Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Explanations of Attachment - Learning Theory - Coggle Diagram
Explanations of Attachment - Learning Theory
Learning theory sees all behaviour as acquired through experience via the process of association
Attachments are seen as developing through an infant learning to associate a caregiver with feeding
As caregivers meet physiological needs , learning theory is also known as 'Cupboard Love'
Classical conditioning occurs when a response produced naturally by a certain stimulus , becomes associated with another stimulus that is not normally associated with that particular response
Therefore attachments are learned by the stimulus of food ( an unconditioned stimulus ) , which produces a natural response of pleasure ( an unconditioned response ) , being paired with a caregiver ( a conditioned stimulus )
After several paired presentations of caregiver and food , the infant learns to associate pleasure solely with the caregiver without any need for food
Before Learning : Food (UCS) = Pleasure (UCR)
During Learning : Food (UCS) + Caregiver (CS) = Pleasure (UCR)
After Learning : Caregiver (CS) = Pleasure (CR)
Operant conditioning is based on the 'Law of Effect' , where any action that has a pleasurable outcome will be repeated again with similar circumstances
Pleasurable outcomes are known as reinforcers ( as they strengthen the behaviour , making it more likely to occur again ) . Positive reinforcements involve receiving something pleasurable for performing a certain behaviour
Negative reinforcements involve not receiving something non pleasurable for performing a certain behaviour
Therefore attachments occur through caregivers becoming associated with reducing the unpleasant feeling of hunger ( a negative reinforcement ) so that the caregiver becomes a source of reinforcement ( reward ) themselves
Dollard and Miller ( 1950 ) argued that in their first year , babies are fed 2000 times generally by their main caregiver , which creates ample opportunity for the carer to become associated with the removal of the unpleasant feeling of hunger ( a form of negative reinforcement ) . This supports the idea that attachments are learned through operant conditioning
Schaffer and Emerson ( 1964 ) found that in 39% of cases the mother was not the babies main attachment figure , suggesting that feeding is not the primary explanation of attachment
Fox ( 1977 ) Studied attachment bonds between mothers , babies and metapelets on communal farms . Metapelets are specially trained , full time carers of newborn children , allowing mothers to work ( though some time is spent with the children ) . Generally children were more attached to mothers than metapelets . As metapelets did the majority of the feeding this does not support learning theory
Evaluation
Conditioning best explains the learning of simple behaviours but attachments are complex with an intense emotional component . This and the fact that attachments are formed with those who do not provide food , cast doubt over learning theory
Schaffer ( 1971 ) commented that 'cupboard love' theories put things the wrong way round . Babies do not 'live to eat' but 'eat to live' , they actively seek stimulation , not passively receive nutrition
Bowlby ( 1973 ) argued that babies only need food occasionally but constantly require the emotional security from an attachment figure . This suggests that food is not the main reason for attachments . Conditioning and reinforcement through feeding probably do play a part in helping to form attachments but they are not the main reasons
Behaviorist explanations are reductionist as they explain complex behaviours in the simplest way possible . It does not consider internal cognitive processes or the emotional nature of attachments
