Attachment
• Caregiver-infant interactions in humans: reciprocity and interactional synchrony. Stages of
attachment identified by Schaffer. Multiple attachments and the role of the father.
• Animal studies of attachment: Lorenz and Harlow.
• Explanations of attachment: learning theory and Bowlby’s monotropic theory. The concepts of a
critical period and an internal working model.
• Ainsworth’s ‘Strange Situation’. Types of attachment: secure, insecure-avoidant and insecure-
resistant. Cultural variations in attachment, including van Ijzendoorn.
• Bowlby’s theory of maternal deprivation. Romanian orphan studies: effects of institutionalisation.
• The influence of early attachment on childhood and adult relationships, including the role of an
internal working model.
,Caregiver-infant interactions in humans: reciprocity and interactional synchrony.
Reciprocity – two-way interaction between caregiver and child/turn-taking/mirroring;
Interactional synchrony – simultaneous co-ordinated sequence of movements, communication,
emotions to sustain communication (caregiver react quickly and seamlessly to the emotions of their
infants, even before they are expressed – anticipate)
Accept other relevant features, eg imitation; baby talk register/‘motherese’
Description of evidence of features:
Meltzoff and Moore
Research suggests that interactional synchrony is an innate process. Meltzoff and Moore’s controlled
observations showed babies as young as three days old mimicking adult’s expression, including sticking
out their tongue. Showing that babies are born to become quickly in synch with their caregivers.
Isabella et al
Found that the more securely attached the infant, the greater the level of interactional synchrony. This
suggests that not all children engage in interactional synchrony, and Meltzoff and Moore’s findings may
have overlooked individual differences.
Use of evidence to support or contradict features Infant’s intention is difficult to determine
Strange situation lab experiment – measure – Research has questionable reliability. Behaviour
evidence of these behaviours particularly in those may have occurred by chance instead of actually
with a secure attachment type engaging in interactional synchrony / reciprocity
Secure – showed clear signs of reciprocity – reunion Not representative of actual behaviour,
– JOY. Mothers anticipation, secure base. assumptions of behaviours.
Insecure-avoidant – less or faulty interactional
synchrony – indifference Reflexes, development of muscles rather than
attachment – looking for food source rather than
Insecure-resistant – inconsistent, cling but also hit comfort.
Observer bias BOWLBY vs. Learning debate
Researchers might have consciously / unconsciously Innate views of infant caregiver interactions are in
interpret behaviour to support their findings. line with Bowlby – add research support (Harlow).
But attachment may also be a learnt process, in
Koepke et al – failed to replicate findings of which care infant movements are random.
Meltzoff and Moore à results might be unreliable
, Stages of attachment identified by Schaffer.
Asocial/pre-attachment stage (0-2 months) - An infant shows similar responses to objects and people.
Display a preference for faces / eyes towards the end of this stage
Indiscriminate/diffuse attachment/stage (2-6 months) - An infant now shows a preference for human
company over non-human company. They can distinguish between different people but are comforted
indiscriminately (by anyone) and do not show stranger anxiety yet
Specific/discriminate attachment/stage (7-12 months) - An infant shows a preference for one caregiver,
displaying separation and stranger anxiety. The infant looks to a particular person for security and
protection. The infant shows joy upon reunion and are comforted by their primary caregiver.
Multiple attachment/stage (one year +) – Attachment behaviour displayed towards several different
people (secondary attachments). Forms in the first month after the primary attachment is formed. No. of
attachments depends on social circle.
Evidence - Schaffer and Emerson: Issues with that research – does it really
represent the stages of attachment?
Sample of 60 babies from working class families in
Glasgow, aged 5-23 weeks. Social desirability bias – Mothers may not have
Researchers interviewed the mothers & observed reported accurate details about their children to
stranger & separation anxiety every month for 12 appear like ‘better mothers’ with secure
months and again at 18 months. attachments
à At specific attachment stage, 50% showed à bias, lower internal behaviour, natural behaviour
separation anxiety from infants but mothers
à By 40 weeks, 80% of children had a specific
attachment; 30% started to form multiple Lacks population validity – Only 60 working class
attachments mothers and babies from Glasgow
May form different attachments compared to
Supports Schaffer’s stages of attachment wealthier families / other countries
à Unable to generalise results to other countries
and backgrounds
RWA -
Not all children following the same patterns – Understanding of infant behaviours can be useful to
awareness of the issues with maturational stages – form assessment and intervention and support
some children will move through stages quicker parents.
than others.
According to Schaffer, multiple attachment
OR happens at 1, so parents can wait until this stage to
leave grandparents in sole charge, to reduce
This highlights the important role of other people, unnecessarily worry.
whilst other theories arguably place too much
emphasis on the mother only. Can be used to give advice about when to return to
work – not during the specific stage, if possible.
