Attachment
Caregiver-infant interactions
Good quality early social interactions with carers
are important for the child’s social development,
associated with the successful development of caregiver-infant attachments
How to recognise an attachment:
proximity – trying to stay physically close to attachment figure
separation distress – show signs of anxiety when attachment figure leaves their
presence
secure-base behaviour – despite independence from attachment figure, we
make regular contact with them
Reciprocity
- babies and carers spend time in intense and highly pleasurable interaction
Reciprocity: when each person responds to the other and elicits a response from
them. They see each other as essential for emotional stability.
- Reciprocal action sometimes called ‘turn-taking’
- Both active contributors
- Essential part of conversation
Alert phases: babies have periodic ‘alert phases’ when they signal they are ready for
a spell of interaction.
Feldman and Eidelman 2007: mothers pick up on and respond to baby’s alertness
around 2/3 of the time.
Finegood et al 2016: this varies according to maternal skill and external factors e.g.
stress.
Feldman 2007: from around 3 months, the interaction is increasingly frequent and
involves mother and baby paying close attention to each other’s verbal signals and
facial expressions.
Active involvement: babies as well as caregivers take an active role – typically
portrayed as passive.
Caregiver and baby take turns initiating interactions.
Brazelton et al 1975: described as a ‘dance’ – like a couple’s dance where partners
respond to each other’s moves.
Interactional synchrony
,= the temporal co-ordination of micro-level social behaviour (Feldman 2007)
- Relates to timing and pattern of interaction
- Reciprocal but also rhythmic with a mutual focus with mirroring of behaviour but
more importantly their emotions
- When caregiver and baby mirror the actions and emotions of the other in
interactions
- Believed to be important in development of caregiver-infant attachment
Feldman: critical in development outcomes of self-regulation, symbol use and capacity
for empathy
Meltzoff and Moore (1977)
Investigated: beginning of interactional synchrony in babies as young as 2 weeks old
with caregivers
- 12-27 days old
Procedure: adult displayed one of three facial expressions or distinctive gestures,
baby’s response was filmed and labelled by 2 independent observers
- 0.92 positive correlation – inter-observer reliability
Findings: baby’s expression and gestures mirrored the adult more than chance would
predict and were able to do so from 12 days
Conclusion: reciprocity is important in later development so must be innate and
universal
Isabella et al. (1989)
Aim: impact of synchrony on mother-infant attachment
Procedure: observed 30 mothers and babies (at 3 and 9 months) together and
assessed degree of synchrony, researchers assessed quality of mother-baby
attachment
Findings: high levels of synchrony were associated with better quality mother-baby
attachment – good emotional intensity
Secure group – well-timed, reciprocal, mutually rewarding
Insecure – minimally involved, unresponsive, intrusive
o Avoidant pairs – maternal intrusiveness and overstimulation
o Resistant pairs – poorly coordinated, under-involved and inconsistent
Conclusion: synchrony can have long-lasting impacts on attachments and potentially
future relationships
Difference between reciprocity and interactional synchrony: reciprocity is about turn-
taking, synchronicity is broader – being in tune with each other emotionally and
behaviourally.
Evaluation
Filmed observations
, o Other distractions for baby can be controlled
o Filmed in a lab - analysed later, unlikely key behaviours will be missed,
multiple observers can record data and establish the inter-rater reliability
of observations
o Babies don’t know they are being observed – behaviour doesn’t change
o Lab setting
o Behavioural category checklist – prevents observer bias
o Good reliability and validity
Observation of babies
o Hard to interpret behaviour
o Lack coordination, virtually immobile
o Movements observed are small and subtle
o Can be difficult to determine cause of behaviour (random or triggered by
caregiver) or what the behaviour is – unknown cognitive aspect
o Cannot be sure the behaviours seen have a special meaning
o Routine and only awake at certain times
o Cannot communicate
o Infant reaction to unfamiliar environments
Developmental importance
o Feldman (2012): ideas like synchrony merely give names to patterns of
observable behaviours
o Can be reliably observed by may not be useful in understanding child
development as doesn’t tell us the purpose of behaviours
o Cannot be sure from observation whether they are important
o Correlation not causation
o Suggested that these interactions could help form parent + infant
attachments and moral development – presumptive
COUNTERPOINT
o Other evidence
o Isabella et al – it is important, interactional synchrony predicts good
quality attachment
Practical applications
o Parenting skills training
o Parent-Child Interaction Therapy – 10 minute sessions improved
interactional synchrony
o Disruption in attachment e.g. adoption – attachments with foster carers
need to be transferred to adoptive parents, encouraged to engage in
reciprocal behaviour
o Can use synchrony and reciprocity to assess if a child is at risk of neglect
o Still face experiment: should respond negatively if they are used to
interaction with a caregiver – helps social workers and psychologists
intervene for vulnerable children
Ethics
o Socially sensitive research – mothers returning to work may risk damaging
their baby’s development
o Could appear neglectful when this is inaccurate
o Pressure on working mums – could risk damaging their baby’s
development and causing insecure attachments
, Schaffer’s stages of attachment
Schaffer and Emerson (1964)
- Observational study of the formation of early infant-adult attachments
Procedure:
60 babies – 31 boys and 29 girls from Glasgow and mostly skilled working-class
families
Visited mothers in homes every month for first year and again at 18 months
Asked mother questions about infant’s protest in 7 everyday separations to
measure baby’s attachment
Assessed stranger anxiety – response to strangers
Social referencing = the degree a child looks to their caregiver to check how they
should respond to something new (secure base).
