Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Bowlby's Theory of
Maternal Deprivation, EVALUATION - Coggle Diagram
-
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
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
!LIMITATION!
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
-