ATTACHMENT THEORY

Attachment TheoryBowlby viewed infants attachment

to a caregiver as a mechanism that evolved to protect infants from predators.

According to ethological theory, infants and babies are biologically predispose to become attached to each other.

Attachment is a deep and enduring emotional bond that connects one person to another across time and space (Ainsworth 1973, Bowlby 1969)

Attachment TheoryAttachment does not have to be reciprocal. One person may

have an attachment with an individual which is not shared. Attachment is characterized by specific behaviors in children, such as seeking proximity with the attachment figure when upset or threatened (Bowlby, 1969).

Attachment behavior in adults towards the child includes responding sensitively and appropriately to the child’s needs. Such behavior appears universal across cultures. Attachment theory provides an explanation of how the parent-child relationship emerges and influences subsequent development.

Attachment Theory John Bowlby (1958) considered the importance of the child’s

relationship with their mother in terms of their social, emotional and cognitive development.

Looked at link between early infant separations with the mother and later maladjustment.

Bowlby defined attachment as a “lasting psychological connectedness between human beings” (1969, p.194).

Bowlby (1958) proposed that attachment can be understood within an evolutionary context in that the caregiver provides safety and security for the infant. Attachment is adaptive as it enhances the infant’s chance of survival.

Attachment TheoryAttachment is a deep and enduring emotional bond that connects

one person to another across time and space Ainsworth, 1973; Bowlby, 1969).

Attachment does not have to be reciprocal. One person may have an attachment with an individual which is not shared. Attachment is characterized by specific behaviors in children, such as seeking proximity with the attachment figure when upset or threatened (Bowlby, 1969).

Attachment behavior in adults towards the child includes responding sensitively and appropriately to the child’s needs. Such behavior appears universal across cultures. Attachment theory provides an explanation of how the parent-child relationship emerges and influences subsequent development.

Attachment Theory

1. It’s innate (Lorenz & Harlow offer support)

2. It has a critical time period to develop (one primary attachment figure for up to age ) (disputed)

3. Child develops internal working model of world

A cognitive schema

4. If attachment is not formed, problems may develop latter in life (disputed)

Attachment TheoryBabies seek proximity to mother and react with anxiety to

separation from her.” (Bowlby, 1973) It’s emotional: negative emotional influences later life if attachment is not

formed within critical time period (birth to age 2 years old) (LO 6) It’s universal: evolutionary advantages for babies to bound with mothers It does not have to be the mother, but Bowlby felt needed to be one person

The central theme of attachment theory is that mothers who are available and responsive to their infant's needs establish a sense of security. The infant knows that the caregiver is dependable, which creates a secure

base for the child to then explore the world & establishes a bases for future relationships

This cognitive schema is called an internal working model

Attachment TheoryIf child experiences love and affection, the child sees

itself as worthy of love and attention Future relationships will be based on this

If the child experiences rejection, abuse or neglect, may base their working model on denialThey deserve to be unloved (Learning Outcome 6)

Internal Working Models are reproduced in later relationships

Attachment TheoryInternal working model: child forms

internal mental representations of attachment relationships of their first attachment relationship (Schema theory!!)Motivation for attachment is biological, but

process is based on experience The cognitive schema of attachment: Ideas about attachment figures and what to expect of

them Ideas about self Ideas of how self and others relate

Attachment TheoryIf child experiences love and affection,

the child sees itself as worthy of love and attention Future relationships will be based on this

If the child experiences rejection, abuse or neglect, may base their working model on denialThey deserve to be unloved

Internal Working Models are reproduced in later relationships

Modifications to Attachment TheoryMATERNAL SENSITIVITYStudies indicate that the sensitivity of the mother plays a role in the development of attachmentBrazleton, 1975: observational studies

of mothers and babies Found interactional synchrony: where

mothers and babies imitate each others emotional expressions

When researchers requested mothers ignore babies signals – babies became upset

Modifications to Attachment TheoryTHE INFANT’S TEMPERAMENT Kagen, 1982: Temperaments are genetic

dispositions to respond to the environment in certain ways On a spectrum from highly reactive to low

reactivity Most cultures will influence (push) babies to certain

parts of this spectrum Kagen would say this is the cause of different

behavior in Ainsworths strange situation

Modifications to Attachment TheoryATTACHMENT MAY BE TO MANY Schaffer & Emerson (1964) specific

attachments started at about 8 months By 18 months very few (13%) were attached to

only one person; some had five or more attachments

At age 8 months, babies can distinguish between primary attachments (mom & dad) and secondary attachments (others)Probably due to brain development – visual

system becoming capable of making fine distinctions

Modifications to Attachment TheoryATTACHMENT CAN OCCUR LATERBowlby says attachment has a critical time

period – short, fixed, & early period like imprinting

Michael Rutter: Not fixed attachment can happen later in life

Hodges & Tizard, 1989: found that children who had not formed attachment behavior at age 4 – when adopted, later did form attachment behavior

