Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Attachment Evaluations, Lorenz, Harlow - Coggle Diagram
Attachment Evaluations
-
Stages of Attachment
Good External Validity :check:
Most observations made by parents during activity
- Alternative would be researchers recording observations
- This could distract the baby or cause anxiety
Means its highly likely that ppts behaved naturally
Counterpoint :red_cross:
Issues with mothers as 'observers'
- They may not be objective
- They can be biased with what they notice/ choose to report. They could have misremembered information
Means despite natural behaviour, behaviour may not have been recorded accurately
Poor evidence for asocial stage :red_cross:
Poor validity of measures used to assess attachment in asocial
- Babies are mostly immobile so anxiety would be shown through subtle, hard to observe actions
- Difficult for mothers to observe and report back signs of anxiety/ attachment in age group
Means babies can be quite social but can appear to be asocial due to flawed method
Real World Applications :check:
Research has practical application in daycare
- In asocial/ indiscriminate stage, they can be comforted by a skilled adult
- Research also explains starting daycare with an unfamiliar adult can cause problems in specific attachment stage
Means parents use of day care can be planned using the stages
Role of the Father
Confusion over research questions :red_cross:
Lack of clarity over question asked
- Some researchers want to understand the role as a secondary attachment figures, others as primary figures
- Former see fathers as behaving different than mothers, latter found fathers can take on the maternal role
Its difficult to offer a simple answer for 'role of the father'
Conflicting Evidence :red_cross:
Findings vary depending on methodology used
- Longitudinal studies like Grossman suggest importance in fathers attachment for play and stimulation
- Due to this, we'd expect differences in children living in single mother or lesbian couple households, but studies show no difference
Means the question to the distinctive role of the father is still unanswered
Counterpoint :check:
Research may not actually be in conflict
- Fathers may be taking on a distinctive role in families, that single mother and lesbian couple families accommodate
Means the question may actually be clear. When fathers are present, they have a distinctive role, when absent families can adapt
Real World Application :check:
Research into the role of fathers can offer advice
- Parents may worry over primary caregiver role. Mothers may feel pressured to be in the stereotypical role, father may feel pressured to work
- Research can be used to offer advice to parents, they can inform fathers are capable of being PAF but not having a father around won't affect a child's development
Means parental anxiety about fathers role can be reduced
-
Learning Theory
Counter-Evidence from animal studies :red_cross:
Lack of support from studies conducted on animals
- Lorenz's geese imprinted on the first moving object regardless of association with food
- There is also no support for Harlow's monkeys - they displayed attachment towards the soft mother compared to wired milk mother
Shows factors other than association with food are important in attachment formation
Counter-Evidence from human studies :red_cross:
Further lack of support from human baby studies
- Schaffer and Emerson found babies usually form main attachment to mothers regardless of whether they're main feeders
- Isabella found good interactional synchrony predicted attachment quality (not related to food)
Suggests food isn't the main factor in attachment formations
Some conditioning may be involved :check:
Elements of conditioning may be involved in aspects of attachment
- Its unlikely that food is a central part in attachment, but conditioning may still play a role
- A baby may associate a warm feeling with the presence of a certain adult and can influence the baby's choice
Means learning theory may still be useful in understanding attachment developments
Counterpoint :red_cross:
Both conditionings see the baby in a passive role in attachment development
- They only respond to associations with comfort or reward
- Research babies take a very active role in attachment interactions
Means conditioning may not be the best explanation for any attachment aspect
Bowlby's Theory
Validity of Monotropy Challenged :red_cross:
The concept of monotropy lacks validity
- Schaffer and Emerson found a significant minority of babies form multiple attachments at the same time
- The 1st attachments influence may be because its stronger not different in quality than other attachments
Means Bowlby may be incorrect that there's a unique quality/ importance of primary attachment
Support for Social Releasers :check:
Clear evidence the cute behaviours elicit caregiver interactions
- There was a study to observe how babies trigger interactions from caregivers
- Researchers instructed the PAFs to ignore social releasers. They became more distressed and even curled up and lay motionless
Illustrates the role of social releasers in emotional development and suggests importance in the process
Support for Internal Working Model :check:
Predicts the patterns of attachments are passed down to generations
- Bailey et al assessed relationships between 99 mothers and their 1 yr baby. They measured mother's attachment to their own primary attachment
- They also assessed attachment quality with baby. Mothers with poor attachment to primary figures were more likely to have poorly attached babies
Supports Bowlby's idea that mother's ability to form attachments to babies are influenced by previous ones
Counterpoint :red_cross:
Likely more important influences on social development
- Some psychologists believe genetic differences in anxiety and sociability affect behaviour in babies and adults
- The differences could also impact on their parenting ability
Means importance of model may be overstated in behaviour at expense of other factors
Strange Situation
Good Predictive Validity :check:
Its outcome predicts aspects of the baby's later development
- Much research shows assessed babies/toddlers as secure have better outcomes in childhood and adulthood (better in school and less involved in bullying)
- Secure attached babies also have better mental health. Insecure resistant types and other types usually have the worst outcomes
Suggests SS measures something real and meaningful in baby development
Counterpoint :red_cross:
Clearly measures something associated with later development
- Not all psychologists believe this is attachment
- Some suggests genetically - influenced anxiety levels could explain attachment behaviour variations
Means SS may not actually measure attachment
Good Reliability :check:
Good inter-rater reliability
- Psychologists tested inter-rater reliability of SS for team of trained observers, they agreed on attachment type 94% time
- May be because its under controlled conditions and behaviours involve large easily observable movements
Means that we can be confident that attachment type assessed by SS isn't based on subjective judgments
Test may be Culture-Bound :red_cross:
It may not be a valid attachment measure in different cultural context
- SS was developed in UK and US, It may be culture-bound. Different cultures have different experiences which may affect responses to SS
- In a Japanese study babies displayed high separation anxiety (high proportion of insecure-resistant). May be due to rare nature of mother-baby separation
Means its difficult to know what SS is measuring outside of US and UK
Cultural Variation
Indigenous Researchers :check:
Most studies conducted by indigenous psychologists
- IJzendoorn and Kroonenberg included research by German team (Grossman) and Takashi, who's Japanese
- Problems in cross-cultural research can be avoided like misunderstanding of language and bias
Means there's a chance researchers and ppts communicated successfully - increases validity
Counterpoint :red_cross:
Not true in all cross-cultural research
- American psychologists studied child-rearing and patterns of attachment in Efé of Zaire
- Data might have been affected by difficulties in gathering data from ppts outside their culture
Means that data from some countries might have been affected by bias and cross-cultural communication difficulties
Confounding Variables :red_cross:
The impact of confounding variables on findings: studies not usually matched for methodology
- Sample characteristics (poverty, social class, age ) can confound results studied in different countries
- Environmental variables also confounds results (size of room or availability of interesting toys). Babies may explore more in small rooms with lots of toys instead of large, bare rooms
Means looking at attachment behaviour in non-matched studies conducted in countries don't tell us much about cross-cultural attachment patterns
Imposed Etic :red_cross:
Trying to impose a test designed for one cultural context to another
- Imposed etic happens when we assume an idea that works in one context will work in another
- In Britain and US, lack of affection may indicate avoidant attachment, in Germany its seen more as independence not insecurity. (Can't work in Germany)
Means behaviours measure by SS may not have the same meanings in different cultural contexts
Maternal Deprivation
Flawed Evidence :red_cross:
Poor quality of the evidence it is based on
- Bowlby carried out both family interviews and assessments for AP. Left him open to bias, he knew in advance who might have AP
- Also influenced by Goldfarb's findings on development of deprived children in orphanages. The study had confounding variables as Goldfarb's ppts had early trauma and institutional care as well as prolonged separation from primary
Means Bowlby's original evidence sources for maternal deprivation has flaws
Counterpoint :check:
New research showed support for idea that maternal deprivation has long term
- Psychologists showed separating baby rats from mothers for even a day has permanent effects on their social development
Means that there are other sources of evidence for his ideas
Deprivation and Privation :red_cross:
Confusion between different types of early experience
- Rutter made a distinction between two early negative experiences, Deprivation = loss of PAF after development. Privation = failure to form an attachment (possibly in institutional care)
- Long term damage associated with deprivation may actually be privation, so studied children may be 'prived' instead of 'deprived'. Children in the 44 thieves study also had disrupted early lives (may not have made strong attachments)
Means that Bowlby may have overestimated the seriousness of effects of deprivation in development
Critical vs Sensitive Periods :red_cross:
Evidence to suggest good quality aftercare can prevent most damage
- Bowlby said damage was inevitable if child hadn't formed an attachment in 2 1/2 yrs
- Psychologist reported Czech Twins who experienced severe physical/ emotional abuse from 18 months - 7yrs. They received excellent care and by their teens fully recovered
Means lasting harm isn't inevitable even in severe cases. 'Critical Period' is better seen as a 'Sensitive Period'
Romanian Orphan Studies
Real world Applications :check:
Application to improve conditions for children growing outside the family home
- Studies improved understanding of effects of early institutional care and how to prevent them. This improves conditions experienced by child
- Children homes avoid large numbers of caregivers for each child and have 2 key workers. There is also an effort to put children into foster care or adoption
Means children in institutional care have a chance to develop normal attachments
Fewer confounding variables :check:
Lack of confounding variables
- Studied orphans post WW2 had varying degrees of trauma, difficult to separate effects of neglect/ abuse and institutional care
- However Romanian children had been handed over by loving parents who couldn't afford to keep them
Results are less likely to be confounded - higher internal validity
Lack of adult data :red_cross:
Lack of data on adult development
- ERA study last looked at ppts early - mid 20s, Means we don't have current data on long term early care effects (forming and maintaining relationships/ mental health)
- Takes a long time to gather data due to longitudinal design
Means it will be a while before we know the long term effects of Romanian orphans
Counterpoint :red_cross:
Studying Romanian orphanages may introduce CVs
- The quality of care was very poor, receiving little intellectual stimulation or comfort
Means harmful effects in studies may represent effects of POOR institutional care
-
-
-