1 Attachment
Caregiver-infant interactions
Attachment = an emotional bond between 2 people (a two way process) that endures over time, leads to
certain behaviours (e.g. clinging & proximity seeking) and serves the role of protecting an infant
Caregiver = anyone who provides care for a child (e.g. parent, grandparent, sibling, other family
members, childminder…)
Reciprocity = responding to the action of another with a similar action, the actions of one partner elicit a
response of the other
Interactional synchrony (I.S) = when two people interact they usually mirror the others emotional and
behavioural movements
Reliability = consistency
Why infants imitate adults
● Biological, innate - to survive, infant wants to live and parent wants their baby to survive
● Visually what they can see
● Baby sees that adult is alive so copies them as they also want to live, adult wants baby to survive
so teaches them
● Communication in later life - learn what to do / it's like
● Foundation of attachment - how attachment forms, one of the building blocks to create a
relationship between 2 people
● Anticipate and respond - starting of conversations for later life to help them
Reciprocity
● Reciprocity = responding to the action of another with a similar action, the actions of one partner
elicit a response of the other
● Partial conversation / turn taking in interactions (Jaffe et al, 1973)
● Occurs to develop conversational skills
● Establishes communications / sensitivity - awareness of an individual's needs = foundations
(Brazelton et al, 1979)
● E.g. baby sticks tongue out, adult smiles - reciprocates behaviour, not the same behaviour but
similar
Interactional synchrony
● Two individuals mirroring the emotions and behaviour of another
● Imitating emotion and behaviour
● Synchrony = when two or more thing move in the same pattern
, ● Meltzoff and moore researched this
● Also happens with an emotional response
Meltzoff and Moore (M + M)
Aim:
- Looking for evidence of interactional synchrony between infant and caregivers
Method:
- Used 4 behaviours - hand gestures, sticking out tongue, putting tongue back in, mouth opening,
closing mouth, pursing lips
- Model who demonstrates behaviour and the child were filmed to then check if behaviour was
copied / imitated
- Filmed - to slow it down, checked using multiple independent observers, reviewed it separately
(inter-observer reliability - comparing results, will see positive correlation if they are similar
results), checking for consistency in results
Findings:
- In ⅔ weeks old found evidence of interactional synchrony (I.S)
- In 3 days old suggests same results, evidence of I.S
- Had very high agreement (0.92)
- This supports the fact I.S is an innate behaviour used in attachment formation (for survival
purposes)
AO3
1. Point: There were criticisms on whether Meltzoff and Moore’s research was actually meaning I.S.
as an innate behaviour used to form attachment as Piaget believed response were only due to
rewards (i.e. reinforcement based learning, in the first year)
Evidence: Murray + Trevarthen conducted research similar to M + M’s where video the screen was
delayed so the infant was not seeing the live / time / appropriate response from the caregiver to the child's
actions.
Explanation: The fact that they showed distress at this supports the idea that the infants were aware of
the two way connection / turn taking - supporting the idea that I.S. is an innate mechanism used in
attachment forming.
Link: This also supports M + M’s conclusion
2. Point: There is variation between different infants
Evidence: Heiman (1989) showed that infants who demonstrate more imitation from birth onwards show
greater relationships between them and the caregiver at 3 months
Explanation: However, this isn’t clear whether the imitation is a cause or an effect of this early synchrony
as research shows there are definite differences but does not show why
, Link: Therefore, reciprocity does occur with infant to caregiver interactions
3. Point: There is a problem with reliability of testing infant behaviour because of irregularities
Explanation: Due to the age and lack of brain development, infant mouths are in constant motion which
makes it difficult to differentiate between a reaction or regular toddler behaviour (e.g. mouth opening or
smiling)
Evidence: M + M’s research concluded that you could differentiate between the two because the testing
was filmed, slowed and shown to observers who agreed on the validity through checking inter-observer
reliability
Link: In agreement with the conclusion of M + M’s research there are ways of increasing internal validity,
therefore this supports the theory of I.S.
