting.
-
Babies start to reciprocate more around 3 months old.
-
Feldman and Eidelman (2007) found that mothers successfully respond to infants signals around two thirds of the time.
​
Interactional synchrony
-
Interactional synchrony is when the caregiver and the infant mirror each others actions. They move in time with each other.
​
Meltzoff & Moore (1977) Interactional synchrony​
Procedure: Controlled observation on infants aged 12-21 days to investigate imitation. An adult model displayed one of three facial expressions (e.g., tongue protrusion) or a hand movement, and the infants’ responses were recorded analysed.
​
Findings: Infants as young as 12 days old imitated the facial expressions and gestures of the adult model. The independent observers identified a significant association between the model’s actions and the infants’ responses. This suggested that imitation is an innate ability rather than a learned behaviour.
AO3
+ Highly controlled research
- Koepke (1983) failed to replicate M&M
- Isabella (1989) securely attached children more likely to interact
- Methodological issues: babies
You can purchase fully written out, A* quality AO3 paragraphs from the resources page.
Back to menu
Schaffer's stages of attachment
AO1
-
Asocial stage (0-2 months): Infants produce similar responses to all objects, whether they are animate or inanimate.
-
Indiscriminate attachment stage (2-7 months): Babies start to prefer human company and can distinguish between familiar and unfamiliar people. However, they are still relatively easily comforted by anyone, and therefore do not show separation or stranger anxiety.​
-
Specific attachment stage (7-12 months): Most infants begin to form a special attachment to one person known as their primary attachment figure. They therefore start to demonstrate separation anxiety and joy at reunion with that person.
-
Multiple attachment stage (12 months+): About a month after forming its first attachment, an infant can form secondary attachments. Schaffer and Emerson found that within one month of being attached 29% of infants had multiple attachments to someone else. Within six months this had risen to 78%. Within one year the majority of infants had developed at least 5 multiple attachments.
​
It helps to recall the stages by remembering the mnemonic All Infants Smile at Mum.
​​
Schaffer and Emerson (1964) Glaswegian baby study​
Procedure: Naturalistic, longitudinal observation. Sample: 60 infants aged 5 – 23 weeks and mothers from working class families in Glasgow. Observed at home every 4 weeks until 1 year old, and again at 18 months. At each visit mother reported infant’s separation protest to different people on a 7 point scale. Stranger anxiety measured by assessing infant’s response to the interviewer at each visit.
​
Findings: It was found that infants do go through stages of attachment (identified above).
Caregiver sensitivity is the key to attachment. There is little relationship between the time spent together and attachment. Infants can create multiple attachments once a primary attachment has been established.
​ AO3
- Social desirability bias affecting results of the study
- Results of the study lack population validity
- Practical applications to nursery settings
- Methodological issues of observing babies in asocial stage
​
You can purchase fully written out, A* quality AO3 paragraphs from the resources page.
​
Back to menu
The role of the father
AO1​​
-
Schaffer & Emerson (1964) found that the father is rarely the primary attachment figure, only in 3% of cases. But babies are attached to the adult that is most responsive to their needs and this could be the father.
-
The father does have an important secondary role. 78% of babies in S&E had formed an attachment with their father by 18 months, noted by separation anxiety when he left.
-
Grossman et al (2002) also found a relationship between quality of fathers play in childhood and the quality of their adolescent attachments. This shows males have a different role to mothers which is more to do with play and stimulation and less to do with nurturing.
-
Field (1978) found that fathers can be the emotional caregiver when they are the primary caregiver.
-
Hormonal differences may mean men are not psychologically equipped to form an intense attachment because they lack emotional sensitivity. Estrogen and oxytocin promote caring and empathy behaviours whereas testosterone promotes aggression.
-
Eagly and Wood (1987) argued that gender role division is social not biological. There are cultural expectations that affect male behaviour, such as it being thought of as “feminine” to be sensitive towards the needs of others.
