Explanations of attachment: Bowlby's theory
Bowlby came up with the monotropic theory. He said that attachment is an innate system that gives
a survival advantage. Imprinting and attachment have happened due to evolution because babies
have had to stay close to their caregivers so they are protected from the wild.
Bowlby's theory is monotropic because he said that a child can only attach to one caregiver. This one
attachment is different from other attachments and is more important. Bowlby said that the more
time the baby spends with their attachment figures the better, and he said this for two reasons.
Firstly the law of continuity means that a child should have constant care for a better quality
attachment. Secondly, the law of accumulated separation is where the effects of all the separation
add up, so it's better to not leave the baby alone at all. Bowlby also said that babies are born with
social releasers which cause caregivers to attach to them. These are smiling, cooing, gripping and
laughing, which encourage the attention of adults. The purpose of this is so that adults interact with
them, which Bowlby said was a reciprocal system.
Bowlby also said that there was a critical period in which the baby had to attach. This was from birth
to 2 years, and the baby had to form an attachment within this period. If they did not form an
attachment, they would struggle to form attachments for the rest of their life. The first attachment
forms an internal working model for all attachments in the future. Bowlby said that a child forms a
mental representation of their primary attachment, and this serves as a template for all relationships
in the future. The child who has a loving primary attachment with a reliable caregiver will form an
expectation that all relationships are loving. However, if the child has a poor first attachment, they
will expect this treatment from others. This can also affect the child's abilities as a parent in the
future.
A limitation is that the concept of monotropy lacks validity. The relationship with the primary
attachment figure might just be stronger than other attachments. This doesn't mean that a child will
only form one single attachment of a different quality. Other family members might develop
attachments with the baby which have the same qualities as the attachment with the primary
caregiver. This means that Bowlby might have been wrong to suggest there is only one unique
quality to a child's primary attachment.
A strength is that there is evidence supporting social releasers. One researcher got primary
attachment figures to ignore their baby's social releasers. The babies showed some distress, and
eventually curled and lay motionless. This supports social releasers and the fact that they are
important in attachment.
Another strength is that there is support for the internal working model. The internal working model
predicts that patterns will be passed down from one generation to the next. One researcher studied
99 mothers. Those with poor attachment to their parents were likely to raise children with poor
attachments. This supports Bowlby's theory of the internal working model being passed down
through families.
However, there are other influences on development. A baby's personality is genetically influenced,
and their personality might affect their parenting style. This suggests that Bowlby overemphasised
the importance of the internal working model.
Bowlby came up with the monotropic theory. He said that attachment is an innate system that gives
a survival advantage. Imprinting and attachment have happened due to evolution because babies
have had to stay close to their caregivers so they are protected from the wild.
Bowlby's theory is monotropic because he said that a child can only attach to one caregiver. This one
attachment is different from other attachments and is more important. Bowlby said that the more
time the baby spends with their attachment figures the better, and he said this for two reasons.
Firstly the law of continuity means that a child should have constant care for a better quality
attachment. Secondly, the law of accumulated separation is where the effects of all the separation
add up, so it's better to not leave the baby alone at all. Bowlby also said that babies are born with
social releasers which cause caregivers to attach to them. These are smiling, cooing, gripping and
laughing, which encourage the attention of adults. The purpose of this is so that adults interact with
them, which Bowlby said was a reciprocal system.
Bowlby also said that there was a critical period in which the baby had to attach. This was from birth
to 2 years, and the baby had to form an attachment within this period. If they did not form an
attachment, they would struggle to form attachments for the rest of their life. The first attachment
forms an internal working model for all attachments in the future. Bowlby said that a child forms a
mental representation of their primary attachment, and this serves as a template for all relationships
in the future. The child who has a loving primary attachment with a reliable caregiver will form an
expectation that all relationships are loving. However, if the child has a poor first attachment, they
will expect this treatment from others. This can also affect the child's abilities as a parent in the
future.
A limitation is that the concept of monotropy lacks validity. The relationship with the primary
attachment figure might just be stronger than other attachments. This doesn't mean that a child will
only form one single attachment of a different quality. Other family members might develop
attachments with the baby which have the same qualities as the attachment with the primary
caregiver. This means that Bowlby might have been wrong to suggest there is only one unique
quality to a child's primary attachment.
A strength is that there is evidence supporting social releasers. One researcher got primary
attachment figures to ignore their baby's social releasers. The babies showed some distress, and
eventually curled and lay motionless. This supports social releasers and the fact that they are
important in attachment.
Another strength is that there is support for the internal working model. The internal working model
predicts that patterns will be passed down from one generation to the next. One researcher studied
99 mothers. Those with poor attachment to their parents were likely to raise children with poor
attachments. This supports Bowlby's theory of the internal working model being passed down
through families.
However, there are other influences on development. A baby's personality is genetically influenced,
and their personality might affect their parenting style. This suggests that Bowlby overemphasised
the importance of the internal working model.
