Explanations of attachment: Learning theory
Dollard and Miller came up with the learning theory of attachment. This emphasises the importance
of food in attachment formation. Children learn to love whoever feeds them. Classical conditioning
is the main theory behind the learning theory. This is when an unconditioned stimulus, food, leads to
an unconditioned response, pleasure. The baby begins to learn that the mother produces a feeling of
pleasure. The main caregiver, such as the mother starts as a neutral stimulus. However when the
caregiver provided the baby with food over time and so the caregiver becomes a conditioned
stimulus. The caregiver then starts to give the conditioned response of pleasure. The caregiver has
now become an attachment figure, and an attachment has formed.
Operant conditioning is also used to explain why babies cry for comfort. Crying leads to a response
from the caregiver, such as feeding. If the caregiver provided the correct response, the crying is
reinforced because it produces a pleasurable consequence. The caregiver received negative
reinforming since they are stopping something unpleasant, crying. The baby is experiencing positive
conditioning because they are feeling fed and fulfilled. Drive reduction is an innate biological
motivator. We are motivated to eat and reduce hunger.
A limitation is that there is counter-evidence from animal studies. Lorenz's geese imprinted on the
first moving object they saw, which was Lorenz. Harlow's monkeys preferred the cloth monkey, even
in the conditions when it didn't feed them. In both of these animal studies imprinting and
attachment didn't happen because of food. This shows that there are other factors other than
feeding which are important in attachments.
Another limitation is that there is counter-evidence from human studies. Schaffer and Emerson's
study showed that babies' first attachment was not to the person who fed them. Isabella et al. also
showed that interactional synchrony, which isn't related to feeding, can improve attachment
qualities. This provides more evidence that there are other factors than feeding which can provide a
secure attachment.
A strength is that there are some elements of conditioning which might be involved in attachment.
Whilst feeding is unlikely to be involved in attachment, conditioning probably is. This is because
babies' choice of attachment is usually the person who cuddles them, and so they learn to feel warm
and comforted by them. This means that conditioning could still be important in attachment even if
it's not through who feeds the baby.
However, this view ignores the fact that babies can take an active role in attachment, according to
Feldman et al.. They have proven to initiate certain interactions, such as interactional synchrony.
This suggests that the learning theory might not explain any aspect of attachment at all.
Dollard and Miller came up with the learning theory of attachment. This emphasises the importance
of food in attachment formation. Children learn to love whoever feeds them. Classical conditioning
is the main theory behind the learning theory. This is when an unconditioned stimulus, food, leads to
an unconditioned response, pleasure. The baby begins to learn that the mother produces a feeling of
pleasure. The main caregiver, such as the mother starts as a neutral stimulus. However when the
caregiver provided the baby with food over time and so the caregiver becomes a conditioned
stimulus. The caregiver then starts to give the conditioned response of pleasure. The caregiver has
now become an attachment figure, and an attachment has formed.
Operant conditioning is also used to explain why babies cry for comfort. Crying leads to a response
from the caregiver, such as feeding. If the caregiver provided the correct response, the crying is
reinforced because it produces a pleasurable consequence. The caregiver received negative
reinforming since they are stopping something unpleasant, crying. The baby is experiencing positive
conditioning because they are feeling fed and fulfilled. Drive reduction is an innate biological
motivator. We are motivated to eat and reduce hunger.
A limitation is that there is counter-evidence from animal studies. Lorenz's geese imprinted on the
first moving object they saw, which was Lorenz. Harlow's monkeys preferred the cloth monkey, even
in the conditions when it didn't feed them. In both of these animal studies imprinting and
attachment didn't happen because of food. This shows that there are other factors other than
feeding which are important in attachments.
Another limitation is that there is counter-evidence from human studies. Schaffer and Emerson's
study showed that babies' first attachment was not to the person who fed them. Isabella et al. also
showed that interactional synchrony, which isn't related to feeding, can improve attachment
qualities. This provides more evidence that there are other factors than feeding which can provide a
secure attachment.
A strength is that there are some elements of conditioning which might be involved in attachment.
Whilst feeding is unlikely to be involved in attachment, conditioning probably is. This is because
babies' choice of attachment is usually the person who cuddles them, and so they learn to feel warm
and comforted by them. This means that conditioning could still be important in attachment even if
it's not through who feeds the baby.
However, this view ignores the fact that babies can take an active role in attachment, according to
Feldman et al.. They have proven to initiate certain interactions, such as interactional synchrony.
This suggests that the learning theory might not explain any aspect of attachment at all.