​
​​​​ AO3
+ A distinct role of playmate (Grossman, 2002)
+ Hrdy (1999) fathers less likely to detect distress
- Belsky (2009) depends on security of adult relationship
-/+ Impact on the economy
​
You can purchase fully written out, A* quality AO3 paragraphs from the resources page.
​
Back to menu
Animal studies
AO1 Lorenz​​
Imprinting is a form of attachment whereby an animal keeps close contact with the first large moving object it encounters.
​​​
Lorenz (1935) Imprinting​
Procedure: Lorenz randomly divided a large clutch of greylag goose eggs into two batches. One batch hatched naturally with the mother, the other batch hatched in an incubator with Lorenz making sure that he was the first moving object the goslings encountered. He then placed all the goslings under an upturned box. The box was then removed and the gosling’s behaviour was recorded. Lorenz also lengthened the time in which the geese saw the first moving object to see how long the critical period was for geese.
​​​​
Findings: When released from the upturned box, the naturally hatched goslings went straight to their mother whereas the incubator hatched goslings went straight to Lorenz, showing no bond to their natural mother. Lorenz noticed how the process of imprinting had to occur within 25 hours or the geese would not imprint at all, known as the critical period. He found that geese had an innate tendency to imprint and these bonds were irreversible.
​​​
​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​ AO3
+ Guiton (1966) sexual imprinting on yellow glove
- Issues with animal extrapolation
+ Application to human attachment. Inspiration for Bowlby = critical period, monotropy, innate
​​​​​​
AO1 Harlow​​
Harlow (1958) Contact comfort​
Procedure: Harlow constructed two surrogate mothers, one ‘wire mother’ which dispensed milk and a soft ‘cloth mother’ with no milk. The amount of time the infant rhesus monkey spent with each mother was recorded (DV). To test for mother preference during periods of stress, the monkeys were startled with a loud noise and their responses recorded. A larger cage was used in some conditions in order to observe the degree of exploration by the baby rhesus monkeys.
​​​​​​
Findings: The infant monkeys spent more time with cloth mother showing that attachment is not purely based on food which refutes learning theory. The infants who grew up with the cloth mother exhibited 'normal' behaviour when presented with stressful variables e.g. cuddling the cloth mother until the monkeys were calm. When they were raised with a wire mother they threw themselves on the floor, rocking back and forth and not going to the wire mesh mother for comfort.
When Harlow raised the monkeys in complete isolation and forced them to breed he found that the monkey mothers killed their infants by chewing off fingers and toes, or even crushing the infants’ head with their teeth.​
​
There is a critical period for attachment to develop, Harlow concluded that this was 90 days. After this time, the damage from maternal deprivation was done and attachment was no longer possible.
​​​
AO3
- Issues with animal extrapolation
+ Application to human attachment. Inspiration for Bowlby = critical period, emotional bond
+ Real life application to social services and parenting
​
You can purchase fully written out, A* quality AO3 paragraphs from the resources page.
​​
Back to menu
Learning theory of attachment
AO1​​
Overview
-
Learning theory proposes that all behaviour is learnt rather that innate. When babies are born, they are blank slates and are shaped through their experiences.​ ​
-
Caregivers can quickly become associated with food because they are present when the infant is being fed. ​​
-
This is sometimes called the ‘cupboard love’ approach because of the emphasis on food.​
​​​​
Classical conditioning (learning through association)
-
The process begins with the food which is a natural unconditioned stimulus (UCS) because babies do not have to learn the unconditioned response (UCR) of pleasure, because the hunger pains are automatically taken away.​
-
​Learning attachments begins when the baby starts to associate mum, the neutral stimulus (NS) with the UCS of food. The baby then begins to associate mum with the UCR of pleasure.​
-
​Once conditioning is complete mum becomes a conditioned stimulus (CS) as the baby has learnt to attach to mum because she brings the conditioned response (CR) of pleasure which is now present even when food is not.
