Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
23 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
What was Schaffers and Emerson Study? What were the results? |
60 babies from Glasgow was studied every month for a year then at 18 months to investigate attachment. They found that 1/2 of the babies showed separation anxiety at 25-32weeks by 40weeks 80% of babies had specific attachment and 30% had multiple attachment. There a 4 stages the babies went through; Asocial-they don't mind going with others but the baby is more comfortable with family members and are forming a bond with careers but similar action with non-human objects Indiscriminate attachment- Shows social behavior and prefers people to inanimate objects Even though they prefer familiar adults they don't show separation anxiety Specific Attachment-strong preference for certain people and shows stranger anxiety. They will have a Primary attachment figure. Multiple Attachment- they extend attachment to other adults they regularly spend time with. This is secondary attachment. |
|
|
Evaluation of Schaffer and Emerson |
Good external Validity- Carried out in the family's house and we're ordinary activities that were reported to the investigator. There for presence of investigator does not affect results Internal validity due to it being a longitudinal study so there are no confounding variable Sample is not representative as everyone was from the same social class and city It was 50 years ago and child rearing practice have changed therefore results may not be representative Asocial stage may not be valid because children have poor coordination and are almost immobile so hard to observe behavior. Conflicting studies- Bolwby and monotrophy and Ijzendoorn says they form multiple attachment from the outset Limited behavioral measures of attachment, they are too crude as a measure of attachment |
|
|
Lorenz's Study and Results |
Divided two groups of goose eggs, One group were in a natural environment with their mother while the other hatched in the incubator and saw Lorenz. He brought the term imprinting which means innate readiness to acquire certain behaviors during a critical period. The incubator geese followed Lorenz around and did not attach to a mother figure. They also were sexual imprinted and showed mating rituals to those who look like whoever they imprinted with. |
|
|
Evaluation of Lorenz |
It is not generalisable to Humans because the mammalian mother attachment system is different to geese. Guition found that sexual imprinting is not permanent because the chickens that imprinted on rubber glove tried to mate with the rubber glove but after experience they learnt to prefer chickens. |
|
|
Harlow's study and Findings |
Harlow reared 16 baby monkeys with two wire mothers one with food and the other that was covered with cloth. He found that the monkeys preferred most the cloth mother and contact comfort better and spent most it's time with the cloth mother and only went to the food mother when the monkeys was hungry. Whenever it felt anxious or scared the baby monkey went to the contact mother.
He followed the monkeys to adulthood to see if maternal deprivation had a permant effect. He found that monkeys with wire mothers were dysfunctional and we're more aggressive and less sociable than other monkeys and many did not mate and if they had offspring they neglected or killed their young. He found the critical period for monkeys were 90 days and early deprivation has permanent effects. |
|
|
Harlow's studies Evaluation |
He shows attachment does not develop as a result of being fed and his results are more closely related to Human attachment Practical value because it helps social worker understand risk factors of child neglect and abuse. It helps us know how important attachment figures are for monkeys in zoos. The monkeys suffered alot from Harlow's experiment and their suffering Is also human like therefore very unethical |
|
|
Learning Theory-Dollard and Miller |
They believed attachment was learnt because the child loves those that feed them through classical conditioning where the food is the unconditional stimulus and the carer is s neutral stimulus that becomes a conditioned stimulas
Operant conditioning leads to their behavior being reinforced and explains why babies cry for comfort which helps build attachment. Attachment is the secondary drive |
|
|
Evaluation for the learning theory |
Animal studies prove that they attach to others before they are fed or Lorenz. In Harlow's they preferred the cloth mother to food. In Schaffers and Emerson they attached to their biological mother more even though other people fed them more. These studies undermine the theory Other factors help form attachment for example reciprocity and interactional sychrony. |
|
|
Bolwby's Theory |
Attachment is innate and evolutionary. Imprinting and Attachment evolved because young stay close to caregivers that protect them. They have innate social releasers that helps adult attachment. The critical period is two years in humans. He beilved that children had a more important attachment with one caregiver. More constant and predictable a child's care the better attachment and the effect of every separation from the mother adds up so the safest dosage is zero. The relationship with the mother and child creates an internal working model where it gives an example of how relationships are like and affects how they parent them self. |
|
|
Evaluation for Bowlby |
Schaffers and Emerson show that babies can have multiple attachments and some formed two at the same time, Suess would say that primary attachment figure is just stronger but not nessacarily different.