Findings:
By 7 months 50% showed separation anxiety with primary caregiver
By 10 months most had several attachments
Mother was primary attachment figure for roughly half of babies at 18 months,
father for most of others
Attachments most likely to form with those sensitive to baby’s signals – not
most time
Identified 4 stages in development of infant attachment behaviour…
1. Asocial stage – first few weeks
Observable behaviour to humans and inanimate objects is fairly similar
Not entirely asocial – prefer to be with other people
Show preference for familiar people – more easily comforted by them
Forming bonds, basis of later attachment
2. Indiscriminate attachment – 2-7 months
More obvious and observable social behaviours
Clear preference for being with other humans over objects
Recognise and prefer familiar people
Accept comfort from any person
Not usually showing separation anxiety or stranger anxiety
3. Specific attachment – from 7 months
Display attachment towards a particular person
Show stranger and separation anxiety
Has formed a specific attachment – primary attachment figure
o Not necessarily most time spent but most interaction and response to baby’s
signals with most skill
o Mother in 65% of cases
Caregiver-infant interactions
Good quality early social interactions with carers
are important for the child’s social development,
associated with the successful development of caregiver-infant attachments
How to recognise an attachment:
proximity – trying to stay physically close to attachment figure
separation distress – show signs of anxiety when attachment figure leaves their
presence
secure-base behaviour – despite independence from attachment figure, we
make regular contact with them
Reciprocity
- babies and carers spend time in intense and highly pleasurable interaction
Reciprocity: when each person responds to the other and elicits a response from
them. They see each other as essential for emotional stability.
- Reciprocal action sometimes called ‘turn-taking’
- Both active contributors
- Essential part of conversation
Alert phases: babies have periodic ‘alert phases’ when they signal they are ready for
a spell of interaction.
Feldman and Eidelman 2007: mothers pick up on and respond to baby’s alertness
around 2/3 of the time.
Finegood et al 2016: this varies according to maternal skill and external factors e.g.
stress.
Feldman 2007: from around 3 months, the interaction is increasingly frequent and
involves mother and baby paying close attention to each other’s verbal signals and
facial expressions.
Active involvement: babies as well as caregivers take an active role – typically
portrayed as passive.
Caregiver and baby take turns initiating interactions.
Brazelton et al 1975: described as a ‘dance’ – like a couple’s dance where partners
respond to each other’s moves.
