Attachment
, LT1
Caregiver- infant interaction in humans
Attachment: security and stability, essential for survival, emotional bond between caregiver and child, responsiveness of caregiver has profound effects. Recognised from
proximity, separation distress, secure base behaviour
Primary caregiver: spends most time with the baby, caring for needs ROLE OF FATHER
Primary attachment figure: baby has the strongest attachment to
Social interactions with carer = important for social development of caregiver - infant attachment
Schaffer & Emerson (64): maj. babies attached to mums 1st
RECIPROCITY - caregiver interaction is a 2 way INTERACTIONAL SYNCHRONY - 2 ppl carrying out (7 months)
process; each party responds to other’s signal to the same action simultaneously - 3%: fathers first sole of attachment
sustain interaction - 27%: joint attachment
- 1st few months: secondary attachment
- 75%: A formed in first 18 months, shown
- (Feldman 07) ‘the temporal coordination of
- Behaviour is reciprocal with a response e.g. separation protest when father left
micro level behaviour’
smiling when a baby does A03: lacks temporal validity: social norms
Meltzoff & Moore (77) Observational study found
- Babies move in rhythm (take turns) Grossmann (02): longitudinal study on baby A until teens,
imitating specific facial/ hand gestures at 2 weeks
- Sensitivity to behaviour = foundation for Adult model displayed ⅓ faces/gestures and child parent behaviour + quality of later A
attachment Quality of infant attachment with mothers was related to
expression was filmed and identified by an independent
ALERT PHASES: babies ‘alter phases’ adolescence. Fathers was less important for LT emotional
observer (not learnt, but imitated)
Signal they are ready for interaction development
Provides foundation for connection
Mothers respond ⅔ of the time Fathers have a different role: more play
Isabel et al (89) 30 mothers + babies = high levels of
(Feldman 07) From 3 months = interaction increases insynchrony = better quality attachment Field(78): filmed 4 month babies in face 2 face interaction
freq with PC mothers, SC fathers + PC fathers
ACTIVE INVOLVEMENT: both initiate interactions and Found PCF spent more time smiling, imitating + holding
take turns Controlled procedures: interactions filmed (multiple infant, than SCF = fathers have potential to be emotionally
(Brazelton 79) Basic rhythm is an important precursor to angles in lab) and fine details recorded + analysed + focused but may only express when PC role
later communications extraneous v controlled (distractions). Inter observer Level of responsiveness, not gender
reliability. No DC = high iv
Socially sensitive: children disadvantaged from rearing
practices e.g. mums who quickly go to work after birth, +ve contributions: Women pressured to stay home
Observation doesn’t say purpose of synchrony/ (research on importance for emotional development) =
reciprocity: Feldmann said they describe restricts synchrony - implications for govt policy and
female liberation women return to work and are economically active
observable behaviour and doesn’t inform it. May
not be important for development. CP: Isabel et al
Social bias prevents objected observation:
parenting in media and stereotypes =
Findings vary according to methodology: Grossman = conclusions hard to disentangle from social
important role in development but we would expect bias
children in single mother family to be different
, LT2
Schaffer’s stages of attachment (1964)
STAGES OF ATTACHMENT: development theory, identifying a sequence
STRANGER ANXIETY: response to arrival of a stranger
SOCIAL REFERENCING: degree a child looks at their carer to check how they should respond to something new
LONGITUDINAL DESIGN: follow 1 set of pps of a long period of time
AIM: development of infant attachment EVALUATION
PROCEDURE: CONCLUSION: HIGH VALIDITY: observant by parents in natural environment (coordinates activities) +
reported to researcher. Researcher not present = natural behaviour (no DC = EV) CP: mum’s
60 (31 male, 29 female) babies Attachment develops in stages. would not be objective observers = biased on what they observe e.g. may not report anxiety =
mainly white, working class not accurately recorded
Suggests that being sensitive +
families in Glasgow
responsive (playing +
communication) is more LONGITUDINAL STUDY: same children observed monthly. A quicker design would be observing
Stranger anxiety measured by different children at each age (Cross-sectional). However, L has internal validity = no confounding
assessing infant response to an instrumental in attachment
development than physical care variables of individual differences = credibility
unfamiliar adult
CULTURALLY SPECIFIC: working area of Glasgow = pps experience same norms and values which
Mum + baby visited monthly for
may be different to those in non-western/london = not applicable = not generalisable/universal
1st year and once at 18 months
STAGES OF ATTACHMENT
At visit: asked Qs abt any protests PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS: if child’s dev. Doesn’t fit with stages,
1. ASOCIAL STAGE (0-4 weeks) - social + non social (objects and
in everyday situations - concerned parents may seek advice = could be diagnosed with ASD.
