Bowlby’s Monotropic Theory 16marks
Bowlby’s Monotropic theory offers an evolutionary explanation for attachment. Bowlby
suggests that infants need to stay close to their primary caregiver for food and survival.
There are four parts to Bowlby’s monotropic theory, social releasers, the critical period,
monotropy and the internal working model. Bowlby suggests that one evolutionary survival
mechanism are a babies innate social releasers. These are innate behaviours such as crying
or facial expressions that are meant to trigger a response in a caregiver, such as a caregiver
understanding that a certain noise/cry means they need food. Bowlby also suggests that an
attachment must be formed during the critical period of up to 2.5yrs otherwise the infant
will have long lasting negative implications such as an inability to form relationships. The
main part of the monotropic theory of attachment is monotropy, this is the suggestion that
an infant has one primary caregiver to who they form an attachment. There are two laws
proposed around a babies primary attachment figure that are the law of continuity, which
states the more consistent and loving the care the better the attachment and the law of
accumulated separation which suggests that any separation from the primary caregiver has
a negative effect and therefore the best number of separations is zero. The final part of
Bowlby’s theory is the internal working model in which it is suggested that the infant
attachment to your primary caregiver creates a schema that acts as a blueprint for future
relationships.
One strength of Bowlby’s monotropic theory of attachment is that there is supporting
evidence for the idea of a critical period. Animal studies of attachment have shown that
other species also have a critical period of development. For example, Harlow found that
the critical period of a baby rhesus monkey was 90 days and that if an attachment wasn’t
formed during this period then the monkeys were more likely to be aggressive later in life
and even kill their own young. This shows that if an attachment isn’t formed during the
critical period that it can have long lasting negative effects.
However, a limitation of Bowlby’s monotropic theory is that is can be considered socially
sensitive. This is because it suggests that the primary caregiver who Bowlby considers to be
the mother should not leave the infant. This could be unnecessary pressure and guilt on
mothers who cannot afford to stop working and stay home with their child. They may have
felt that they were negatively impacting their child however couldn’t afford to stay with
them. Bowlby’s theory can therefore be criticised for putting unnecessary pressure on
mothers to stay at home and not return to work.
Still, there is supporting research for the internal working model shown by Bailey. Bailey
investigated 99 mothers asking them to self-report the quality of attachment to their own
attachment and the quality of attachment with their child. He found that the better their
attachment o their own mother the better the attachment to their child demonstrating how
early attachment influences later relationships by acting as a blueprint.
Although, the monotropic theory can be criticised for being culturally biased. This is because
it assumes that an infant will have only one primary caregiver, which may be appropriate to
assume in individualistic cultures however it cannot be applied to collectivist cultures such
as Japan. In collectivist cultures as there are many people involved in the raising of a child
Bowlby’s Monotropic theory offers an evolutionary explanation for attachment. Bowlby
suggests that infants need to stay close to their primary caregiver for food and survival.
There are four parts to Bowlby’s monotropic theory, social releasers, the critical period,
monotropy and the internal working model. Bowlby suggests that one evolutionary survival
mechanism are a babies innate social releasers. These are innate behaviours such as crying
or facial expressions that are meant to trigger a response in a caregiver, such as a caregiver
understanding that a certain noise/cry means they need food. Bowlby also suggests that an
attachment must be formed during the critical period of up to 2.5yrs otherwise the infant
will have long lasting negative implications such as an inability to form relationships. The
main part of the monotropic theory of attachment is monotropy, this is the suggestion that
an infant has one primary caregiver to who they form an attachment. There are two laws
proposed around a babies primary attachment figure that are the law of continuity, which
states the more consistent and loving the care the better the attachment and the law of
accumulated separation which suggests that any separation from the primary caregiver has
a negative effect and therefore the best number of separations is zero. The final part of
Bowlby’s theory is the internal working model in which it is suggested that the infant
attachment to your primary caregiver creates a schema that acts as a blueprint for future
relationships.
One strength of Bowlby’s monotropic theory of attachment is that there is supporting
evidence for the idea of a critical period. Animal studies of attachment have shown that
other species also have a critical period of development. For example, Harlow found that
the critical period of a baby rhesus monkey was 90 days and that if an attachment wasn’t
formed during this period then the monkeys were more likely to be aggressive later in life
and even kill their own young. This shows that if an attachment isn’t formed during the
critical period that it can have long lasting negative effects.
However, a limitation of Bowlby’s monotropic theory is that is can be considered socially
sensitive. This is because it suggests that the primary caregiver who Bowlby considers to be
the mother should not leave the infant. This could be unnecessary pressure and guilt on
mothers who cannot afford to stop working and stay home with their child. They may have
felt that they were negatively impacting their child however couldn’t afford to stay with
them. Bowlby’s theory can therefore be criticised for putting unnecessary pressure on
mothers to stay at home and not return to work.
Still, there is supporting research for the internal working model shown by Bailey. Bailey
investigated 99 mothers asking them to self-report the quality of attachment to their own
attachment and the quality of attachment with their child. He found that the better their
attachment o their own mother the better the attachment to their child demonstrating how
early attachment influences later relationships by acting as a blueprint.
Although, the monotropic theory can be criticised for being culturally biased. This is because
it assumes that an infant will have only one primary caregiver, which may be appropriate to
assume in individualistic cultures however it cannot be applied to collectivist cultures such
as Japan. In collectivist cultures as there are many people involved in the raising of a child
