Bowlby's Theory of
Maternal Deprivation
maternal deprivation hypothesis:
breaking the maternal bond with the child during early years of its life is likely to have serious effects on its intellectual, social & emotional development
Bowlby also claimed that many of these negative effects of maternal deprivation are permanent & irreversible
separation vs deprivation
- separation : child isn't in the presence of the primary attachment figure
- only becomes an issue for development if child is deprived of emotional care
- brief separations (particularly if child is with a substitute caregiver) is not significant for development
- however, extended separations can lead to deprivation, which by definition causes harm
critical period
- first 2 & 1/2 years of life = critical period for psychological development
- if child is separated from mother in absence of suitable substitute care & so deprived of emotional care - psychological damage was inevitable
Effects on development
intellectual development
- Bowlby believed if children were deprived of maternal care for too long during the critical period they would experience delayed intellectual development, characterised by abnormally low IQ
- this has been demonstrated in studies of adoption
- e.g. Goldfarb (1947) found lower IQ in children who had remained in institutions as opposed to those who were fostered & thus had a higher standard of emotional care
Emotional development
- Bowlby identified affectionless psychopathy as the inability to experience guilt or strong emotion towards others
- this prevents developing fulfilling relationships & is associated with criminality
- affectionless psychopaths cannot appreciate feelings of victims & so lack remorse for their actions
Key Study - 44 Thieves Study
- study in maternal deprivation & juvenile delinquency 1946
- examined link between affectionless psychopathy & maternal deprivation
Procedure
- 44 criminal teens accused of stealing
- all thieves interviews for signs of affectionless psychopathy
- characterised as a lack of affection, lack of guilt about their actions & lack of empathy for their victims
- families also interviewed in order to establish whether the thieves had prolonged early separations from their mothers
- sample cmpared to control group of 44 non-criminal but emotionally-disturbed young people
Findings - 14 of 44 thieves could be described as affectionless psychopaths & 12 of these had experiences prolonged separation from their mothers in first 2 years if life
- only 5 of remaining 30 thieves had experienced separations
- only 2 participants in control group had experienced long separations
Conclusions - prolonged early separation/deprivation caused affectionless psychopaths
EVALUATION
!LIMITATION!
flawed evidence
- poor quality evidence its based on
- 44 thieves study flawed as Bowlby carried out both family interviews & assessments for affectionless psychopathy
- open to bias - knew in advance which teenagers he expected to show signs of psychopathy
- means Bowlby's original sources of evidence for maternal deprivation had serious flaws & would not be taken seriously as evidence nowadays
!LIMITATION!
HOWEVER
- new line of research provided some modest support for idea that maternal deprivation can have long-term effects
- Levy et al (2003) showed that separating baby rats from their mother for a little as a day had a permanent effect on their social development
- means although Bowlby relied on flawed evidence to support theory of maternal deprivation, there are other sources of evidence for his ideas
deprivation & privation
- confusion between different types of early experiences
- Rutter (1981) drew an important distinction between 2 types of early negative experience
- deprivation strictly refers to loss of primary attachment figure after attachment has developed
- privation is failure to form any attachment in the first place
- takes place when child are brought up in institutional care
- Rutter pointed out that severe long-term damage Bowlby associated with deprivation is more likely to be result of privation instead
- means Bowlby may have overestimated seriousness of effects of deprivation in children's devlopment
!LIMITATION!
critical vs sensitive period
- Bowlby's idea of critical period
- for Bowlby, damage was inevitable if a child had not formed an attachment in 1st 2 & 1/2 years of life
- this is critical period
- however - evidence suggests that in many cases good quality after care can prevent most/all of this damage
- Koluchova (1976) reported case of Czech twins
- twins experience very severe physical & emotional abuse from age of 18 months - 7 years
- although they were severely damaged emotionally by their experience, they received excellent care & by their teens they had recovered fully
- means lasting harm is not inevitable even in cases of severe privation
- 'Critical period therefore better seen as a sensitive period'