Interactional synchrony
,= the temporal co-ordination of micro-level social behaviour (Feldman 2007)
- Relates to timing and pattern of interaction
- Reciprocal but also rhythmic with a mutual focus with mirroring of behaviour but
more importantly their emotions
- When caregiver and baby mirror the actions and emotions of the other in
interactions
- Believed to be important in development of caregiver-infant attachment
Feldman: critical in development outcomes of self-regulation, symbol use and capacity
for empathy
Meltzoff and Moore (1977)
Investigated: beginning of interactional synchrony in babies as young as 2 weeks old
with caregivers
- 12-27 days old
Procedure: adult displayed one of three facial expressions or distinctive gestures,
baby’s response was filmed and labelled by 2 independent observers
- 0.92 positive correlation – inter-observer reliability
Findings: baby’s expression and gestures mirrored the adult more than chance would
predict and were able to do so from 12 days
Conclusion: reciprocity is important in later development so must be innate and
universal
Isabella et al. (1989)
Aim: impact of synchrony on mother-infant attachment
Procedure: observed 30 mothers and babies (at 3 and 9 months) together and
assessed degree of synchrony, researchers assessed quality of mother-baby
attachment
Findings: high levels of synchrony were associated with better quality mother-baby
attachment – good emotional intensity
Secure group – well-timed, reciprocal, mutually rewarding
Insecure – minimally involved, unresponsive, intrusive
o Avoidant pairs – maternal intrusiveness and overstimulation
o Resistant pairs – poorly coordinated, under-involved and inconsistent
Conclusion: synchrony can have long-lasting impacts on attachments and potentially
future relationships
Difference between reciprocity and interactional synchrony: reciprocity is about turn-
taking, synchronicity is broader – being in tune with each other emotionally and
behaviourally.
Evaluation
Filmed observations
, o Other distractions for baby can be controlled
o Filmed in a lab - analysed later, unlikely key behaviours will be missed,
multiple observers can record data and establish the inter-rater reliability
of observations
o Babies don’t know they are being observed – behaviour doesn’t change
o Lab setting
o Behavioural category checklist – prevents observer bias
o Good reliability and validity
Observation of babies
o Hard to interpret behaviour
o Lack coordination, virtually immobile
o Movements observed are small and subtle
o Can be difficult to determine cause of behaviour (random or triggered by
caregiver) or what the behaviour is – unknown cognitive aspect
o Cannot be sure the behaviours seen have a special meaning
o Routine and only awake at certain times
o Cannot communicate
o Infant reaction to unfamiliar environments
Developmental importance
o Feldman (2012): ideas like synchrony merely give names to patterns of
observable behaviours
o Can be reliably observed by may not be useful in understanding child
development as doesn’t tell us the purpose of behaviours
o Cannot be sure from observation whether they are important
o Correlation not causation
o Suggested that these interactions could help form parent + infant
attachments and moral development – presumptive
COUNTERPOINT
o Other evidence
o Isabella et al – it is important, interactional synchrony predicts good
quality attachment
Practical applications
o Parenting skills training
o Parent-Child Interaction Therapy – 10 minute sessions improved
interactional synchrony
o Disruption in attachment e.g. adoption – attachments with foster carers
need to be transferred to adoptive parents, encouraged to engage in
reciprocal behaviour
o Can use synchrony and reciprocity to assess if a child is at risk of neglect
o Still face experiment: should respond negatively if they are used to
interaction with a caregiver – helps social workers and psychologists
intervene for vulnerable children
Ethics
o Socially sensitive research – mothers returning to work may risk damaging
their baby’s development
o Could appear neglectful when this is inaccurate
o Pressure on working mums – could risk damaging their baby’s
development and causing insecure attachments
, Schaffer’s stages of attachment
Schaffer and Emerson (1964)
- Observational study of the formation of early infant-adult attachments
Procedure:
60 babies – 31 boys and 29 girls from Glasgow and mostly skilled working-class
families
Visited mothers in homes every month for first year and again at 18 months
Asked mother questions about infant’s protest in 7 everyday separations to
measure baby’s attachment
Assessed stranger anxiety – response to strangers
Social referencing = the degree a child looks to their caregiver to check how they
should respond to something new (secure base).
Findings:
By 7 months 50% showed separation anxiety with primary caregiver
By 10 months most had several attachments
Mother was primary attachment figure for roughly half of babies at 18 months,
father for most of others
Attachments most likely to form with those sensitive to baby’s signals – not
most time
Identified 4 stages in development of infant attachment behaviour…
1. Asocial stage – first few weeks
Observable behaviour to humans and inanimate objects is fairly similar
Not entirely asocial – prefer to be with other people
Show preference for familiar people – more easily comforted by them
Forming bonds, basis of later attachment
2. Indiscriminate attachment – 2-7 months
More obvious and observable social behaviours
Clear preference for being with other humans over objects
Recognise and prefer familiar people
Accept comfort from any person
Not usually showing separation anxiety or stranger anxiety
3. Specific attachment – from 7 months
Display attachment towards a particular person
Show stranger and separation anxiety
Has formed a specific attachment – primary attachment figure
o Not necessarily most time spent but most interaction and response to baby’s
signals with most skill
o Mother in 65% of cases
