The Role of the Father
We already know that Bowlby argued that the role of the father was to be a secondary attachment figure and
his role was that of economic provider/breadwinner, therefore enabling mother to form the primary
attachment (monotropy)
-> A03 criticism – obsolete, lacks temporal validity
In this subsection, we will look at research into the role of the father as a secondary attachment figure i.e. do
fathers make a unique/different contribution to children’s development than mothers as the primary
caregiver
-> this contribution is in terms of play, which is more physical, “rough + tumble”, more intense stimuli
We will also look at research into the role of the father as a primary attachment figure
e.g.
-> single parent family, male headed (patrifocal)
-> stay-at-home dad, working mum
-> male homosexual family
Can fathers fulfil the primary caregiver role?
Most attachment research has focused on mother and baby attachment, and the role of the father
in the development of attachment has often been neglected. However, there is research on the
specific roles that fathers play in development. (Note that a ‘father’ does not specifically refer to
a baby’s biological male parent – it refers to a child’s closest male caregiver. This is about what
male caregivers may contribute e.g. stepfather, adoptive father)
Attachment to fathers
Perhaps the most basic question about the role of fathers is whether babies actually
attach to them and, if so, when. Available evidence suggests that fathers are much less
likely to become babies’ first attachment figure compared to mothers.
For example, in the previous subsection we looked at the stages of attachment based on
research by Schaffer and Emerson (1964). They found that the majority of babies first
became attached to their mother at around 7 months. In only 3% of cases the father
was the first sole object of attachment. In 27% of cases, the father was the joint first
object of attachment with the mother. However, it appears that most fathers go on to
become important attachment figures. 75% of the babies studied by Schaffer and
Emerson formed an attachment with their father by the age of 18 months. This was
determined by the fact that the babies protested when their father walked away – a sign of
attachment.
, Distinctive role for fathers
A different research question is whether attachment to fathers holds some specific value
in a child’s development and, if so, whether it plays a different role in a child’s
development from attachment to the mother. In other words, do male adult caregivers
make a unique contribution to early development?
Grossman et al (2002) carried out a longitudinal study where babies’ attachments were
studied until they were into their teens. The researchers looked at both parents’ behaviour
and its relationship to the quality of their baby’s later attachments to other people. Quality
of a baby’s attachment with mothers but not fathers was related to attachments in
adolescence. This suggests that attachment to fathers is less important than
attachment to mothers.
However, Grossman et al also found that the quality of fathers’ play with babies was
related to the quality of adolescent attachments. This suggests that fathers have a
different role from mothers – one that is more to do with play and stimulation, and less
to do with emotional development.
Research has found that fathers as secondary attachment figures had an important role in
their children’s development. However, other studies (e.g. MacCallum and Golombok,
2004) have found that children growing up in single or same-sex parent families do not
develop any differently from those in two-parent heterosexual families. This would
seem to suggest that the father’s role as a secondary attachment figure is not
important -> odd one out – suggests the removal of the father = normal development
Fathers as primary attachment figures
A distinction is made between primary and secondary attachment figures. Previously we described
the first specific attachment as a primary attachment and later attachments (in stage 4) as
secondary attachments. But there is more to primary attachment than being first – a baby’s primary
attachment has special emotional significance. A baby’s relationship with their primary
attachment figure forms the basis of all later close emotional relationships (Bowlby’s internal
working model, continuity hypothesis)
Interestingly, there is some evidence to suggest that when fathers do take on the role of
primary caregiver, they are able to adopt the emotional role more typically associated
with mothers.
For example, in one study Field (1978) filmed 4-month-old babies in face-to-face
interaction with primary caregiver mothers, secondary caregiver fathers and primary
We already know that Bowlby argued that the role of the father was to be a secondary attachment figure and
his role was that of economic provider/breadwinner, therefore enabling mother to form the primary
attachment (monotropy)
-> A03 criticism – obsolete, lacks temporal validity
In this subsection, we will look at research into the role of the father as a secondary attachment figure i.e. do
fathers make a unique/different contribution to children’s development than mothers as the primary
caregiver
-> this contribution is in terms of play, which is more physical, “rough + tumble”, more intense stimuli
We will also look at research into the role of the father as a primary attachment figure
e.g.
-> single parent family, male headed (patrifocal)
-> stay-at-home dad, working mum
-> male homosexual family
Can fathers fulfil the primary caregiver role?
Most attachment research has focused on mother and baby attachment, and the role of the father
in the development of attachment has often been neglected. However, there is research on the
specific roles that fathers play in development. (Note that a ‘father’ does not specifically refer to
a baby’s biological male parent – it refers to a child’s closest male caregiver. This is about what
male caregivers may contribute e.g. stepfather, adoptive father)
Attachment to fathers
Perhaps the most basic question about the role of fathers is whether babies actually
attach to them and, if so, when. Available evidence suggests that fathers are much less
likely to become babies’ first attachment figure compared to mothers.
For example, in the previous subsection we looked at the stages of attachment based on
research by Schaffer and Emerson (1964). They found that the majority of babies first
became attached to their mother at around 7 months. In only 3% of cases the father
was the first sole object of attachment. In 27% of cases, the father was the joint first
object of attachment with the mother. However, it appears that most fathers go on to
become important attachment figures. 75% of the babies studied by Schaffer and
Emerson formed an attachment with their father by the age of 18 months. This was
determined by the fact that the babies protested when their father walked away – a sign of
attachment.
, Distinctive role for fathers
A different research question is whether attachment to fathers holds some specific value
in a child’s development and, if so, whether it plays a different role in a child’s
development from attachment to the mother. In other words, do male adult caregivers
make a unique contribution to early development?
Grossman et al (2002) carried out a longitudinal study where babies’ attachments were
studied until they were into their teens. The researchers looked at both parents’ behaviour
and its relationship to the quality of their baby’s later attachments to other people. Quality
of a baby’s attachment with mothers but not fathers was related to attachments in
adolescence. This suggests that attachment to fathers is less important than
attachment to mothers.
However, Grossman et al also found that the quality of fathers’ play with babies was
related to the quality of adolescent attachments. This suggests that fathers have a
different role from mothers – one that is more to do with play and stimulation, and less
to do with emotional development.
Research has found that fathers as secondary attachment figures had an important role in
their children’s development. However, other studies (e.g. MacCallum and Golombok,
2004) have found that children growing up in single or same-sex parent families do not
develop any differently from those in two-parent heterosexual families. This would
seem to suggest that the father’s role as a secondary attachment figure is not
important -> odd one out – suggests the removal of the father = normal development
Fathers as primary attachment figures
A distinction is made between primary and secondary attachment figures. Previously we described
the first specific attachment as a primary attachment and later attachments (in stage 4) as
secondary attachments. But there is more to primary attachment than being first – a baby’s primary
attachment has special emotional significance. A baby’s relationship with their primary
attachment figure forms the basis of all later close emotional relationships (Bowlby’s internal
working model, continuity hypothesis)
Interestingly, there is some evidence to suggest that when fathers do take on the role of
primary caregiver, they are able to adopt the emotional role more typically associated
with mothers.
For example, in one study Field (1978) filmed 4-month-old babies in face-to-face
interaction with primary caregiver mothers, secondary caregiver fathers and primary