​​​
Operant conditioning (learning through consequences)​
-
Babies learn to form an attachment through positive reinforcement as they get a reward for crying. When a hungry infant feels discomfort, they cry and are rewarded with food.​
-
The caregiver experiences negative reinforcement – they feed the baby to remove the unpleasant experience of the baby crying. ​
-
Food reduces the discomfort as it fulfils the drive and is therefore a primary reinforcer.
-
​The person feeding the baby is associated with the reward. They become a secondary reinforcer themselves.
​​​​
​​​​ AO3
- Harlow's research
- Quality time is most important to form attachment (S&E 1964)
- Environmentally reductionist
- Hay and Vespo (1988) SLT better explains modelling attachment behaviour and vicarious reinforcement of wanted behaviours
​​
You can purchase fully written out, A* quality AO3 paragraphs from the resources page.
​
Back to menu
Bowlby's theory of attachment
AO1​​
-
Bowlby was an evolutionary psychologist that believed that attachment was innate as it has a survival advantage.​ This means that both the baby and mother have an urge to seek proximity, and this is not learned but it is a biological drive.​
-
He was inspired by Lorenz's work on imprinting.
-
Bowlby believed that babies form one special attachment with their mother. This special intense attachment is called monotropy.​ ​If the mother is not available, the infant could bond with another ever-present, adult whom he referred to as a "mother substitute“.
-
An Internal Working Model is where the first attachment forms a template (or schema) for future adult relationships.​​ This template continues into adulthood and effects future relationships which is known at the continuity hypothesis.​​
-
A child who has received continuous care from its primary caregiver will develop a positive internal working model and have positive expectations of relationships in the future e.g. think that relationships are safe.​ A child who has received a lack of sensitive caregiving will develop a negative internal working model and will have negative expectations of relationships in the future e.g. people cannot be depended on.​
-
Bowlby argued that babies must form an attachment within the critical period which is the first 2.5 years of their life with a caregiver. He argued if they do not, they will suffer irreversible damage.​​ The critical period was later softened to the sensitive period (0-5 years) due to case study evidence which contradicted his original concept.​
-
Social releasers are innate behaviours of the baby e.g. crying, smiling that activate the adult attachment system and elicit a response towards the baby​​
​
You can use the acronym MISS CECI to help you remember the key terms; Monotropy, Internal Working Model, Social Releasers, Survival, Critical Period, Evolutionary, Continuity Hypothesis, Innate
​​​
​​​​ AO3
+ Brazleton (1975) importance of social releasers
+ Bailey (2007) IWM: 99 mothers - those with insecure attachment style had poor attachment with own child
+ Rutter (2011) importance of critical period
- Social sensitivity: expectations of females
- S&E (1964) multiple attachments
​​
You can purchase fully written out, A* quality AO3 paragraphs from the resources page.
​
Back to menu
Types of attachment
AO1​​
Ainsworth and Bell (1970) The Strange Situation
Procedure
-
Ainsworth and Bell (1970) developed the most commonly used test to measure infant attachment styles which classifies infants as secure, insecure-avoidant or insecure-resistant.
-
It is a controlled observation in which infant reactions are measured to playing in an unfamiliar room, being left alone, left with a stranger and reunited with a caregiver for a period of 21 minutes.​
-
There are 7 stages with each stage lasting between 2-3 minutes recreating the flow of the familiar and unfamiliar presence in most children's lives.
