Theory Supporting Evidence Conflicting Evidence
Bowlby’s Monotropy/attachment Monotropy/attachment
theory of - Lorenz, goslings followed - Main research conducted
attachment him after imprinting on on animals but not humans
wellies as they were the as there is complex
first thing they saw differences in the brain
- Applications to paid which may question the
maternity leave and validity of these studies
maternity rights Internal working model
Social releases - Internal working model
- Brazleton et al 1979 - overlooked, what about
When mother ignores baby, adoptive parents, same sex
baby would curl up, parents or parents whose
motionless, babies do not mother has died? Doesn’t
provide social releases seem true that is has to be
when mothers do not mum which casts doubt on
respond attentively the evolutionary basis
Internal working model suggesting that it has to be
- Fonagy et al 1993 - women the mother
with insecure attachments - Rutter 1970 - children could
with parents have insecure be well adjusted even if
attachments with their own they were separated from
babies their mothers when young,
children’s problems were
more likely to be caused by
family problems than
separation itself
Deprivation - Goldfarb 1943 - in 2 groups - Bowlby’s research does not
of children, one raised in demonstrate that
social isolation in an deprivation actually is the
institution and one in foster causal factor. In 44 thieves
care, the institution group study there were many
lagged behind the foster other factors which might
group on all the measures explain why the early
taken, including IQ, separations were later
abstract thinking, social associated with
maturity and rule following affectionless psychopathy
- Bowlby 44 thieves study - e.g. discord in the home
two groups of boys one may have caused both the
group with theft tendencies early separations and
and the other were affectionless psychopathy
emotionally disturbed but - Rutter 81 - criticised Bowlby
no criminal tendencies. as unsure whether the
Found that 86% of the child’s attachment bond had
thieves had experienced formed but been broken, or
mannerly deprivation early had never been formed.
in their lives, only 2 Conclusions from Bowlby’s
individuals of the disturbed research lack validity
group had. 36% of thieves because it is not clear
displayed affectionless whether the effects are due
psychopathy to deprivation or privation
Bowlby’s Monotropy/attachment Monotropy/attachment
theory of - Lorenz, goslings followed - Main research conducted
attachment him after imprinting on on animals but not humans
wellies as they were the as there is complex
first thing they saw differences in the brain
- Applications to paid which may question the
maternity leave and validity of these studies
maternity rights Internal working model
Social releases - Internal working model
- Brazleton et al 1979 - overlooked, what about
When mother ignores baby, adoptive parents, same sex
baby would curl up, parents or parents whose
motionless, babies do not mother has died? Doesn’t
provide social releases seem true that is has to be
when mothers do not mum which casts doubt on
respond attentively the evolutionary basis
Internal working model suggesting that it has to be
- Fonagy et al 1993 - women the mother
with insecure attachments - Rutter 1970 - children could
with parents have insecure be well adjusted even if
attachments with their own they were separated from
babies their mothers when young,
children’s problems were
more likely to be caused by
family problems than
separation itself
Deprivation - Goldfarb 1943 - in 2 groups - Bowlby’s research does not
of children, one raised in demonstrate that
social isolation in an deprivation actually is the
institution and one in foster causal factor. In 44 thieves
care, the institution group study there were many
lagged behind the foster other factors which might
group on all the measures explain why the early
taken, including IQ, separations were later
abstract thinking, social associated with
maturity and rule following affectionless psychopathy
- Bowlby 44 thieves study - e.g. discord in the home
two groups of boys one may have caused both the
group with theft tendencies early separations and
and the other were affectionless psychopathy
emotionally disturbed but - Rutter 81 - criticised Bowlby
no criminal tendencies. as unsure whether the
Found that 86% of the child’s attachment bond had
thieves had experienced formed but been broken, or
mannerly deprivation early had never been formed.
in their lives, only 2 Conclusions from Bowlby’s
individuals of the disturbed research lack validity
group had. 36% of thieves because it is not clear
displayed affectionless whether the effects are due
psychopathy to deprivation or privation