described intensity rated on 4 people) = favourable reaction. Familiar face and eyes calm down
Helps identify families who need help = increase QoL. Applications to
point scale the baby and happy with others
nursery. Shows starting the day with an unfamiliar adult is
2. INDISCRIMINATE ATTACHMENTS (2-7 months) - obvious +
problematic during 3
Start age: 5-25 weeks observable social behaviour. Prefer people>objects.
ASOCIAL STAGE IS HARD TO STUDY: young = poor
Indiscriminately enjoys human company and responds equally to
End age: 1 year coordination + immobile = hard to make judgements based
any caregiver. No stranger fear or stranger anxiety. 3 months =
on observations = unreliable data. Hard to draw
more familiar faces
RESULTS: conclusions as babies may be social but flawed method
3. SPECIFIC (7 months+) prefer 1 caregiver (specific attachment) for
shows them to be asocial
security, comfort, protection. Shows stranger fear + separation
25 weeks to 32 = 50% showed ETHNOCENTRIC: not clear the age it occurs. Some research
anxiety. Not necessarily who is with them most, but most
separation anxiety towards a says most babies form A to a single main carer before
interaction and response
particular adult (usually mum) developing multiple. Others working in cultural contexts,
4. MULTIPLE (10/11 months) - Independent + forms secondary
attachments e.g. grandparents. 18 months - multiple attachment where MA is common, believes MA form from outset = -ve
By 40 weeks = 80% had a specific cross cultural differences in child rearing = hard to make
(29% formed within 1 month of forming a primary attachment)
attachment, 29% displayed universal theories (collectivist + individualist)
multiple attachments
, LT1
Caregiver- infant interaction in humans
Attachment: security and stability, essential for survival, emotional bond between caregiver and child, responsiveness of caregiver has profound effects. Recognised from
proximity, separation distress, secure base behaviour
Primary caregiver: spends most time with the baby, caring for needs ROLE OF FATHER
Primary attachment figure: baby has the strongest attachment to
Social interactions with carer = important for social development of caregiver - infant attachment
Schaffer & Emerson (64): maj. babies attached to mums 1st
RECIPROCITY - caregiver interaction is a 2 way INTERACTIONAL SYNCHRONY - 2 ppl carrying out (7 months)
process; each party responds to other’s signal to the same action simultaneously - 3%: fathers first sole of attachment
sustain interaction - 27%: joint attachment
- 1st few months: secondary attachment
- 75%: A formed in first 18 months, shown
- (Feldman 07) ‘the temporal coordination of
- Behaviour is reciprocal with a response e.g. separation protest when father left
micro level behaviour’
smiling when a baby does A03: lacks temporal validity: social norms
Meltzoff & Moore (77) Observational study found
- Babies move in rhythm (take turns) Grossmann (02): longitudinal study on baby A until teens,
imitating specific facial/ hand gestures at 2 weeks
- Sensitivity to behaviour = foundation for Adult model displayed ⅓ faces/gestures and child parent behaviour + quality of later A
attachment Quality of infant attachment with mothers was related to
expression was filmed and identified by an independent
ALERT PHASES: babies ‘alter phases’ adolescence. Fathers was less important for LT emotional
observer (not learnt, but imitated)
Signal they are ready for interaction development
Provides foundation for connection
Mothers respond ⅔ of the time Fathers have a different role: more play
Isabel et al (89) 30 mothers + babies = high levels of
(Feldman 07) From 3 months = interaction increases insynchrony = better quality attachment Field(78): filmed 4 month babies in face 2 face interaction
freq with PC mothers, SC fathers + PC fathers
ACTIVE INVOLVEMENT: both initiate interactions and Found PCF spent more time smiling, imitating + holding
take turns Controlled procedures: interactions filmed (multiple infant, than SCF = fathers have potential to be emotionally
(Brazelton 79) Basic rhythm is an important precursor to angles in lab) and fine details recorded + analysed + focused but may only express when PC role
later communications extraneous v controlled (distractions). Inter observer Level of responsiveness, not gender
