The influence of early A on childhood and adult relationships
AO1- Hazen + Shaver (Love AO1
Quiz) - (short-term purpose of A) = safety,
- (procedure) advert in newspaper in survival, security
the Rocky Mountains, America, to - (long-term purpose of A) = develop
complete questionnaire, 620 replies IWM which dictates all future
- (questionnaire) adult view on relationships
relationships, love experiences,
relationship in the past with parents
- (results) used answers to
determine A style childhood A
appears to be linked with present
attachment type
-> secure= trust others, positive
relationships, A figure(s) are
dependable and caring
-> anxious- avoidant= fear of
closeness, love is not durable, cold/
rejecting A figure(s)
-> anxious-resistant= fall in love
easily but have trouble finding true
love, conflicting A figure(s)
-> prototype theory= what happens
as a child happens for adult forever
AO3- STRENGTHS AO3- WEAKNESSES
Methodology Methodology
-> large sample of 620 -> self-selected sample, sample
-> can generalise as it is Rockey Mountains
representative -> social desirability bias
-> retrospective + unverifiable BUT
Research support (McCarthy) longitudinal study which
-> (Myron-Wilson + Smith) A type is is not retrospective
associated with bullying behaviour
eg. secure= unlikely, avoidant= Correlation
victims, resistant= bullies -> research used is correlational so
-> (McCarthy) 40 women identified cannot establish cause and effects
in previous studies to have had -> not valid
insecure A to primary carers, (now)
anxious- avoidant/ resistant= poor Overly deterministic
relationships -> (McCarthy + Maughan) link
between infant A type and adult
relationship not always the case,
28% insecure A went on to good
relationships
-> (Cohn et al) 1 insecure and 1
, secure in a relationship works
Caregiver-infant interactions
AO1 AO1
- (reciprocity)= description of how - (is IS intentional) (Tronick)
2 people interact including their -> ‘still face experiment’
response to each other's actions -> mother shows IS/R then stops
and each elicits responses to one (‘dead face’/ no interaction)
another by taking turns -> child screams, cries, loses posture
-> a precursor to communications -> if just copying baby would match
- (interactional synchrony) = how ‘dead face’
people respond to actions/
emotions, it is synchronised/ - (consequence of IS) (Isabella et al)
temporal, they mirror each other, -> 30 mothers observed
an intentional reaction which is -> high IS associated with better
more important than reciprocity quality A
- (cause of IS) (Meltzoff + Moore)
-> 3 faces, 1 hand gesture
-> at 2 weeks show IS, some even
3 days so inherited as it cannot be
learnt in such a short time
AO3- STRENGTHS AO3- WEAKNESSES
Research support- Meltzoff + Research issues- Meltzoff +
Moore Moore
-> (videoed + independent -> (data collected through
observers) interrater observer observation) bias observer as knew
reliability above 0.92 what the adult face would have been,
-> (Mendonca) found similar father may interpret babies’ reactions
infant synchrony, IS in mums and
dads Research issues
-> (Isabella) correlational data,
Research support (IS) cannot establish cause and effect
-> Tronick
-> Isabella Nature/ nurture debate
-> (nurture) caregiver/ interaction
Research support (R) -> (nature!!) temperament
-> (Feldman) 3 months onwards hypothesis, if child has a ‘difficult’
both baby and mother pay close temperament won’t show IS/R, not to
attention to each other’s verbal do with caregiver
signals/ facial expressions,
interaction signals of both are
increasingly frequent (baby is alert)
AO1- Hazen + Shaver (Love AO1
Quiz) - (short-term purpose of A) = safety,
- (procedure) advert in newspaper in survival, security
the Rocky Mountains, America, to - (long-term purpose of A) = develop
complete questionnaire, 620 replies IWM which dictates all future
- (questionnaire) adult view on relationships
relationships, love experiences,
relationship in the past with parents
- (results) used answers to
determine A style childhood A
appears to be linked with present
attachment type
-> secure= trust others, positive
relationships, A figure(s) are
dependable and caring
-> anxious- avoidant= fear of
closeness, love is not durable, cold/
rejecting A figure(s)
-> anxious-resistant= fall in love
easily but have trouble finding true
love, conflicting A figure(s)
-> prototype theory= what happens
as a child happens for adult forever
AO3- STRENGTHS AO3- WEAKNESSES
Methodology Methodology
-> large sample of 620 -> self-selected sample, sample
-> can generalise as it is Rockey Mountains
representative -> social desirability bias
-> retrospective + unverifiable BUT
Research support (McCarthy) longitudinal study which
-> (Myron-Wilson + Smith) A type is is not retrospective
associated with bullying behaviour
eg. secure= unlikely, avoidant= Correlation
victims, resistant= bullies -> research used is correlational so
-> (McCarthy) 40 women identified cannot establish cause and effects
in previous studies to have had -> not valid
insecure A to primary carers, (now)
anxious- avoidant/ resistant= poor Overly deterministic
relationships -> (McCarthy + Maughan) link
between infant A type and adult
relationship not always the case,
28% insecure A went on to good
relationships
-> (Cohn et al) 1 insecure and 1
, secure in a relationship works
Caregiver-infant interactions
AO1 AO1
- (reciprocity)= description of how - (is IS intentional) (Tronick)
2 people interact including their -> ‘still face experiment’
response to each other's actions -> mother shows IS/R then stops
and each elicits responses to one (‘dead face’/ no interaction)
another by taking turns -> child screams, cries, loses posture
-> a precursor to communications -> if just copying baby would match
- (interactional synchrony) = how ‘dead face’
people respond to actions/
emotions, it is synchronised/ - (consequence of IS) (Isabella et al)
temporal, they mirror each other, -> 30 mothers observed
an intentional reaction which is -> high IS associated with better
more important than reciprocity quality A
- (cause of IS) (Meltzoff + Moore)
-> 3 faces, 1 hand gesture
-> at 2 weeks show IS, some even
3 days so inherited as it cannot be
learnt in such a short time
AO3- STRENGTHS AO3- WEAKNESSES
Research support- Meltzoff + Research issues- Meltzoff +
Moore Moore
-> (videoed + independent -> (data collected through
observers) interrater observer observation) bias observer as knew
reliability above 0.92 what the adult face would have been,
-> (Mendonca) found similar father may interpret babies’ reactions
infant synchrony, IS in mums and
dads Research issues
-> (Isabella) correlational data,
Research support (IS) cannot establish cause and effect
-> Tronick
-> Isabella Nature/ nurture debate
-> (nurture) caregiver/ interaction
Research support (R) -> (nature!!) temperament
-> (Feldman) 3 months onwards hypothesis, if child has a ‘difficult’
both baby and mother pay close temperament won’t show IS/R, not to
attention to each other’s verbal do with caregiver
signals/ facial expressions,
interaction signals of both are
increasingly frequent (baby is alert)