-
It measures the target behaviours of stranger anxiety (response to unfamiliar adult), separation anxiety (mother leaving), reunion behaviour (mother returning), proximity seeking and exploration and safe base behaviour (playing in an unfamiliar room)
​
Findings
-
Secure attachment (Type B) 60-75%
-
Secure base behaviour: Happy to explore but will return to caregiver
-
Separation anxiety: Moderate
-
Stranger anxiety: Moderate
-
Reunion behaviour: Pleased to see caregiver and accepts comfort
-
-
Insecure-avoidant attachment (Type A) 20-25%
-
Secure base behaviour: Explores freely and does not return
-
Separation anxiety: Low
-
Stranger anxiety: Low
-
Reunion behaviour: Avoids contact
-
-
Insecure-resistant attachment (Type C) 3%
-
Secure base behaviour: Explores less and seeks proximity
-
Separation anxiety: High
-
Stranger anxiety: High
-
Reunion behaviour: Resists comfort at reunion
-
​​​​
​​​​ AO3 (for both topics)
+ Standardised procedure. High inter-rater reliability 94%.
+ Good predictive validity of future outcomes (Hazan & Shaver)
- Main & Soloman added Type D Insecure-Disorganised
- Ethnocentric bias - imposed etic to generalise to other cultures
- Ignores temperament (Kagan)
​​
You can purchase fully written out, A* quality AO3 paragraphs from the resources page.
​
Back to menu
Cultural variations of attachment
AO1​​
​
Van Ijzendoorn & Kroonenberg (1998) Attachment types around the world
Procedure
The researchers carried out a meta-analysis of 32 studies, across 8 countries with a sample size of 1990 infants. They analysed studies investigating infant attachment types across different cultures to find out if there were cross-cultural differences.
Findings
-
Secure attachment was the most common type of attachment, in all the cultures examined.
-
The lowest percent of secure attachment was shown in China, and the highest in Great Britain.
-
Avoidant attachment was more common in West Germany but rare in Israel and Japan.
-
Variation within cultures was 1.5 times greater than the variation between cultures
-
Japan and Israel (collectivist cultures) showed higher levels of insecure–resistant attachment in comparison to other cultures.
-
Germany (an individualistic culture) showed higher levels of insecure–avoidant attachment, in comparison to other cultures.
​
Conclusion
Most babies worldwide exhibit secure attachment. This supports Bowlby’s theory of attachment which suggests that attachment is innate and universal, as it provides an evolutionary advantage for survival. If attachment were purely shaped by cultural differences, we might expect significant variations in attachment styles between cultures. However, cultural variations in the proportion of insecure-resistant and insecure-avoidant attachments indicate that environment also plays a role in shaping attachment patterns.
​
​​
Simonelli et al (2014) Italian study measuring attachment
76 infants. 50% had a secure attachment and 36% had an insecure-avoidant attachment.
This means less infants were secure and more avoidant, compared to Ainsworth & Bell. This may be due to cultural differences in parenting styles. However, this could also be due to low temporal validity of Ainsworth's results. More women are now in the workplace compared to 1970s and more children are in day care which could explain the changes.
Takahashi (1990) Japanese study measuring attachment
60 middle class Japanese infants. 0% Insecure-avoidant, 32% Insecure-resistant and 68% Secure. 90% of infant-alone steps had to be stopped due to excessive infant anxiety. This is likely to be as Japanese mothers rarely leave their infants, including co-sleeping with them and therefore the different parenting styles leads to different behaviours in the test developed by Ainsworth.
​​​
​​​​ AO3
+ V&K (1988) - more difference within a country rather than across - cannot generalise
- V&K (1988) individualistic culture bias: 27/32 studies
- Imposed etic to use a Westernised test to judge others
+ Standardised procedure. High inter-rater reliability 94%.
​​
You can purchase fully written out, A* quality AO3 paragraphs from the resources page.
​
Back to menu
Maternal deprivation
AO1​​
​
Key terms
Separation is physical time spent away from the mother, usually for a short period of time.
Deprivation is prolonged separation over a long period of time.
Privation is when not attachment has ever been formed.
​
Bowlby's Maternal Deprivation Hypothesis
-
Bowlby proposed the maternal deprivation hypothesis 20 years before his attachment theory, which explains why there are some similarities across both theories.
-
He argued a mother's continuous care is as important for mental health as vitamins and minerals are for physical health.