reliability. No DC = high iv
Socially sensitive: children disadvantaged from rearing
practices e.g. mums who quickly go to work after birth, +ve contributions: Women pressured to stay home
Observation doesn’t say purpose of synchrony/ (research on importance for emotional development) =
reciprocity: Feldmann said they describe restricts synchrony - implications for govt policy and
female liberation women return to work and are economically active
observable behaviour and doesn’t inform it. May
not be important for development. CP: Isabel et al
Social bias prevents objected observation:
parenting in media and stereotypes =
Findings vary according to methodology: Grossman = conclusions hard to disentangle from social
important role in development but we would expect bias
children in single mother family to be different
, LT2
Schaffer’s stages of attachment (1964)
STAGES OF ATTACHMENT: development theory, identifying a sequence
STRANGER ANXIETY: response to arrival of a stranger
SOCIAL REFERENCING: degree a child looks at their carer to check how they should respond to something new
LONGITUDINAL DESIGN: follow 1 set of pps of a long period of time
AIM: development of infant attachment EVALUATION
PROCEDURE: CONCLUSION: HIGH VALIDITY: observant by parents in natural environment (coordinates activities) +
reported to researcher. Researcher not present = natural behaviour (no DC = EV) CP: mum’s
60 (31 male, 29 female) babies Attachment develops in stages. would not be objective observers = biased on what they observe e.g. may not report anxiety =
mainly white, working class not accurately recorded
Suggests that being sensitive +
families in Glasgow
responsive (playing +
communication) is more LONGITUDINAL STUDY: same children observed monthly. A quicker design would be observing
Stranger anxiety measured by different children at each age (Cross-sectional). However, L has internal validity = no confounding
assessing infant response to an instrumental in attachment
development than physical care variables of individual differences = credibility
unfamiliar adult
CULTURALLY SPECIFIC: working area of Glasgow = pps experience same norms and values which
Mum + baby visited monthly for
may be different to those in non-western/london = not applicable = not generalisable/universal
1st year and once at 18 months
STAGES OF ATTACHMENT
At visit: asked Qs abt any protests PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS: if child’s dev. Doesn’t fit with stages,
1. ASOCIAL STAGE (0-4 weeks) - social + non social (objects and
in everyday situations - concerned parents may seek advice = could be diagnosed with ASD.
described intensity rated on 4 people) = favourable reaction. Familiar face and eyes calm down
Helps identify families who need help = increase QoL. Applications to
point scale the baby and happy with others
nursery. Shows starting the day with an unfamiliar adult is
2. INDISCRIMINATE ATTACHMENTS (2-7 months) - obvious +
problematic during 3
Start age: 5-25 weeks observable social behaviour. Prefer people>objects.
ASOCIAL STAGE IS HARD TO STUDY: young = poor
Indiscriminately enjoys human company and responds equally to
End age: 1 year coordination + immobile = hard to make judgements based
any caregiver. No stranger fear or stranger anxiety. 3 months =
on observations = unreliable data. Hard to draw
more familiar faces
RESULTS: conclusions as babies may be social but flawed method
3. SPECIFIC (7 months+) prefer 1 caregiver (specific attachment) for
shows them to be asocial
security, comfort, protection. Shows stranger fear + separation
25 weeks to 32 = 50% showed ETHNOCENTRIC: not clear the age it occurs. Some research
anxiety. Not necessarily who is with them most, but most
separation anxiety towards a says most babies form A to a single main carer before
interaction and response
particular adult (usually mum) developing multiple. Others working in cultural contexts,
4. MULTIPLE (10/11 months) - Independent + forms secondary
attachments e.g. grandparents. 18 months - multiple attachment where MA is common, believes MA form from outset = -ve
By 40 weeks = 80% had a specific cross cultural differences in child rearing = hard to make
(29% formed within 1 month of forming a primary attachment)
attachment, 29% displayed universal theories (collectivist + individualist)
multiple attachments
