Schaffer and Emerson studied 60 babies in Glasgow of working class (WC) families
at monthly intervals for the first 18 months of life, and a regular pattern was to be
identified in the development of attachment. The interactions with the primary
caregiver (PCG) were observed and the PCG was interviewed. The mother/ PCG kept
a diary of the behaviours that were expressed by each infant, so experimenters could
examine the evidence for the development of attachment. Stranger anxiety was one
of the behaviours measured which is the response to the arrival of a stranger.
Separation anxiety was the second behaviour measured, this is the level of distress
when separated from the PCG, and the degree of comfort needed on return (reunion
behaviour). The final behaviour was social referencing, which is the degree to which
the infant looks at their PCG to get reassurance on how they should respond to
something new.
Based on their findings they proposed attachments developed in 4 stages. The first
stage was asocial stage, the stage where a baby is 0-6 weeks and begins to form
bonds, but relationships with objects and humans are similar. The infant will produce
many stimuli that produce a reaction from PCGs. Stage 2 is when an infant of 2
months begins to display more observable social behaviour and is called the
indiscriminate attachment stage. The infant expresses a preference for people over
objects and they prefer familiar adults, however, do not show stranger or separation
anxiety. The infant becomes comfortable with interactions that include their regular
caregiver. In Stage 3, specific attachment/ discriminate attachment, from around 7
months, the majority of babies display stranger anxiety and separation anxiety from
one particular adult (biological mother in 65% of cases). The specific attachment
with the primary attachment figure is not necessarily the person the infant spent the
most time with but the carer who offers the most interaction and responds to the
baby's 'signals'. Stage 4 is when babies form multiple attachments; shortly after the
babies start to show attachment to one adult, they usually extend to multiple
attachments with other adults who they regularly spend time with.
In Shaffer & Emerson’s study 29% of children had secondary attachment within a
month of primary attachment. By the age of 40 weeks, 80% of the babies had a
specific attachment and almost 30% displayed multiple attachments. The results of
the study indicate that attachments were likely to form with those who responded
accurately to the baby’s signal.
One weakness of the research is that the validity could be questioned. The
conclusions of the study are supported by the carers’ report of their infant. This
means that some carers may be less sensitive to their infants’ protests and less
likely to report them. The self-report aspect of the study creates an unreliable and
less valid set of data, which directly challenges the validity of the research. This
could further mean that data collection was limited, resulting in the research to be
affected by demand characteristics; changing the report to fit or go against what the
parents believed was the hypothesis. As a result, the over-reliance on the self-report
technique for the experiment, may reduce the validity and reliability of the
conclusions.
Furthermore, the research could be considered biased because the study was done
on specific types of people. Firstly, it was done on WC infants, the results might be
at monthly intervals for the first 18 months of life, and a regular pattern was to be
identified in the development of attachment. The interactions with the primary
caregiver (PCG) were observed and the PCG was interviewed. The mother/ PCG kept
a diary of the behaviours that were expressed by each infant, so experimenters could
examine the evidence for the development of attachment. Stranger anxiety was one
of the behaviours measured which is the response to the arrival of a stranger.
Separation anxiety was the second behaviour measured, this is the level of distress
when separated from the PCG, and the degree of comfort needed on return (reunion
behaviour). The final behaviour was social referencing, which is the degree to which
the infant looks at their PCG to get reassurance on how they should respond to
something new.
Based on their findings they proposed attachments developed in 4 stages. The first
stage was asocial stage, the stage where a baby is 0-6 weeks and begins to form
bonds, but relationships with objects and humans are similar. The infant will produce
many stimuli that produce a reaction from PCGs. Stage 2 is when an infant of 2
months begins to display more observable social behaviour and is called the
indiscriminate attachment stage. The infant expresses a preference for people over
objects and they prefer familiar adults, however, do not show stranger or separation
anxiety. The infant becomes comfortable with interactions that include their regular
caregiver. In Stage 3, specific attachment/ discriminate attachment, from around 7
months, the majority of babies display stranger anxiety and separation anxiety from
one particular adult (biological mother in 65% of cases). The specific attachment
with the primary attachment figure is not necessarily the person the infant spent the
most time with but the carer who offers the most interaction and responds to the
baby's 'signals'. Stage 4 is when babies form multiple attachments; shortly after the
babies start to show attachment to one adult, they usually extend to multiple
attachments with other adults who they regularly spend time with.
In Shaffer & Emerson’s study 29% of children had secondary attachment within a
month of primary attachment. By the age of 40 weeks, 80% of the babies had a
specific attachment and almost 30% displayed multiple attachments. The results of
the study indicate that attachments were likely to form with those who responded
accurately to the baby’s signal.
One weakness of the research is that the validity could be questioned. The
conclusions of the study are supported by the carers’ report of their infant. This
means that some carers may be less sensitive to their infants’ protests and less
likely to report them. The self-report aspect of the study creates an unreliable and
less valid set of data, which directly challenges the validity of the research. This
could further mean that data collection was limited, resulting in the research to be
affected by demand characteristics; changing the report to fit or go against what the
parents believed was the hypothesis. As a result, the over-reliance on the self-report
technique for the experiment, may reduce the validity and reliability of the
conclusions.
Furthermore, the research could be considered biased because the study was done
on specific types of people. Firstly, it was done on WC infants, the results might be
