Definition: A strong and emotional bond between two people. Attachments maintain proximity between infant and caregiver because each experiences distress when separated, they serves as a basis for subsequent emotional

development.

Attachment

The development of attachment• tom and jerry that's my mom

my - Google Videos• Maccoby (1980)

developed 4 characteristics.

1: Seeking proximity, especially at times of stress

2: Distress on separation: Separation anxiety.

3: Pleasure when reunited4: General orientation of behaviour

towards the primary caregiver.

Lorenz and Imprinting

• Animals forms bonds in the first few moments after birth.

• In orphaned animals the baby will attach itself to another species rather than be alone.

• Conrad Lorenz carried out experiments on greylag geese (1930)

• YouTube - Konrad Lorenz - Imprinting

Schaffer and Emerson (1964)

• Aim: Find out how old infants were when they first became attached. They also looked at individual differences

• Procedures: They studied 60 infants in Glasgow, every 4 weeks for 18 months.

• Findings: First attachments at 6 – 8 months. Stranger anxiety one month after

• Conclusion: Infants who developed strong attachments had mothers who were quick to respond to their needs. This normally started around 7 months with multiple attachment happening soon after.

• Criticisms: Bushnell et al (1989) found that infants bonded with their mothers as young as 24hrs old

The Different theories of Attachment

Why do

babies develop

attachment?

Explanations of Attachment

• Learning theory: Behaviourists

explanation looks at nurture as

the main determinism for attachment.

• Bowlby’s theory: Believes that

children have an innate tendency

to form attachments to increase

chances of survival.

• Social Learning Explanationssuggests that children learn through

imitation of other’s behaviours.

Learning Theory• Classical conditioning: Individuals can be taught to associate stimulus with a certain response. Food is good, mother gives food therefore mother is good. Take food away and mother is still Good. Pavlov’s dog

• Operant conditioning: Food is a primary reinforceras mother gives food she becomes secondary Reinforcer therefore baby seeks secondaryReinforcer. operant conditioning skinner - Google Video

Dollard and Miller• Infant becomes hungry and this produces a drive to

reduce the discomfort.

• Mother gives food which reduces discomfort = reward

• Food becomes a • primary reinforcer

• Mother becomes a • secondary reinforcer

Evaluation of Learning Theory

• Attachment to food giver: Schaffer and Emerson (1964) found fewer than ½ the infants were attached to the person that fed, bathed and changed them.

• attachment - Google Video• Love in infant monkeys:

Harlow and Harlow (1962) discovered that monkeys clung to a cloth covered monkey rather than a food providing metal monkey.

Social Learning ExplanationsHay & Vespo

• This theory was originally proposedby Bandura (1977). It suggests that children learn through imitation of other’s behaviours.

social learning theory - Google Videos#

• Hay & Vespo argue that parents act as role models for children and teach them how to carry out relationships.

• Activity: Using your text book find out the meaning of the following:Role Modelling, Direct instruction, Social facilitation.

Bowlby’s Theory of

AttachmentBowlby

believes that attachment is innate rather than learned

Bowlby’s Theory• Natural selection: Infants and Carers are • programmed to become attached.

YouTube - Walking with Beasts - Ep 4 - Next of Kin - Part 1 of 3

• A critical Period: As attachment is a biological• process, it takes place during a critical period of• development or not at all. The first 21/2 years.

• Internal Working Model: A model that the infant will develop about themselves and what to expect from others based on their experiences with the primary care giver.

• Monotropy: Attachment plays a role in later development- monotropy and

• the continuity hypothesis.

Support for Monotrophy Monotrophy: Bowlby (1969) argued that wedevelop from one main attachment/ special relationship.

Multiple attachments: Thomas (1998) believes it isbetter to develop a network of attachments.

Monotrophy: Tronick et al (1992) studied Pygmies where children werelooked after and breastfeed by multiple caregivers but still preferredthe company of their mothers.

The Continuity Hypothesis• Secure attachment: Children learn from the primarycaregiver how to form positive relationship and carrythis into adulthood.• bowlby's theory of attachment - Google Videos

• Avoidant attachment:Primary caregiver rejects the infant and child develops a belief they are unacceptableand unworthy.