-
The law of accumulated separation states that the effects of every separation from the mother add up so “the safest dose is therefore a zero dose”.
-
Bowlby argues that if a child experiences maternal deprivation that he or she will suffer irreversible negative consequences. ​Consequences of maternal deprivation may include:
-
Affectionless psychopathy is an inability to show affection or concern for others. Such individuals act on impulse with little regard for the consequences of their actions.
-
Delinquency - petty crime committed by young people
-
Low IQ in which he termed 'mental retardation'
-
​​​​
Bowlby (1944) 44 Thieves Study
Aim: To see if early separation from the primary caregiver (deprivation) was associated with behavioural disorders. Bowlby defined a particular behaviour disorder as affectionless psychopathy to describe individuals who have no sense of shame of guilt.
Procedure: The sample were children, aged between 5–16 years old who had been referred to a guidance clinic in London where Bowlby worked. 44 of the children were criminals (guilty of theft) and 44 non-criminal participants were used a control group. Bowlby interviewed the children and their families to create a record of early life experiences.
​​
Findings: Bowlby identified 14 of the 44 thieves as affectionless psychopaths. 12 out of 14 of these affectionless psychopaths had experienced early and prolonged deprivation. Only 5 of the ‘other thieves’ had experienced such separations and 2/44 of the control group had experienced frequent early separations. These findings suggest a link between early separations and later social maladjustment. The maternal deprivation hypothesis appears to lead to affectionless psychopathy and antisocial behaviour.
​​​​​
AO3
​
- Low reliability - Lewis did not replicate results on wider sample
- Social desirability bias of study
- Bowlby confused privation and deprivation
+ Too deterministic (irreversible) Romanian orphans reversed IQ damage before 6 mths
+ Social sensitivity
​​
You can purchase fully written out, A* quality AO3 paragraphs from the resources page.
​
Back to menu
Institutionalisation
AO1​​
Background info (not needed for the exam): During the 1990s the unveiling of political events in Romania allowed psychologists to study the effects of institutionalisation. The Western world became aware that record numbers of children had been placed in orphanages as parents could not cope with the strict government rules. Under dictatorship, abortion was banned and couples were required to birth large numbers of children in a bid to boost the population. At the end of this thirty years of this regime, more than 100,000 children were reported to be in 600 state-operated orphanages. ​
​​
Rutter et al (2010) Romanian Orphans
Aim: To examine the long-term effects of institutionalisation in a longitudinal study, beginning in the early 1990s, called the ERA (English and Romanian Adoptees). ​
​
Procedure: These 165 Romanian orphans were compared against a control group of 52 British children adopted at the same time. All were assessed in terms of their physical, intellectual, emotional and social development at the ages of 4, 6, 11 and 15 and again at 25 years old.​
​
Findings
IQ​: When they first arrived half of the Romanian orphans showed damage to intellectual development. At age 11 they showed different improvements in IQ depending on the age of their adoption:​
-
Adopted by 6 months – IQ 102 (average)​
-
Adopted between 6 months and 2 years – IQ 86​
-
Adopted after 2 years – IQ 77​
​
Disinhibited attachment​
Those adopted after 6 months showed disinhibited attachment. Those adopted before 6 months did not show this.​ Disinhibited attachment includes symptoms such as clinginess, attention-seeking and indiscriminate behaviour directed to all adults. ​​​
​​
Conclusion: Institutionalisation can have severe long-term effects on development, especially if children are not provided with adequate emotional caregiving i.e. adopted by two years old.​
​​​
Zeanah et al (2005) Romanian Orphans Attachment Types​​
Procedure: The researchers assessed attachment in 95 children aged 12-31 months who had spent most of their lives in institutional care (90% on average).​ They were compared to a control group of 50 children who had never lived in an institution.​ Their attachment type was measured using the Strange Situation. ​Carers were also asked about unusual social behaviour including clingy, attention-seeking behaviour directed inappropriately at all adults i.e. a disinhibited attachment.​
​​
Findings: They found that almost three quarters (74%) of the control group were classified as being securely attached to their caregivers. ​Less than one fifth (19%) of infants from the experimental group, who had spent most of their life in institutional care, were deemed to have a secure attachment. ​
Many of the infants (44%) appeared to have a disinhibited attachment disorder. ​
​​
​​​​ AO3
+ Real world application
+ Longitudinal research -long terms effects
- Low generalisability - specific type of deprivation
- Complexity of institutions - confounding variables
​​
You can purchase fully written out, A* quality AO3 paragraphs from the resources page.
