Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Attachment (Y1) - Coggle Diagram
Attachment (Y1)
-
-
Basis of attachment
Genes - twin study from O'Connor and Croft showed close concordance in MZ and DZ twins suggesting no influence of genetics on attachment
- Model suggest 14th variance in attachment type due to genetics, 32% to shared environment and 53% to non shared environment
- Roisman and Fraley - 485 same sex twin pairs; found shared and non shared environments contribute to attachment security
- Dozier - attachment to foster mothers was as good as the concordance for biological infant pairs, suggesting little genetic influence
Environmental influence - Maternal sensitivity hypothesis; Ainsworth
- Quality and sensitivity of mother-infant interactions predicts attachment - responding to infant cues
- Meins - mother's mind-mindedness - treats infant as individual with their own mind, rather than a creature needing satisfaction, with emphasis on respond to inferred mental state not just behaviour - predict attachment security at 12 months
- True - mother's frightened / frightening behaviour may contribute to attachment security
- Maternal depression - Kemppinen et al; mothers with low maternal sensitivity scores and high maternal control predicted low child cooperation and prenatal depression
- A lot of varriance from non shared environment, and even a mother responding differently to each child can result in different attachment (gender, birth order etc)
Theories of attachment - attachment is a close emotional relationship between two people characterised by mutual affection and a desire to maintain proximity to each other
- An affectionate and long enduring bond and the partner is just as important as the unique individual
Freud - proposed the first stage theory of development (psychosexual) -
- oral stage - attachment bond is formed with the mother because of the satisfaction of the id demand for food (oral gratification)
- Erikson - overall responsiveness - trust and mistrust; similar to caregiver sensitivty hypothesis of Ainsworth where a more responsive caregiver gives stronger attachment
Learning theorists - operant and classical conditioning, behaviourism
- Feeding -> infant contentment -> caregiver affection (Dollard and Miller, drive reduction)
- Multiple comforts at feeding time -> mother associated with pleasurable sensations (Pavlov, classical conditioning)
- Mother-infant relationship a secondary by product (reinforcer) of reduction of primary drives of hunger, thirst and pain (drive reduction, D and M, operant conditioning)
- Harlow challenge - hunger is not the underlying factor in the attachment bond; comfort is more important
- Lorenz's geese - studied imprinting from bird attachment, first large moving object was basis of attachment in critical period (incubated v natural)
Attachments are typical to mother, but most infants have multiple early attachments
- Schaffer and Emerson - 1/3 strongest to mother, attachments with responsive caregivers and interactive persons
- Israeli Kibbutzim - 1-2 year olds showed strong attachment to mother and to the metapelet as both were reassuring and provided a secure base
Harlow's monkey's: 1960s study of the factors most important to attachment:
- Important conclusions - contact comfort is essential to attachment, not just basic survival needs - supports sensitivity hypothesis and also the idea of insecure attachment coming from depressed caregivers who are dismissive of needs
- He tested how important feeding is by confronting rehsus monkey's with two mothers; one wire with food and one covered in cloth, aiming to see which mother was preferred
- Infant's affection for cloth mother provides basis for later close relationships, showing comfort is more important than food
- It is also important that the child is communicated with and is exposed to social situations in order for normal development socially and cognitively as monkey's were maladapted following release due to separation
Impact of care outside the family: Fostering; beneficial alternative to institutional care, children often develop normally if given responsive caregivingChildminding and day care - Insecure attachments are a possibility due to large carer:child ratios, and Belsky suggested those spending more than 20 hours a week as 1-2 year olds in these settings would lead to insecure attachment
- Melhuish (1990) - childminded group performed worse cognitively, in communication and language development and this was the area that was least stimulated
NICHD Longitudinal study - Studied children who were in early child care at 4.5, 7, 9, 11 and 12 years old
- Cognitive language development - higher the quality of day care, the better the outcomes, but all detriment is solved by 11 in terms of language and academic achievement
- Social development - quantity of day care leads to more aggression and disobedience, effects do decrease but often stay significant until 12 years old at least
-> Positive and negative outcomes of daycare are highest for centre based daycare rather than hom based care - no adverse effects from paternal or grandparental care (Linting and IV 2009)
- Effects sizes outweighed by quality of parenting quality
Impacts of the day care in relation to the child:
Temperament interactions:
- Pluess and Belsky - interaction effect; children with difficult temperament show more behaviour problems in low quality day care than high quality day care
Group effects:
- Dmitrieva (2007) - ECLS study found contagion or diffusion effect; the more children with extensive exposure to childcare, the more teacher-rater externalising behavour there was
- Same for achievement - the group follows the majority behaviour
- Many children may be affected, but individual aggression etc is increased by group
Genetic moderation - Belsky and Pluess (2013)
- NICHD sample - diathesis stress model best explains effects as those externalizing poor behaviour had poor childcare quality (7 repeat allele)
- Teacher reported social skills in kindergarten showed a significant crossover interaction supporting a differential susceptibility model
- Better quality childcare predicts better social skills in kindergarten, but children with the repeat 7 allele do noticeably worse when experiencing poor quality childcare, and better with higher quality