• Ambivalent attachment: Primary caregiver is inconsistent leading to negative self image with exaggerated emotional responses.

Support for Continuity Hypothesis

• The Minnesota longitudinal study:Sroufe et al (1999) found that securelyattached infants developed self confidence, more initiative and were more popular later in life.

• Insecure attachments: Mc Carthy (1999) found women who were avoidant-insecure were likely to have romantic problems and resistant insecure were likely to have friendship problems.

Evaluation of Bowlby’s

Theory on Attachment

There is criticism about the continuity

hypothesis, monotrophy and the

role of the father

Criticism of Continuity Hypothesis

• Zimmerman et al (2000): Looked at children from divorced families

• They concluded that serious

life events had an impact on

the development of attachment

• Therefore continuity will only apply when serious events do not have an impact on the child

Criticism for Bowlby’s Theory

• The Temperament Hypothesis explains that some children are born with an ability to make friends. The lack of fear at a stranger might not have anything to do with mothers inability to bond.

• Correlational: A lot of evidence is correlation therefore no statement on cause and effect can be made.

Role of Father: Bowlby believes that the father’s role is to support the mother (financially and emotionally). Other research however has shown that fathers have a more direct role to playin the development of their children

Post-Hoc: Bowlby says attachment has an evolutionary function, “ behaviour is directed by genes” but there is no evidence to support this

Homework: Describe and evaluate the Learning Theory 12 Marks

Criticism for Bowlby’s Theory

• Bushnell et al (1989) found infants formed bonds with mother at less than 48hr old.

• Piaget (1954): At 6 months infant show object permanence (play peek a boo) know when caregiver has left the room.

• Ainsworth (1967) found stranger anxiety coincided with motor development.

The Stranger Situation

Mary Ainsworth found different

types of attachment

Research into Attachment

• Separation anxiety occurs between 6-8 months with fear of strangers occurring one month later.

• First attachments: In 65% of children first attachment is to the mother by 18 months other attachments have formed.

• Quick response by mothers and ability to interact lead to high intensity of attachment.

Secure and insecure attachments

The Strange Situation Classification Mary Ainsworth developed a method of measuring attachment; attachment - Google Videos

Three different categories: 1. Securely attached, 2. Avoidant-insecure

3. Resistant-insecure.

'Strange Situation' (Ainsworth et al.,

1978). Type A –

Insecure-avoidant -20% Indifferent to caregiver - unconcerned if present or absent. Signs of distress when left alone but could be comforted by caregiver or stranger

Type B• Securely attached - 70% - Stay close to

caregiver and are distressed by their departure but easily comforted on return. Stranger could give limited comfort.

Type C – • Insecure-resistant - 10% - Ambivalent to

caregiver - both close and resistant at times. Anxious of environment and resistant to stranger.

Secure Avoidant Resistant

Primary Carer’s Behaviour Towards Child

Child’s ‘Working Model’ of Itself

Positive & Loved Unloved & Rejected

Angry & Confused

www.

psyc

hlot

ron.

org.

uk

Evaluation

of the Stranger Situation

The reliability and validity of the SS in attachment has been looked at

Support for the SSC

• Internal Reliability: Wartner et al (1993) found that results on the Strange Situation Classification (SSC) were the same when children were 1 and again when they were 6.

• External Reliability• The original research was easy to replicate

and led to an increase in research on this area – many of which found similar results.

Evaluating the Strange situation• Low Population Validity: Initial research

was on middleclass American infants and therefore has low population validity

• Low Ecological Validity: Was done in a laboratory and not in the child’s own home

• Although the validity can be questioned, the study does have similarities to being left in day care or at a nursery.

Evaluating the Strange situation

• It may measure a particular attachment to one individual rather than a general attachment type. (Lamb 1977)

• Ethics: Is it ethical to place a child in a stressful situation.

Cross Culture and Attachment

Do we all form similar attachments regardless of cultural influence on

upbringing

Cross Cultural studies

• It is important to makesure that theories ofchild developmentare valid throughoutdifferent cultures.