​​
Back to menu
Influence of early attachment
AO1​​
Internal Working Model
The internal working model is a mental representation of attachments, formed by the quality of the first relationship with the infants key caregiver. ​The continuity hypothesis states that the internal working model will be reflected in later relationship types as the blueprint for relationships stays with the infant into adulthood. ​
If a child’s first relationship is with a reliable attachment figure they will assume this is how relationships are meant to be and seek out functional future relationships and behave functionally within them.​ If a child’s first relationship involves inconsistent or neglectful attachment figure this will influence future relationships. Children may go on to struggle to form relationships or not know how to behave appropriately within a relationship, displaying insecure-resistant or insecure-avoidant attachment styles with friends and partners. ​
​
Friendships (bullying)
Securely attached children go on to form the best quality childhood friendships and insecurely attached infants have friendship difficulties (Kerns 1994). ​Bullying behaviour can be predicted by attachment type. Myron-Wilson and Smith (1998) assessed attachment type and bullying involvement using a questionnaire in 196 children aged 7-11 in London. Results:​
-
Securely attached children least likely to be involved in bullying​
-
Insecure-avoidant children most likely to be victims​
-
Insecure-resistant most likely to be bullies​
​​
Romantic relationships​
Hazan and Shaver (1987) Love Quiz​​
Procedure: The ‘Love Quiz’ was published in a local American newspaper and received 620 volunteer responses (205 males and 415 females). ​​The first section was designed to assess the individuals’ most important relationship. The second section focused on ascertaining general experiences in love and the third part asked self-selecting participants about their feelings in relation to some statements. ​
​
Findings​​
Attachment Styles​
-
56% respondents were classified as securely attached​
-
25% with an insecure–avoidant attachment type​
-
19% as being insecure–resistant​
​
A positive correlation was found between early attachment type and experiences in love with those reporting secure attachments in childhood being the most likely to have loving and lasting romantic relationships. ​
Respondents whose answers indicated an insecure–avoidant attachment type from infancy were more likely to report feeling of dislike in relation to intimacy, doubtful of the existence of love and less forgiving. ​​
Those individuals with an insecure–resistant attachment type were more likely to have shorter relationships of six years on average, compared to secure respondents who averaged relationship durations of 10 years+. They also had emotional extremes of passion and jealousy, fall in and out of relationships easily but struggle with ‘true love’.
​
Parenting​​
Parenting styles are based on personal experiences and expectations of the internal working model and therefore attachment type tends to be passed down through the generations of a family. ​
​​
Bailey et al. (2007) looked at the attachment type of nearly 100 mothers and their infants, assessed in the strange situation test. They then investigated the relationships they had with their own mothers established in an interview. It was found that most of the women had the same attachment type to their infant as to their own mother.​
​
Likewise, findings from Harlow (1966) using non-human animals also mirror this pattern. Monkeys with poor or no attachments were seen to experience difficulties with parenting because of their early, formative experiences. Some even went on to kill their young.​
​
​​​​ AO3
+ Contradictory case study evidence e.g. Genie & Czech twins
- Retrospective nature of studies
- Methodological issues of Love Quiz
- Does highlighting a risk lead to a self fulfilling prophecy?
​​
You can purchase fully written out, A* quality AO3 paragraphs from the resources page.
​
Back to menu
