Development of Social Attachments in Infancy - Schaffer & Emerson (1964)

OVERVIEW:

• Realising that attachments weren't formed at birth, the researchers were interested in documenting the process of how attachments formed.
• To achieve this they studied a group of working-class Glaswegian children and their mothers on a regular basis.

AIMS:

• To assess whether there was a pattern of attachment formation that was common to all infants.
• To identify and describe the distinct stages by which attachments form.

METHOD:

• A longitudinal study was conducted upon 60 newborn babies and their mothers from working class area of Glasgow.
• Mothers and babies were studied each month for 1st year in their own homes and again at 18 months.

METHOD CONT.

• Observations were conducted, as well as interviews with mothers, with q's being asked about whom infants smiled at, whom they responded to, who caused them distress etc.
• Attachment was measured in 2 ways:

Separation Protest:  Assessed through several everyday situations: infant being left alone in a room, left alone with others, left in their pram outside the house, left in their pram outside the shops, left in the cot at night, being put down after being held and being passed by while sitting in a chair/cot or pram.

Stranger Anxiety:  Assessed by the researcher starting each home visit by approaching the infant to see if this distressed the child.

RESULTS:

• Most infants started to show some separation protest when aprted from their attachment figure at between 6-8 months, with stranger anxiety being shown around 1 month later.
• Strongly attached infants had mothers who responded to their needs quickly and gave more opportunities for interaction.  

RESULTS CONT.

• Weakly attached infants had mothers who responded less quickly and gave fewer opportunities for interaction.
• Most infants went on to develop multiple attachments.  At 18 months 87% had at least 2 attachments, with 31% having 5 or more attachments.
• Attachments to different people were of a similar nature, with infants behaving in the same way to different attachment figures.
• 39% of infants prime attachment was not to the main carer.

CONCLUSIONS:

• There is a pattern of attachment formation common to all infants, which suggests the process if biologically controlled.
• Attachments are more easily made with those who display sensitive responsiveness, recognising and responding appropriately to an infant's needs, rather than those spending the most time with a child.
• Multiple attachments are the norm and of similar quality, which opposes Bowlby's idea that attachments are a hierarchy of one prime attachment and other minor ones.

CONCLUSIONS CONT.

• Schaffer commented that there is nothing to suggest that mothering can't be shared by several people.

EVALUATION:

• Data collected by direct observations or from the mothers - both sources prone to bias and inaccuracy.
• Study has mundance realism, conducted under everyday conditions, means conclusions drawn about the formation of attachments can be seen as having high validity.
• There were large individual differences in when attachments formed, casting doubt on the process of attachment formation being exclusively biological in nature.