This is importantwhen looking at Nature vs nurture

YouTube - attachment 2 - developmental psychology

Research into Cross-culture

• Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg (1988)

• Collated data using the stranger situation technique to see if cross cultural differences exist.

• Meta-analysis study: They looked at the findings of various other studies to draw conclusions

Cross Cultural StudiesSecure Avoidant Resistant

W Germany 3 57 35 8Great Britain 1 75 22 3

Netherlands 4 67 26 7Sweden 1 74 22 4Israel 2 64 7 29Japan 2 68 5 27China 1 50 25 25United states 18 65 21 14

Evaluation of cross-cultural studies

• Ecological validity: Takahashi (1990) argues that cultural upbringing may lead to children being clasified as insecure when they are actually developing secure attachments

• In Japan children sleep, bath and are carried by their parents, therefore separation is more

• There was also a lack of avoidance behaviour. In Japan this behaviour is taught to be impolite

Nature vs Nurture

Nature: Bee (1999) states there is consistency in cross-cultural studies and concludes that similar interactions may occur leading to an innate relationship.

Nurture: Van Ilxendoorn and Kronenberg (1988) argue that mass media leads to nurture rather than nature for explanation.

Disruption of attachment

The loss of emotional care that

results in the breaking of

emotional bonds.

Separation • Separation: Child is

separated from their

primary caregiver. The separation can be long or short-term.

• If there is suitable care given, i.e. a replacement primary caregiver, there are no long term effects.

Immediate response to Separation

• Protest : The child cries, screams and protests angrily. They cling to the parent and try to escape if others pick them up.

• Despair: The child’s anger subsides, although they are still upset. The child refuses to be comforted by others.

• Detachment: They engage with other people and may reject the care provider when they return

Research on Separation

• James and Joyce Robertson (1952) filmed children who had been left in hospital or residential nurseries.

• They found that children were deeply disturbed by the separation from their mothers.

• Hospitals changed their policies about visitation rights of parents after the Robertson’s work was publicised.

Factors effecting Separation

• Age of child: Schaffer and Callender (1959) found children under 7 months. The most stress was children between 12-18 months.

• Type of Attachment: Securely attached children coped better

• Sex of child: Generally boys coped better than girls (Gross and McIlveen 1997)

PrivationLoss of the primary care provider. We

look at children who have had no-one to

bond with

The Czech Twins

• Mother died when 18 monthsChildren were given to father

• Locked in a cellar and starved and beaten they wereFound at 7 with no speech

• They were fostered and grew up to be sociable and happy

Genie• Genie was isolated until age 13.• She experienced severe privation.• She also experienced physical abuse.

• She never recovered YouTube - Genie

• This could have been because of the late age at which she was discovered

• Rymer (1993) states it could have been the physical abuse as well as the emotional privation.

Methodology of Case studies

• Ethical issues: Children are unable to give their fully informed consent and many have said later in life the experience was very detrimental

• Lack of control: These children have many problems (Physical abuse) as well as no opportunity to form attachments

• Case studies are retrospective: Children must look back over their lives difficult to be accurate

Institutionalisation and Privation

• Institutionalisation: This refers to thebehaviour of children raised in orphanages or children’s homes.

• Hodges & TizardWanted to see if there was long term effects from privation, i.e. nobond developed in early childhood.

Institutionalised Children

• Procedure: Children were • placed in an institution before • they were 4 months old.

• Staff were not allowed to form bonds with the children. There was also a high turnover of staff

• Children were assessed at ages 4, 8 and 16 years

Findings:• Age 4: No deep relationships,they were attention seeking and were more indiscriminately affectionate.

• Age 8: Most adopted or restored children had formed close attachments. However they were still more attention seeking and over friendly. They were also less popular than their peers.

Differences in Adopted children• Children at the age of 4 were either adopted or

restored to their natural parents.

