Developmental Psychology - Attachment - Mindmap in A Level and IB Psychology

Created by: Harry Jones
Created on: 02-01-13 10:15

View mindmap

Developmental Psychology - Attachment
- Explanations of Attachments
  - Social Learning Theory
    - Hay and Vespo found that parents: - Act as role models - Directly instruct children - Socially facilitate (help child play with friends etc.)
    - Bandura proposed that children learn through imitation of parent behaviour
    - Evaluation
      - Limitations: - Same as learning theory (in terms of lack of consideration for emotion) - Research is artificial and findings down to demand characteristics - Social learning theory doesn't account for every factor (e.g: gender differences and genetic influences)
      - Strengths: - Studies are reliable and establish cause and effect clearly - Can be applied to explain many other types of behaviour (e.g: aggression)
  - Learning Theory
    - Classical Conditioning - associating certain things (being fed with presence of mother)
    - Operant Conditioning - Dollard and Miller found evidence that babies learn through reinforcement (when they are hungry they are fed - hunger goes away = negative reinforcement)
    - Evaluation
      - Limitations: - Harlow's monkeys; importance of comfort overlooked - Schaffer and Emerson found attachments were formed earlier - Klaus and Kennell stress emotional bonding
      - Strengths: - Successfully determines how attachments are formed - Clear and well explained - Supported by Pavlov's dogs experiment
  - Bowlby's Evolutionary Theory
    - Concepts
      - Social releasers (e.g: crying) and biological instincts (sucking and grasping)
      - Monotropy: Importance of one attachment which becomes an internal working model for future attachments (continuity hypothesis)
      - Safe base: where the baby is relaxed and secure
      - Temperamenthypothesis: children have certain personalities that vary
    - First 3 years is a critical period for monotropic attachment to develop
    - Evaluation
      - Strengths: - Harlow's study supports the idea that we need to form attachments to survive - Hazan and Shaver's study into child and adult attachments support the continuity hypothesis - Koluchova study of Genie supports critical period idea
      - Limitations: - Schaffer and Emerson's study found that monotropy was not always found - Koluchova czech twin study suggests that effects of not forming a monotropic attachment not as bad as Bowlby's theory claims - Zimmerman et al found dual attachments to be common: weakness of monotropy
- Attachments
  - Maccoby's four characteristicsof an attachment: seeking proximity, distress on separation, joy on reunion and general orientation of behaviour
  - Konrad Lorenz theory of imprinting (ethological approach)
  - Klaus and Kennell tested the effect of skin-to-skin contact and found that there was a sensitive period for bonding
  - Schaffer and Emerson's longitudinal study found that: attachments are usually formed between 25 and 32 weeks and that many infants attach to both parents/caregivers (dual attachments)
  - Schaffer and Emerson developed "Stages in the development of attachments": 1) Asocial stage 0-6weeks 2) Indiscriminateattachments 6weeks-6months 3) Specific attachments 7-11months 4) Multiple attachments
- Types of Attachment
  - Mary Ainsworth's Three Types
    - Types Identified: - Secure - Insecure-ambivalent/resistant - Insecure-avoidant
    - The "Strange Situation" provided data and involves: 1) Parent entering room with child 2) Stranger entering 3) Parent leaving and stranger trying to comfort child 4) Parent returning
      - Evaluation
        Limitations: - Low ecological validity - Relevant to culture and not representativeof all children - Ethical issues: distress - Lack of control over extraneous variables or the infant's temperament
        
        Strengths: - Reliable - Easy to replicate - High mundane realism - Few demand characteristics(observation conducted in secret) - Produces rich data, very efficient
    - Solomon and Maine later added a fourth attachment type: - Strength: Supports Ainsworth's research and her research lead to further study - Weakness: Ainsworth failed to consider something in her research
    - Ainsworth concluded that the cause of attachment type is the sensitivity of the mother . Others add that the temperament of the child is also important
  - Cultural Variations
    - Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenburg conducted a meta-analysis of 32 strange situation studies around the world
    - Individualistic cultures (e.g: Germany) have more insecure-avoidant
    - Collectivistic cultures (e.g: Japan) have more insecure-ambivalent/resistant
- Disruption of Attachments
  - Short-term Separation
    - Factors which affect response to separation: age, attachment type, sex, quality of care when left, previous attachments and individual differences
    - Robertson and Robertson formed the PDD model: - Protest (2-3hrs) - Despair (1 day) - Detachment
    - Evaluation
      - Limitations: - Factors aren't considered (e.g: research has shown separation is easier when good quality care is provided) - Many other factors affect how a child reacts (lack of control over extraneous variables)
      - Strengths: - Findings have had important implications - Supported by Bowlby's theory of the need for a healthy attachment - Supported by Ainsworth's research which found similar responses to separation - High ecological validity
  - Long-term separation (Deprivation)
    - Bowlby's study of 44 juvenile thieves: lead him to propose the maternal deprivation hypothesis where he found that depression and emotionally disturbed behaviour can occur from deprived childhood attachment
  - Privation
    - Longitudinal Studies (Institutionalisation)
      - Rutter et al studied Romanian orphans and found disinhibited attachment
      - Tizard and Hodgesconducted a similar study in the form of a natural experiment and found that children adopted rather than returned to their birth parents were more likely to form close attachments
        Evaluation: [] Strengths: - Range of research methods (reliable) - High ecological validity [] Limitations: - High attrition rate - Ethical Issues - Difficult to assess extent of privation
        Rutter et al studied Romanian orphans and found disinhibited attachment
    - Reactive Attachment Disorder
      - Parker and Forest found that this condition is a permenant result of privation. Adults are unable to give or receive affection
        Quinton et al studied women raised in institutions and found a "cycle of Privation" as they were more likely to experience problems raising children of their own
    - Case Studies
      - Koluchova - czech twins: Adopted by a loving family and made a full recovery with normal attachments
      - Curtiss - case of Genie: Girl experienced neglect and privation, was found and recovered in institutions - never fully recovered or fully developed intellectually
- Day Care
  - Types of day care: - Nursery - Childminders - Nanny/Au pair - Informal arrangements
  - Age
    - Bowlby's maternal deprivation hypothesis suggests that 3 years would be a good age
    - Belsky suggested that before 12 months children were at a higher risk of forming insecure attachments
    - Ainsworth's research suggests that insecure attachments could result from separation for day care
    - Schaffer and Emerson's stages suggest that infants form discriminate attachments after 6 months (shouldn't be in day care at this point)
  - Quality of care
    - Scarr's factors: - Staff training - Appropriate activities - good ratio - adequate space - minimising staff turnover
  - Social Development
    - Day care being bad for social development
      - Belsky and Rovine found that children in day care were more likely to have an insecure attachment
      - Campbell, Lamb and Hwang found that long days make children frustrated and lead to negative peer relations but short days increase good social development
        Day care being good for social development
        Shea day care increases social development and decreases aggression
        
        Clarke-Stewert et al found that children in day care were better at coping with social situations
        
        Field et al found that children that attended day care more often (higher intensity) were more cooperative in peer relations
    - Day care being good for social development
      - Shea day care increases social development and decreases aggression
      - Clarke-Stewert et al found that children in day care were better at coping with social situations
      - Field et al found that children that attended day care more often (higher intensity) were more cooperative in peer relations

Get Revising

Developmental Psychology - Attachment

Comments

Similar Psychology resources: