Attachments review
Topics What I need to know
- An emotional relationship between two people in which each seeks closeness and feels more secure
Attachment
when in presence of the attachment figure
- Where an infant responds to the action of another person
Reciprocity
- The actions of the mother elicits a response from the infant
Interactional - Where an infant mirrors the actions of another person, e.g. facial expressions and body movement,
synchrony moving their body in tune with the rhythm of their carer
Meltzoff and - A – to investigate the interaction between caregiver - P – controlled observation, so fine details
Moore study and infant using controlled observations were captured
- P – observed the beginnings of interactional E – e.g. mother and infant were
synchrony in infants as young as 2 weeks old. An filmed from multiple angles, which
adult displayed one of 3 facial expressions/gestures ensured that the fine details could be
and the child’s response was filmed recorded and then later analysed.
- F – found an association between the expression and Also babies don’t know that they are
the action of the child being observed so their behaviour
- C – Meltzoff and Moore concluded that the ability to doesn’t change
imitate serves as an important building block for later C – strength because it means the
social and cognitive development research has high internal validity,
meaning it’s measuring what it’s
intending to measure
- P – hard to know what’s happening when
observing infants
E – when observing babies, they are
merely just doing random hand
movements or changes in
expressions. It’s difficult to see
what’s taking place from the infant’s
perspective. Is the infant’s imitations
conscious and deliberate?
C – we cannot be certain that mother-
infant interactions have a special
meaning
- P – the observations don’t tell us the
purpose of synchrony and reciprocity
E – e.g. Feldman pointed out that
synchrony describes behaviour that
,Attachments review
occurs at the same time
C – these are about robust
phenomena in the sense that they
can be reliably observed but it
doesn’t tell us their purpose
Schaffer and - A – to identify stages of attachment and find a pattern - P – good ecological validity
Emerson in the development of an attachment between infants E – most observations were made by
and parents mother during ordinary activities and
- P – 60 babies and their mothers were visited at their reported to researchers. So the
home every month for a year and then again at 18 babies behaviour was unlikely to be
months. Separation anxiety was measured by asking affected by the presence of
mothers about their children’s behaviour during researcher. It is highly likely that the
everyday separations, like when leaving the room. participants behaved naturally whilst
Stranger anxiety was measured by asking mothers being observed
what their children’s response was to unfamiliar C – strength because this study was
adults carried out and observed in their own
- F – 50% of babies showed separation anxiety towards homes in everyday situations. This
a particular adult between 25-32 week of age. The gave the findings face validity and
specific attachment was normally with the mother was high in mundane realism
- C – attachment tended to be to the caregiver who was - P – lack population validity
most interactive and sensitive to infant signals and E – infants in study came from
facial expressions Glasgow and were mostly form
working class. Also the small sample
size of only 60 babies reduces the
strength of the conclusion that we
can draw from the study
C – therefore the results cannot be
generalised to other children from
other places, which shows a limited
explanation of attachment
development
- P – may lack internal validity
E – uses self-report method as the
parents kept a daily diary
C – therefore the accuracy of data
, Attachments review
may not be the best. They may also
be subjected to social desirability
bias. The parents might have
changed their report to make them
seem close with their baby and also
to show that they are socially
acceptable, e.g. they might
intentionally not note all the negative
experience they have. There also
could be demand characteristics
where the parents will change the
report to fit the aim of the study
Role of Study by Grossman: P – the role of fathers as secondary
fathers - P - He carried out a longitudinal study looking at both attachment figures can be explained
the parent’s behaviour and its relationship to the through biological processes and
quality of children’s attachment into their teens gender stereotyping
- F - Found that mother’s attachment was important E – for example, the fact that fathers
when nurturing the child but the father’s role was tend not to become the primary
important in a different role which had more to do attachment figure could simply be
with play and stimulation, and less to do with down to the result of traditional
nurturing gender roles, in which women are
expected to be more caring and
nurturing than men. On the other
hand, it could be that females’
hormones (oestrogen) create higher
levels of nurturing and therefore
women are biologically predisposed
to be the primary attachment figure
C – this is a strength because it
confirms that such difference
between mothers and fathers in the
role of rearing children can be down
to an individual’s nature but also their
experience of nurture
- P – a criticism is that research has left
unanswered questions such as if fathers
Topics What I need to know
- An emotional relationship between two people in which each seeks closeness and feels more secure
Attachment
when in presence of the attachment figure
- Where an infant responds to the action of another person
Reciprocity
- The actions of the mother elicits a response from the infant
Interactional - Where an infant mirrors the actions of another person, e.g. facial expressions and body movement,
synchrony moving their body in tune with the rhythm of their carer
Meltzoff and - A – to investigate the interaction between caregiver - P – controlled observation, so fine details
Moore study and infant using controlled observations were captured
- P – observed the beginnings of interactional E – e.g. mother and infant were
synchrony in infants as young as 2 weeks old. An filmed from multiple angles, which
adult displayed one of 3 facial expressions/gestures ensured that the fine details could be
and the child’s response was filmed recorded and then later analysed.