Attachment Theory

Characteristics of Attachment Behavior

1. The child strives to stay near the caregiver, thus keeping the child safe. (Proximity Maintenance)

2. The child returns to the attachment figure for comfort & safety in times of distress. (Safe Haven)

3. Reacting with distress when separated from attachment figure (separation distress) &

4. The caregiver provides a secure and dependable base for the child to explore the world. (Secure Base)

Attachment Theory

Separation Distress: Kagen, 1978: When separated from the caregiver, the child will become upset and distressed. Develops around 6 – 8 months & last until about 3 years of age

Cultural influence: Collectivist cultures: Lots of adults

– this period is not as intense or long

Attachment is not an ‘all or nothing’ processThere may be variations, or individual differences between children in the attachments they form

There are different types of attachment: Secure vs. Insecure

Attachment: Individual Differences

Controlled observation of children’s attachment behaviour using the ‘Strange Situation Classification’ (SSC):Mother leaves child in

unfamiliar environmentChild is approached by

strangerMother returnsLooks at separation protest,

stranger anxiety and reunion behaviour

Ainsworth & Bell (1970)

Ainsworth & Bell (1970)

Three patterns of attachment:Secure (70% of sample)Insecure – avoidant (15%)Insecure – resistant (15%)

Ainsworth suggested that attachment type was determined by primary carer’s (mother’s) behaviour and how sensitive the carer is to the child’s needs

Ainsworth & Bell (1971)

Ainsworth & Bell (1971)

Distressed when mother leftPositive & happy when mother returnedAvoidant of stranger when alone but friendly when

mother presentWill use the mother as a safe base to explore their

environment

Associated with sensitive & responsive primary care

Characteristic of 70% of infants

Secure Attachment

No sign of distress by mother’s absence Showed little interest when she returned Infant okay with stranger and plays normally when stranger is present Stranger will be treated similar to the mother (does not seek contact). Mother & stranger are able to comfort infant equally well

Mothers tend to be insensitive or not interested in children

Research has suggested that this attachment style might be a result of abusive or neglectful caregivers.

Characteristic of 15% of infants

Avoidant Attachment

Intensely distressed when mother leftApparent fear of stranger – and avoids strangerClinginess mixed with rejection on return may approach

mother but may resist contact (or even push her away)Fear of exploration (insecure behaviour) and cries moreResearch suggests that ambivalent attachment is a

result of poor maternal availability. These children cannot depend on their mother (or caregiver) to be there when the child is in need

Characteristic of 15% of infants

Resistant Attachment

Secure Avoidant Resistant

Primary Carer’s Behaviour Towards Child

Child’s ‘Working Model’ of Itself

Positive & Loved Unloved & Rejected

Angry & Confused

Does not take babies experience into accountBabies that spend a lot of time with lots of adults may

appear to be avoidantMost children form a secure attachment to their mothers –

LeVine, 2006Time spent in day care does NOT correlate to attachment!!! A

BIG issue even today!!Wartner, 1994: The strange situation classification has good

reliability. A study conducted in Germany found 78% of the children

were classified in the same way at ages 1 and 6 years

Evaluation of Ainsworth

Lacks Validity – Lamb, (1977): it identifies only the type of attachment to the mother. The child may have a different type of attachment to the

father or grandmother, for example Lamb, 1985: highly artificial & limited in the amount of

informationCultural considerations – Japanese babies are rarely separated

from mothers

Evaluation of Ainsworth

There are cultural differences:Ijzendoorn & Kroonenberg, (1988): meta analysis Japan: absence of Avoidant, lots of Resistant Secure attachment – most dominate worldwide Based on childrearing styles

Cultural Factors

Factors that promote insecure attachment:

1. Abandonment & deprivation in the first two years of life

2. Parenting that is abusive, neglectful, or erratic

3. Childs own temperament4. Stressful circumstances of the

family

Bowlby’s 44 Thieves

Aim: To investigate the effects of maternal

deprivation on children in order to see whether delinquents have suffered deprivation.

According to the Maternal Deprivation Hypothesis, breaking the maternal bond with the child during the early stages of its life is likely to have serious effects on its intellectual, social and emotional development.

Bowlby’s 44 Thieves

Procedure: Bowlby interviewed 44 adolescents who were referred to a

child protection program in London because of stealing- i.e. they were thieves.

Bowlby selected another group of 44 children to act as ‘controls’- individuals referred to clinic because of emotional problems, but not yet committed any crimes.

He interviewed the parents from both groups to state whether their children had experienced separation during the critical period and for how long. (do you see any problems with this?)

