Attachment
Animal studies
Harlow
Lorenz
click to edit
16 Rhesus monkeys towellings and wire mother 4 conditions
Evaluation
Useful applications - importance of forming bond between mothers and baby = changes to hospitals
Findings - spends more time with mother regardless of milk - sort towel mother when scared -
Evaluations
Evidence suggests effect of imprinting not correct - GUITON found that when chicks were imprinted on a yellow rubber glove they did at first try to mate with it but with experience they eventually learned to prefer mating with other chickens
Procedure -
Significant differences in nature and complexity of bonds between humans and animals - Birds vs humans infants = mammals tend to show more emotional attachment towards young - human attachment involves reciprocity and interactional synchrony - bird imprinting is very different - so different why even generalise
Means that Lorenz overestimates the long term effect of imprinting
Practice question
click to edit
Harlow study of attachment involved used 2 surrogate mothers, a towel mother and a wire mother and measured the effect of food in attachment vs the effect of comfort on 16 baby rhesus mothers. This involved 4 conditions two where both mothers present and only one had milk and 2 where there was one mother present with milk with a baby rhesus monkeys in a cage. Harlow measured the amount of time the monkeys spent with each mother, how much time spent feeding, how far the monkeys explored and which mother they preferred when frightened. Harlow found that baby monkeys always preferred spending time with the towelling mother regardless of whether it had milk or not and would often cling to the towelling mother when getting milk from the wire mother. He also found that they would seek comfort from the towel when frightened.
Procedure 2/2 Findings 2/2
Ethical issues - Long term negative effects on the monkeys - unskilled at mating and some even killed their children later - short term very distressed, removed from mother Could it be justified? - maybe the findings on privation were significant enough at the time to justify - benefits eg orphanages not just food enough for healthy attachments - primates quite similar to humans and is impossible to study on children
Issues of extrapolation when using animal studies to investigate human attachment - biologically similar - humans much more complex in variables that effect attachment eg social and cultural factors
Explanation's of attachment
Montropic theory - Evolutionary innate porgramming - based on Animal studies
Learning theory - bases off of operant and classical conditioning
Classical - food UCS and Mother is ns - Baby associates UCS (food) with NS (MUM) and NS becomes a CS
Operant - primary drivers (food) is primary reinforcer and mother is secondary reinforcer - baby exhibits attachment behaviour eg crying and seperation and anxiety to ensure food
CrIIMPS (Critical period, Innate programming, Internal working model, monotropy, proximity and social releasers)
Ainsworths strange situation
Types of attachment
Insecure Avoidant Avoid intimacy with others (most common insecure in west) 22% in AInsworth
Insecure resitant Both seek and avoid intimacy with others 12% of Ainsworth
Secure attachment - Content and happt relationships and embraces intimacy with others
Cultural variations - Meta analysis finds that secure attachment most common in all cultures - suggests universal drives - however difference between resitant and avoidant in west vs non western cultures suggests culture plays some role
Difference within cultures was 1 1/2 greater than between cultures
Cultural bias of meta analsysis - Ethnocentric as used US based ainsworth study - behaviours seen as positive in US like autonomy not neccesarily seen positively in other cultures like japan -
Bowlbys theory of maternal deprivation
Harlow contradicts as found that baby rhesus preferred the towelling mother regardless of access to milk
Animal studies support Montropy = Innate programming (Lorenz) and Monotropy supported by Harlow as they spend most time with the towelling and comforting mother
Monotropy is socially sensitive because it places Mother as responsible for childs problems - negative implications
Bowlbys 44 thieves - 44 no criminals and 44 thieves - 16 diagnosed as affectionless psychpaths and of those majority were fiound to have experienced maternal deprivation
Critiqued as argue flawed methodology as didn't distinguish between deprivation and privation and argue that many experienced privation (never having attached) so therefore role of deprivation not so important - especisally if a suitable substitute found
Real world applications as changed care in hospitals as parents used tp be discouraged from seeing child - but now encouraged and able to stay to avoid deprivation
Influ
Romanian orphans