Outline and evaluate multiple attachments and the role of the father as an
explanation for attachment
Para 1:
Multiple attachment refers to having more that one attachment figure, such as the infant may
have attachments to grandparents, siblings and cousins etc as well as the mother and father
Bowlby argued the theory of monotropy, the idea that only one special attachment is formed with
the mother and other attachments are secondary and much less important
However,
Rutter argued through the multiple attachment model that all attachments are equivalent and
these attachments are integrated to produce the infant’s attachment type
Multiple attachments are often formed to different people for different purposes. For example,
the mother provides loving care, whereas the father provides fun / exciting play
THERE IS SUPPORTING EVIDENCE FOR THE EXISTENCE OF MULTIPLE
ATTACHMENTS
Schaffer and Emmerson found that 31% of infants formed 5 or more attachments and 39%
formed 1 to someone that was not their primary care giver
CONCLUSION: THIS INCREASES THE VALIDITY OF THE MULTIPLE ATTACHMENT
MODEL
THE EVIDENCE DOESN’T NECESSARILY CONTRADICT BOWLBY’S
MONOTROPIC THEORY
Bowlby claims that infants do form secondary attachments and that they do contribute to social
development - he simply said that healthy development requires one central figure that is higher
in the hierarchy than all the others
Schaffer and Emmerson’s findings don’t necessarily contradict this
CONCLUSION: PRIOR AND GLASER CONCLUDED THAT THE EVIDENCE STILL
POINTS TO THE HIERARCHICAL MODEL AS SUGGESTED BY BOWLBY
THERE ARE DIFFICULTIES IN MEASURING MULTIPLE ATTACHMENTS
This is because Schaffer and Emmerson used behaviours such as separation protest and stranger
anxiety as indicators of attachment. However, an infant may show similar behaviours in response
to their playmates - who are not true attachment figures
CONCLUSION: THIS MEANS THE FINDINGS MAY NOT PROVIDE VALID EVIDENCE
FOR MULTIPLE ATTACHMENTS
explanation for attachment
Para 1:
Multiple attachment refers to having more that one attachment figure, such as the infant may
have attachments to grandparents, siblings and cousins etc as well as the mother and father
Bowlby argued the theory of monotropy, the idea that only one special attachment is formed with
the mother and other attachments are secondary and much less important
However,
Rutter argued through the multiple attachment model that all attachments are equivalent and
these attachments are integrated to produce the infant’s attachment type
Multiple attachments are often formed to different people for different purposes. For example,
the mother provides loving care, whereas the father provides fun / exciting play
THERE IS SUPPORTING EVIDENCE FOR THE EXISTENCE OF MULTIPLE
ATTACHMENTS
Schaffer and Emmerson found that 31% of infants formed 5 or more attachments and 39%
formed 1 to someone that was not their primary care giver
CONCLUSION: THIS INCREASES THE VALIDITY OF THE MULTIPLE ATTACHMENT
MODEL
THE EVIDENCE DOESN’T NECESSARILY CONTRADICT BOWLBY’S
MONOTROPIC THEORY
Bowlby claims that infants do form secondary attachments and that they do contribute to social
development - he simply said that healthy development requires one central figure that is higher
in the hierarchy than all the others
Schaffer and Emmerson’s findings don’t necessarily contradict this
CONCLUSION: PRIOR AND GLASER CONCLUDED THAT THE EVIDENCE STILL
POINTS TO THE HIERARCHICAL MODEL AS SUGGESTED BY BOWLBY
THERE ARE DIFFICULTIES IN MEASURING MULTIPLE ATTACHMENTS
This is because Schaffer and Emmerson used behaviours such as separation protest and stranger
anxiety as indicators of attachment. However, an infant may show similar behaviours in response
to their playmates - who are not true attachment figures
CONCLUSION: THIS MEANS THE FINDINGS MAY NOT PROVIDE VALID EVIDENCE
FOR MULTIPLE ATTACHMENTS