Bowlby’s 44 Thieves

Findings: More than half of the juvenile thieves had been

separated from their mothers for longer than 6 months during their first five years.

In the control group only 2 had had such a separation.

He also found several of the young thieves (32%) showed 'affectionless psychopathy' (they were not able to care about or feel affection for others).

None of the control group were affectionless psychopaths.

Bowlby’s 44 Thieves

Conclusion: Affectionless psychopaths show

little concern for others and are unable to form relationships.

Bowlby concluded that the reason for the anti-social behavior and emotional problems in the first group was due to maternal deprivation.

Hodges & Tizard, (1989)

Aims:To investigate the effect of institutional

upbringing on later attachments. To investigate the effects of privation on

later social and emotional development. To investigate if the effects of privation

can be reversed

Hodges & Tizard, (1989) Procedure:

Followed the development of 65 children who had been in residential nurseries from only a few months old. A longitudinal study, semi-experimental design – a naturalistic observation

The care provided was of good quality, but care givers were discouraged from forming attachments with the children (i.e. privation occurred). ETHICS!!

By age 4, 24 children were adopted, 15 returned to their natural home (restored), and the rest stayed in institutions

They were also compared with a control group, who had spent all their lives in their own families. The control group was closely matched to the children in the experimental group.

The children were assessed for social and emotional competence at 4, 8 and 16 years old. The assessment comprised interviewing the children and their parents and teachers and a set of questionnaires.

Hodges & Tizard, (1989) - Findings Adopted Restored

4 Years No Attachment No Attachment

8 Years Normal Attachment Poor Attachment

16 Years Normal Attachment Only 50% ‘deeply’ attached

Conclusion: We can conclude from this evidence that Bowlby was correct to emphasize the importance of the early years, but the effects of delay in the formation of attachments do not necessarily persist into adulthood and lead to affectionless psychopathy, as Bowlby predicted.

Indeed, loving relationships and high quality care are necessary to reverse privation effects.

Subsequent formation of relationships

Attachment and it’s relationship to adult romantic love (our internal working models)Hazan & Shaver, 1987:Aim: Wanted to explore relationship between attachment

theory & romantic love Attachment theory might be able to explain both positive & negative

experiences of loveAssumptions: Adult attachment behavior is reflected in:

Beliefs about self, others, & relationships Their inner working model

Hazen & Shaver’s love quiz – based on 3 attachment styles

Subsequent formation of relationships

Participants: self-selecting – 620 (2/3rds female)60% secure style20 % anxious ambivalent style20% anxious-avoidant styleSelf description of parents by participants

correlated with love quiz resultsLots of criticism on method & sampling

Try the ‘Romantic Attachment Style’ Quiz: http://psychology.about.com/library/quiz/bl-attachment-quiz.

htm

6.4 Effects of Deprivation or Traumaon later development

A child reared in a severely deprived setting will not experience factors such as access to adequate nutrition, sensory and cognitive stimulation, loving caregivers and linguistic input. However – this does NOT mean the child will not develop normally.

Deprivation: living in a state of neglect tp provide basic needs. Often connected with growing up in poverty, parental problems or institutionalisation

Trauma: can be experienced in childhood (eg divorce, war, natural disasters, sexual abuse) and can have long-lasting effects on development.

It is difficult to distinguish between effects of deprivation or trauma – they are much the same.

6.4 Effects of Traumaon later development

PTSD – left untreated, can show in children as hyper-vigilance, agitation, avoidance behaviours and emotional numbness.Carion et al (2009) – fMRI scans found children suffering PTSD after

experiencing stressors such as abuse or witnessing violence performed worse on a simple verbal memory test and showed less hippocampal activity. Also exhibited specific PTSD symptoms. They also had problems remembering the trauma, felt isolated and had impaired emotions.

Yehuda et al (2001) – studied 51 children of Holocaust survivors who were raised by traumatised parents. Mean age: 40.9 years. Results show children of Holocaust survivors more likely to develop PTSD (33.3% compared to 12.2% of control group) Showed PTSD can be transmitted from parent to child.

6.4 Effects of Deprivation on later development

Rutter, (2001): longitudinal study on Romanian institutionally-reared children who were later adopted into UK homes compared to UK institutionally-reared children who were later adoptedThree areas of differences:

1. Greater # of Romanian children with attachment problems (avoidant attachment)

2. Greater over activity & cognitive impairment3. Showed “near autistic features”

6.4 Effects of Deprivation or Traumaon later development

Rutter, 2001: (continued) Age of adoption a factor – the older when child left

orphanage, more problemsBut by age six, most children were normal in their

functioningMost children are resilient!!!

Koluchova, 1971: Czech twin boys Longitudinal case studyTurned out ok – counter to Genie