ESSAY PLANS
Discuss animal studies of attachment (16)
Lorenz investigated imprinting (innate readiness to form an attachment)
in goslings. He randomly allocated goose eggs to either a control group –
naturally hatched with their mother – or an experimental group – hatched
in an incubator with Lorenz. Once hatched, these goslings were grouped
together to see who they would follow. As expected, the control group
imprinted on their mother, whereas the experimental group imprinted on
Lorenz. When combined, the goslings separated and followed their
attachment figure – their bonds were irreversible. Lorenz found that there
was a critical period of 4-25 hours. He also found that adult mate
preferences were affected – they were displayed towards the attachment
type figure. Harry Harlow also conducted a study into animal attachment.
He wanted to investigate whether attachment is formed based on food or
contact comfort. He conducted an experiment with baby rhesus monkeys.
One condition had the monkey put with a wire mother who dispensed
milk, and the other condition was with a cloth mother who dispensed milk.
He recorded the amount of time that was spent with each mother. He also
frightened the monkeys with a loud noise to test them for mother
preference when distressed. He found that preference was shown for
contact with the cloth mother when given the choice, regardless of
whether she produced food. This suggests that attachment is not based
on association with food, but rather contact comfort.
A strength of Lorenz’ research is that it has theoretical value. The idea of
a critical period heavily influenced Bowlby’s idea of a critical period in
human attachment – the idea that there is a specific time period where an
attachment between an infant and carer must form. Additionally, the idea
of sexual imprinting also influenced Bowlby’s continuity hypothesis, on the
importance of attachment relationships for future relationships. This is a
strength because Bowlby’s theories play an important role in
understanding attachment, and Lorenz’ research is highly credible for
influencing him.
Additionally, Harlow’s research also has theoretical value. His findings
showed that attachment is a result of contact comfort – Ainsworth stated
that secure attachments form due to sensitive caregiving. His findings
also show that deprivation of an attachment figure has serious,
irreversible effects. This is also shown in Bowlby’s maternal deprivation
hypothesis. He states that if a child is deprived of emotional care, there’s
an impact on later social, emotional and intellectual development. This
adds validity to Harlow’s research as it is supported by highly established
theories.
Nevertheless, there are problems generalising animal studies to humans.
Firstly, humans and geese are biologically different. For goslings,
imprinting is necessary for their survival as they are mobile as soon as
they hatch. In humans, it takes about 9 months to become mobile. Also,
, humans and geese are psychologically different – human mothers show
more emotional attachment than birds and can form attachments during a
sensitive period, rather than a critical one. What is more, whilst monkeys
are in some ways similar to humans, it is likely that attachment works in
similar ways. However, there are also differences. The human brain is
around three times bigger than a monkeys, and humans can make
conscious decisions about social interactions to a greater extent.
Therefore, we cannot assume that human babies would respond in exactly
the same way as the goslings or monkeys.
Outline + evaluate Bowlby’s explanation of attachment (16)
Bowlby had the idea that we have an innate tendency to form
attachments as they give a survival advantage, and are therefore
adaptive. An infant who is attached is better protected. He came up with
the idea of social releasers – babies are born with a set of innate ‘cute’
features and behaviours that encourage the attention from adults. These
activate the innate adult attachment system, which is the tendency for
adults to care for them. Social releasers include having big eyes, a small
nose, crying, cooing or gripping. Bowlby used idea’s from Lorenz’ study
and agreed that babies have an innate drive to become attached, and
that this must take place in a critical period of around two years. He
argued that infants who do not form an attachment in this time will have
difficulty doing so later on. Bowlby also introduced the concept of
monotropy – the idea that the relationship that an infant has with their
primary attachment figure is of special significance in emotional
development, and is a more important relationship than the rest. A child
forms a mental representation of their relationship with their primary
caregiver – this is called an internal working model. This acts as a
template for all future relationships and generates expectations of what
intimate relationships are like. Securely attached infants continue to be
socially and emotionally competent and likely to have secure relationships
as adults (the continuity hypothesis).
There is research evidence that supports the idea of th internal working
model. Bailey et al. assessed 99 mothers with their one-year old babies on
the quality of attachment to their own mothers, using interviews. They
also assessed the attachments of the babies to their mothers using
observations. It was found that mothers who reported poor attachments
to their own parents in interviews were much more likely to have children
classified as a poor attachment type, according to their observations. This
supports the idea that there is an internal working model of attachment
being passed through families. This adds validity to Bowlby’s explanation
of attachment.