• Adopted children settled better than restored

Close attachment at age 8

Rejecting or hostile

Close attachment at age 16

Rejecting or hostile

Adopted mothers

20/21 1/21 17/21 4/21

Restored mothers

6/13 7/13 5/9 4/9

Conclusion• Family relationships: • It can be stated that the long term effects of

privation can be overcome when good substitution care is give and that close relationships can form within the home

• Peer relationships: However. Long term effects can be seen were children have difficulty in fitting in to society and developing close relationships with their peers.

Methodology of Research

• Attrition: As the study was over a long period some children ‘drop out’. It is often the more disturbed children and this can bias results

• Sample bias: Children who are adopted would have been chosen for their pleasant temperaments. Those of the restored children would have been a mixture of pleasant and unpleasant temperaments.

• Parental input: Adopted parent put more energy into their children than those that went back to their parents.

Effects of Instituationaliation

• Rutter et al (2007) looked at children orphaned in Romania.

No disinhibition

Mild disinhibition

Markeddisinhibition

Uk adoptees 21 (40.4%) 29 (55.8%) 2 (3.8%)Romanian >6 months

24 (53.3%) 17 (37.8%) 4 (8.9%)

Romanian 6-24 months

26 (29.5%) 39 (44.3%) 23 (26.1%)

Homework

• Discuss the effects of institutionalisation on attachment 12 Marks

Day Care

Care for infants and children outside the home. This can either be for part of

the day or the whole day. Children then return home in the evening.

Social Development

• Social development: a child’s ability to interact and build relationships with others.

• Secure attachment

is necessary for the

development of relationships

• However, Day Care centres give the opportunity for children to develop relationships with each other

Positive effects of Day Care

• Clarke-Stewart discoveredthat children who attended day care socialised better at school.

• They also found that children in day care were equally distressed when separated from their mothers in the Atkinson’s Strange Situation

• Schweinhart et al (1993) found enrichment programmes (headstart) reduced the level of delinquency and criminal activities in adolescence.

The negative effects

• Belsky and Rovine (1988) state children were more insecurely attached if they were at day care for more that 20hrs per week.

• National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD)

• found that children who spent morethat 10hrs per week in day care were more aggressive at school.

Assessing the effects of day care

There are many factors influencing a child’s social development1.Different temperaments• Pennebaker et al (1981) found that shy children

do not gain as much from day care as they are scared.

• Egeland and Hiester (1995) discovered that securely attached children lost out at day care while insecurely attached children did better.

Assessing the effects of day care

Different attachment experiencesTime: how can you compare children who start

attending day care at different ages. Another factor is how long they spend there each day.

Quality: Campbell et al showed that quality affects the child’s experience of the setting.

Different kinds of day care facilities Nursery versus relatives: Melhuish et al (1991)

compared 255 women at work who used day care. The mothers developed different attitudes to maternal care showing a qualitative difference in the family dynamic.

Cognitive Development

• Cognitive development: growth of a child’s mental abilities.

• Secure base for explorationAttachment leads to security. Children need to feel secure before they explore their environment.

• Hazen and Durret (1982): Secure children more innovative and better at problem-solving.

Stimulation

• Stimulation is necessary for cognitive development

• Greenough et al (1987) found that rats in an enriched environment had larger brains with more neuron activities.

• Bryant et al (1980) discovered that childminders rewarded quiet behaviour while day care centres provided more stimulating environment.

Positive effects of Day Care

• Campbell et al (2001) discovered children scored high on maths and reading tests if they had attended a good quality day care centre (i.e. It was a stimulating environment)

• Anderson (1992) found that Swedish children who attended day care before 1, were top of the class at ages 8 – 13. Those at the bottom had not attended day care before school.

National Institute of Child Health and Human Development

• Good care: Interaction and vocal responsiveness from adults.

• Higher quality of care in first 3 years 1. Child’s language at 15, 24, & 36 months

is better2. Child’s scores on Bayley Scales of Infant

development are higher.

Negative effects of Day Care

Ruhm (2000) discovered that children who went

to day care before the age of three had lower

reading and maths skills

Russell ( 1999) did a meta-analysis

research on over 100 studies

conducted between 1957 – 1995

stated that day care had a negative

effect on cognitive development.