The development of attachment
Multiple attachment = having more than one attachment figure
Primary attachment figure = the one who formed the closest bond with the child, shown by the intensity of
their relationship (usually the biological mother, but can be others - e.g. adoptive mother, father,
grandmother)
Separation anxiety = distress shown by the infant when separated from their caregiver - doesn't have to
be biological mother
Stranger anxiety = distress shown by the infant when approached or picked up by someone who is
unfamiliar to them
Stages of attachment
● Schaffer and Emerson - conducted study on attachment
1. Indiscriminate attachment
● From birth to 2 months
● Infants produce similar responses to all objects, animate or inanimate
● Reciprocity and I.S play a role in establishing the infants relationships with others
● Towards end of this period infants begin to show more preference for social stimuli (e.g smiling
face) and to be more content when with people
2. The beginnings of attachment
● Around 4 months
● Infants become more social
Caregiver-infant interactions
Attachment = an emotional bond between 2 people (a two way process) that endures over time, leads to
certain behaviours (e.g. clinging & proximity seeking) and serves the role of protecting an infant
Caregiver = anyone who provides care for a child (e.g. parent, grandparent, sibling, other family
members, childminder…)
Reciprocity = responding to the action of another with a similar action, the actions of one partner elicit a
response of the other
Interactional synchrony (I.S) = when two people interact they usually mirror the others emotional and
behavioural movements
Reliability = consistency
Why infants imitate adults
● Biological, innate - to survive, infant wants to live and parent wants their baby to survive
● Visually what they can see
● Baby sees that adult is alive so copies them as they also want to live, adult wants baby to survive
so teaches them
● Communication in later life - learn what to do / it's like
● Foundation of attachment - how attachment forms, one of the building blocks to create a
relationship between 2 people
● Anticipate and respond - starting of conversations for later life to help them
Reciprocity
● Reciprocity = responding to the action of another with a similar action, the actions of one partner
elicit a response of the other
● Partial conversation / turn taking in interactions (Jaffe et al, 1973)
● Occurs to develop conversational skills
● Establishes communications / sensitivity - awareness of an individual's needs = foundations
(Brazelton et al, 1979)
● E.g. baby sticks tongue out, adult smiles - reciprocates behaviour, not the same behaviour but
similar
Interactional synchrony
● Two individuals mirroring the emotions and behaviour of another
● Imitating emotion and behaviour
● Synchrony = when two or more thing move in the same pattern
, ● Meltzoff and moore researched this
● Also happens with an emotional response
Meltzoff and Moore (M + M)
Aim:
- Looking for evidence of interactional synchrony between infant and caregivers
Method:
- Used 4 behaviours - hand gestures, sticking out tongue, putting tongue back in, mouth opening,
closing mouth, pursing lips
- Model who demonstrates behaviour and the child were filmed to then check if behaviour was
copied / imitated
- Filmed - to slow it down, checked using multiple independent observers, reviewed it separately
(inter-observer reliability - comparing results, will see positive correlation if they are similar
results), checking for consistency in results
Findings:
- In ⅔ weeks old found evidence of interactional synchrony (I.S)
- In 3 days old suggests same results, evidence of I.S
- Had very high agreement (0.92)
- This supports the fact I.S is an innate behaviour used in attachment formation (for survival
purposes)
AO3
1. Point: There were criticisms on whether Meltzoff and Moore’s research was actually meaning I.S.
as an innate behaviour used to form attachment as Piaget believed response were only due to
rewards (i.e. reinforcement based learning, in the first year)
Evidence: Murray + Trevarthen conducted research similar to M + M’s where video the screen was
delayed so the infant was not seeing the live / time / appropriate response from the caregiver to the child's
actions.
Explanation: The fact that they showed distress at this supports the idea that the infants were aware of
the two way connection / turn taking - supporting the idea that I.S. is an innate mechanism used in
attachment forming.
Link: This also supports M + M’s conclusion
2. Point: There is variation between different infants
Evidence: Heiman (1989) showed that infants who demonstrate more imitation from birth onwards show
greater relationships between them and the caregiver at 3 months
Explanation: However, this isn’t clear whether the imitation is a cause or an effect of this early synchrony
as research shows there are definite differences but does not show why
, Link: Therefore, reciprocity does occur with infant to caregiver interactions
3. Point: There is a problem with reliability of testing infant behaviour because of irregularities
Explanation: Due to the age and lack of brain development, infant mouths are in constant motion which
makes it difficult to differentiate between a reaction or regular toddler behaviour (e.g. mouth opening or
smiling)
Evidence: M + M’s research concluded that you could differentiate between the two because the testing
was filmed, slowed and shown to observers who agreed on the validity through checking inter-observer
reliability
Link: In agreement with the conclusion of M + M’s research there are ways of increasing internal validity,
therefore this supports the theory of I.S.
The development of attachment
Multiple attachment = having more than one attachment figure
Primary attachment figure = the one who formed the closest bond with the child, shown by the intensity of
their relationship (usually the biological mother, but can be others - e.g. adoptive mother, father,
grandmother)
Separation anxiety = distress shown by the infant when separated from their caregiver - doesn't have to
be biological mother
Stranger anxiety = distress shown by the infant when approached or picked up by someone who is
unfamiliar to them
Stages of attachment
● Schaffer and Emerson - conducted study on attachment
1. Indiscriminate attachment
● From birth to 2 months
● Infants produce similar responses to all objects, animate or inanimate
● Reciprocity and I.S play a role in establishing the infants relationships with others
● Towards end of this period infants begin to show more preference for social stimuli (e.g smiling
face) and to be more content when with people
2. The beginnings of attachment
● Around 4 months
● Infants become more social