• Caregiver-infant interactions in humans: reciprocity and interactional synchrony. Stages of
attachment identified by Schaffer. Multiple attachments and the role of the father.
• Animal studies of attachment: Lorenz and Harlow.
• Explanations of attachment: learning theory and Bowlby’s monotropic theory. The concepts of a
critical period and an internal working model.
• Ainsworth’s ‘Strange Situation’. Types of attachment: secure, insecure-avoidant and insecure-
resistant. Cultural variations in attachment, including van Ijzendoorn.
• Bowlby’s theory of maternal deprivation. Romanian orphan studies: effects of institutionalisation.
• The influence of early attachment on childhood and adult relationships, including the role of an
internal working model.
,Caregiver-infant interactions in humans: reciprocity and interactional synchrony.
Reciprocity – two-way interaction between caregiver and child/turn-taking/mirroring;
Interactional synchrony – simultaneous co-ordinated sequence of movements, communication,
emotions to sustain communication (caregiver react quickly and seamlessly to the emotions of their
infants, even before they are expressed – anticipate)
Accept other relevant features, eg imitation; baby talk register/‘motherese’
Description of evidence of features:
Meltzoff and Moore
Research suggests that interactional synchrony is an innate process. Meltzoff and Moore’s controlled
observations showed babies as young as three days old mimicking adult’s expression, including sticking
out their tongue. Showing that babies are born to become quickly in synch with their caregivers.
Isabella et al
Found that the more securely attached the infant, the greater the level of interactional synchrony. This
suggests that not all children engage in interactional synchrony, and Meltzoff and Moore’s findings may
have overlooked individual differences.
Use of evidence to support or contradict features Infant’s intention is difficult to determine
Strange situation lab experiment – measure – Research has questionable reliability. Behaviour
evidence of these behaviours particularly in those may have occurred by chance instead of actually
with a secure attachment type engaging in interactional synchrony / reciprocity
Secure – showed clear signs of reciprocity – reunion Not representative of actual behaviour,
– JOY. Mothers anticipation, secure base. assumptions of behaviours.
Insecure-avoidant – less or faulty interactional
synchrony – indifference Reflexes, development of muscles rather than
attachment – looking for food source rather than
Insecure-resistant – inconsistent, cling but also hit comfort.
Observer bias BOWLBY vs. Learning debate
Researchers might have consciously / unconsciously Innate views of infant caregiver interactions are in
interpret behaviour to support their findings. line with Bowlby – add research support (Harlow).
But attachment may also be a learnt process, in
Koepke et al – failed to replicate findings of which care infant movements are random.
Meltzoff and Moore à results might be unreliable
, Stages of attachment identified by Schaffer.
Asocial/pre-attachment stage (0-2 months) - An infant shows similar responses to objects and people.
Display a preference for faces / eyes towards the end of this stage
Indiscriminate/diffuse attachment/stage (2-6 months) - An infant now shows a preference for human
company over non-human company. They can distinguish between different people but are comforted
indiscriminately (by anyone) and do not show stranger anxiety yet
Specific/discriminate attachment/stage (7-12 months) - An infant shows a preference for one caregiver,
displaying separation and stranger anxiety. The infant looks to a particular person for security and
protection. The infant shows joy upon reunion and are comforted by their primary caregiver.
Multiple attachment/stage (one year +) – Attachment behaviour displayed towards several different
people (secondary attachments). Forms in the first month after the primary attachment is formed. No. of
attachments depends on social circle.
Evidence - Schaffer and Emerson: Issues with that research – does it really
represent the stages of attachment?
Sample of 60 babies from working class families in
Glasgow, aged 5-23 weeks. Social desirability bias – Mothers may not have
Researchers interviewed the mothers & observed reported accurate details about their children to
stranger & separation anxiety every month for 12 appear like ‘better mothers’ with secure
months and again at 18 months. attachments
à At specific attachment stage, 50% showed à bias, lower internal behaviour, natural behaviour
separation anxiety from infants but mothers
à By 40 weeks, 80% of children had a specific
attachment; 30% started to form multiple Lacks population validity – Only 60 working class
attachments mothers and babies from Glasgow
May form different attachments compared to
Supports Schaffer’s stages of attachment wealthier families / other countries
à Unable to generalise results to other countries
and backgrounds
RWA -
Not all children following the same patterns – Understanding of infant behaviours can be useful to
awareness of the issues with maturational stages – form assessment and intervention and support
some children will move through stages quicker parents.
than others.
According to Schaffer, multiple attachment
OR happens at 1, so parents can wait until this stage to
leave grandparents in sole charge, to reduce
This highlights the important role of other people, unnecessarily worry.
whilst other theories arguably place too much
emphasis on the mother only. Can be used to give advice about when to return to
work – not during the specific stage, if possible.