However, there is also evidence to suggest that the idea of a monotropic
attachment is flawed. Schaffer and Emerson found that most babies did
attach to one person first. However, a significant minority appeared to
Discuss animal studies of attachment (16)
Lorenz investigated imprinting (innate readiness to form an attachment)
in goslings. He randomly allocated goose eggs to either a control group –
naturally hatched with their mother – or an experimental group – hatched
in an incubator with Lorenz. Once hatched, these goslings were grouped
together to see who they would follow. As expected, the control group
imprinted on their mother, whereas the experimental group imprinted on
Lorenz. When combined, the goslings separated and followed their
attachment figure – their bonds were irreversible. Lorenz found that there
was a critical period of 4-25 hours. He also found that adult mate
preferences were affected – they were displayed towards the attachment
type figure. Harry Harlow also conducted a study into animal attachment.
He wanted to investigate whether attachment is formed based on food or
contact comfort. He conducted an experiment with baby rhesus monkeys.
One condition had the monkey put with a wire mother who dispensed
milk, and the other condition was with a cloth mother who dispensed milk.
He recorded the amount of time that was spent with each mother. He also
frightened the monkeys with a loud noise to test them for mother
preference when distressed. He found that preference was shown for
contact with the cloth mother when given the choice, regardless of
whether she produced food. This suggests that attachment is not based
on association with food, but rather contact comfort.
A strength of Lorenz’ research is that it has theoretical value. The idea of
a critical period heavily influenced Bowlby’s idea of a critical period in
human attachment – the idea that there is a specific time period where an
attachment between an infant and carer must form. Additionally, the idea
of sexual imprinting also influenced Bowlby’s continuity hypothesis, on the
importance of attachment relationships for future relationships. This is a
strength because Bowlby’s theories play an important role in
understanding attachment, and Lorenz’ research is highly credible for
influencing him.
Additionally, Harlow’s research also has theoretical value. His findings
showed that attachment is a result of contact comfort – Ainsworth stated
that secure attachments form due to sensitive caregiving. His findings
also show that deprivation of an attachment figure has serious,
irreversible effects. This is also shown in Bowlby’s maternal deprivation
hypothesis. He states that if a child is deprived of emotional care, there’s
an impact on later social, emotional and intellectual development. This
adds validity to Harlow’s research as it is supported by highly established
theories.
Nevertheless, there are problems generalising animal studies to humans.
Firstly, humans and geese are biologically different. For goslings,
imprinting is necessary for their survival as they are mobile as soon as
they hatch. In humans, it takes about 9 months to become mobile. Also,
, humans and geese are psychologically different – human mothers show
more emotional attachment than birds and can form attachments during a
sensitive period, rather than a critical one. What is more, whilst monkeys
are in some ways similar to humans, it is likely that attachment works in
similar ways. However, there are also differences. The human brain is
around three times bigger than a monkeys, and humans can make
conscious decisions about social interactions to a greater extent.
Therefore, we cannot assume that human babies would respond in exactly
the same way as the goslings or monkeys.
Outline + evaluate Bowlby’s explanation of attachment (16)
Bowlby had the idea that we have an innate tendency to form
attachments as they give a survival advantage, and are therefore
adaptive. An infant who is attached is better protected. He came up with
the idea of social releasers – babies are born with a set of innate ‘cute’
features and behaviours that encourage the attention from adults. These
activate the innate adult attachment system, which is the tendency for
adults to care for them. Social releasers include having big eyes, a small
nose, crying, cooing or gripping. Bowlby used idea’s from Lorenz’ study
and agreed that babies have an innate drive to become attached, and
that this must take place in a critical period of around two years. He
argued that infants who do not form an attachment in this time will have
difficulty doing so later on. Bowlby also introduced the concept of
monotropy – the idea that the relationship that an infant has with their
primary attachment figure is of special significance in emotional
development, and is a more important relationship than the rest. A child
forms a mental representation of their relationship with their primary
caregiver – this is called an internal working model. This acts as a
template for all future relationships and generates expectations of what
intimate relationships are like. Securely attached infants continue to be
socially and emotionally competent and likely to have secure relationships
as adults (the continuity hypothesis).
There is research evidence that supports the idea of th internal working
model. Bailey et al. assessed 99 mothers with their one-year old babies on
the quality of attachment to their own mothers, using interviews. They
also assessed the attachments of the babies to their mothers using
observations. It was found that mothers who reported poor attachments
to their own parents in interviews were much more likely to have children
classified as a poor attachment type, according to their observations. This
supports the idea that there is an internal working model of attachment
being passed through families. This adds validity to Bowlby’s explanation
of attachment.
However, there is also evidence to suggest that the idea of a monotropic
attachment is flawed. Schaffer and Emerson found that most babies did
attach to one person first. However, a significant minority appeared to