Clear evidence for social releasers and mothers and babies showed interactional sychrony.
Support for internal working model because Bailey et AL showed that mother that reported poor attachments with their mum had poor attachment with their children.
|
|
|
Ainsworth- Strange situation |
There were 7 stages and they were looking for how babies react with caregivers and situations without them. They measured: proximity seeking,exploration and secure base, stranger anxiety, separation anxiety, response to re Union. 1) child encouraged to explore room with mothers 2) stranger comes and tries to interact with kids 3) caregiver leaves and the baby and stranger are in the room. 4)stranger leaves caregiver comes in 5) caregiver leaves so the child is by them self 6) stranger comes in 7)caregiver comes in. They identified three attachment types: secure, insecure avoidant, insecure resistant. |
|
|
Findings of Ainsworth- Strange situation |
75%-secure: children were happy to explore but regularly went back to the caregiver. Moderate separation and stranger anxiety. Accepts comfort of the caregiver at reunion 22% insecure avoidant: Explores freely but don't go back to caregiver. No reaction when caregiver leaves. Little separation anxiety. Do not require comfort at reunion stage 3% Insecure resistant: seek greater proximity so explore less, huge separation and stranger anxiety but resist comfort from caregiver on return. |
|
|
Evaluation of Strange situation |
Experiment is valid because it goes onto show that Attachment type can explain subsequent outcomes in later life Inter- rater reliability because alot of observers were watching the same children and generally agreed on the attachment type so it is not very subjective Culturally relative results |
|
|
Koonsberg Strange situation |
Did 32 studies of Strange situation from 8 countries mostly Western countries and were meta analysed. Results varied but the most common was still secure but proportions differ. Insecure resistant was the least common which ranged from 3-30%. Insecure avoidant was most common in Germany. |
|
|
Evaluation of Koonsberg |
Large sample size therefore more internal validity and less anomalous results. Unrepresentative of culture because comparisons were made between countries and not cultures because different countries raise there kids differently and the samples were unrepresentative of the whole country Biased results because the study is Anglo-american so it leads to imposed etic which means cultural universals. Kagan says that Strange situation does not test attachment but temperament instead of relationship with caregiver and just measured anxiety therefore not a valid study |
|
|
Rutter et al Romanian orphan study |
165 Romanian orphans were involved in an longitudinal study and they were compared psychologically cognitively and physically with the British orphans adopted before the age of 6 months They found that those adopted before the age of four caught up with their British children even though they classified as mentally retarded. Those that were adopted after had disinhibited attachments. |
|
|
Effect of institutionalisation |
Physical underdevelopment Low intellectual level Disinhibited attachment- clingy, attention seeking, too affectionate with everyone and trouble with peers Poor parenting |
|
|
Evaluation for orphan studies |
Individual differences-not generalisable Real life application- can be used in orphanages to give the best care 1/3 can repair |
|
|
Attachments and later relationships |
Bowlby- children that did not have a loving relationship with a reliable caregiver struggled to form attachment. They showed type A,C behaviors with later relationships Attachment and Later Childhood- Assessed 196 kids and found that secure kids were unlikely to bully, insecure avoidant were likely to be victims and insecure resistant were the bullies Hazan and Schaffer- took 620 replies to infant attachment type and attitude to their partners now. Found that avoidant had fear of intimacy and were jealous and secure had more longer lasting relationships |
|
|
Maternal deprivation Bowlby |
Deprivation lead to low emotional development and many had affectionless psychopathy. Separation lead to low IQ levels and mental retardation |
|
|
44 Thieves study |
44 Thieves and a control group were examined to find a link with psychopathy and maternal deprivation. 14/44 were affectionless psychopath and 12/14 were separated from mothers during their critical period. In the control only two experienced long separations |
|
|
Goldfarb |
Lower IQ for those who stayed in institutions compared to fostered children. Fostered group: 96 Orphanage group:68 This is because fostered children had 1 on 1 care with caregivers that taught like lessons |
|
|
Evaluation for Maternal Deprivation |
+ animal studies show that rats and monkeys separated from there mum had permanent effects on their social developments. + goldfarb and theif study - Lewis re did and found the history of prolonged separation had no effects so the outcome may be because of another factor - Rutters says long term damage is from privation not deprivation - Flaws in Orphanage studies because the sample were traumatized and had poor after care as well not just maternal care - sensitive period rather than critical period because two Czech twins were isolated but after getting loving adults they fully recovered. |