- F – found an association between the expression and Also babies don’t know that they are
the action of the child being observed so their behaviour
- C – Meltzoff and Moore concluded that the ability to doesn’t change
imitate serves as an important building block for later C – strength because it means the
social and cognitive development research has high internal validity,
meaning it’s measuring what it’s
intending to measure
- P – hard to know what’s happening when
observing infants
E – when observing babies, they are
merely just doing random hand
movements or changes in
expressions. It’s difficult to see
what’s taking place from the infant’s
perspective. Is the infant’s imitations
conscious and deliberate?
C – we cannot be certain that mother-
infant interactions have a special
meaning
- P – the observations don’t tell us the
purpose of synchrony and reciprocity
E – e.g. Feldman pointed out that
synchrony describes behaviour that
,Attachments review
occurs at the same time
C – these are about robust
phenomena in the sense that they
can be reliably observed but it
doesn’t tell us their purpose
Schaffer and - A – to identify stages of attachment and find a pattern - P – good ecological validity
Emerson in the development of an attachment between infants E – most observations were made by
and parents mother during ordinary activities and
- P – 60 babies and their mothers were visited at their reported to researchers. So the
home every month for a year and then again at 18 babies behaviour was unlikely to be
months. Separation anxiety was measured by asking affected by the presence of
mothers about their children’s behaviour during researcher. It is highly likely that the
everyday separations, like when leaving the room. participants behaved naturally whilst
Stranger anxiety was measured by asking mothers being observed
what their children’s response was to unfamiliar C – strength because this study was
adults carried out and observed in their own
- F – 50% of babies showed separation anxiety towards homes in everyday situations. This
a particular adult between 25-32 week of age. The gave the findings face validity and
specific attachment was normally with the mother was high in mundane realism
- C – attachment tended to be to the caregiver who was - P – lack population validity
most interactive and sensitive to infant signals and E – infants in study came from
facial expressions Glasgow and were mostly form
working class. Also the small sample
size of only 60 babies reduces the
strength of the conclusion that we
can draw from the study
C – therefore the results cannot be
generalised to other children from
other places, which shows a limited
explanation of attachment
development
- P – may lack internal validity
E – uses self-report method as the
parents kept a daily diary
C – therefore the accuracy of data
, Attachments review
may not be the best. They may also
be subjected to social desirability
bias. The parents might have
changed their report to make them
seem close with their baby and also
to show that they are socially
acceptable, e.g. they might
intentionally not note all the negative
experience they have. There also
could be demand characteristics
where the parents will change the
report to fit the aim of the study
Role of Study by Grossman: P – the role of fathers as secondary
fathers - P - He carried out a longitudinal study looking at both attachment figures can be explained
the parent’s behaviour and its relationship to the through biological processes and
quality of children’s attachment into their teens gender stereotyping
- F - Found that mother’s attachment was important E – for example, the fact that fathers
when nurturing the child but the father’s role was tend not to become the primary
important in a different role which had more to do attachment figure could simply be
with play and stimulation, and less to do with down to the result of traditional
nurturing gender roles, in which women are
expected to be more caring and
nurturing than men. On the other
hand, it could be that females’
hormones (oestrogen) create higher
levels of nurturing and therefore
women are biologically predisposed
to be the primary attachment figure
C – this is a strength because it
confirms that such difference
between mothers and fathers in the
role of rearing children can be down
to an individual’s nature but also their
experience of nurture
- P – a criticism is that research has left
unanswered questions such as if fathers
