The nature of attachment and its development.

Attachment can be defined as:

A strong and reciprocal emotional bond with another person.

• seeking to be near the attachment figure
• being distressed when seperated from them
• showing pleasure when reuinted with them
• orientation towards them, being aware of their presence cand frequently making contact with them

indiscriminate attachment:

• up to about 6 months
• it doesn't matter who is holding the baby
• baby smiles at anyone and protests when put down, whoever is holding them

specific attachment:

• from 7 months to a year
• 1 specific attachment emerges (mother/caregiver)
• in earlier period - becomes distressed when seperated from this person (seperation anxiety) and is wary of strangers (stranger anxiety)

Multiple attachments:

• from a year onwards
• attachment to another person is shown, and then to a number of people who are important in the child's life.

several theories have been put forward to try to explain why infants form attachments

the Behaviourist perspective in psychology believes that all behaviour is learned through:

• classical
• operant conditioning

• Watson was interested in the link between an event in the environment (a stimulus), and the behaviour that follows (a response)
• behaviourism is sometimes known as S.R (stimulus-response) psychology.

• these ideas were taken up by others.
• theories are grouped together as learning theory.

• Watson's idea tied in to research being carried out by Ivan Pavlov 1849-1936.
• he was interested in the digestive processes of dogs.
• - the salivation reflex.

• Pavlov noticed that the dogs not only slaivated in response to the taste of food
• but also when they could see it
• carried out a series of studies to investigate whether this response could also be triggered by other stimuli. (page 13)

• the dog salivates to the sounds of the bell - an objectively measurable behaviour change
• can be said to have learned to salivate to the sound of the bell
• this kind of learning associating ..

a stimulus + a response = classical conditioning.

• B.F Skinner (1904-90)
• emphasises observable behaviour

• it does not see learning as an association between stimulus and response.
• but between behaviour and the consequences of that behaviour.
• classical conditioning relates only to reflex behaviour. 
• operant conditioning relates to ALL behaviour.

• behaviour is shaped and maintained by its consequences
• Skinner believed that all behaviour is learned, apart from the reflexes wit which we are born
• animals can produce any behaviour of which it is physically capable if appropriate techniques are used.

key ideas in this theory:

Reinforcement and Shaping

Reinforcement

• refers to the positive outcomes of a behaviour that makes it more likely to be repeated

Shaping

• refers to gradually modifying behaviour, using reinforcement
• as the behaviour produced becomes more like the target behaviour

• positive reinforcement (where there is a positive outcome to behaviour)
• negative reinforcement (when the outcome of behaviour is that something unpleasant stops) 
• and punishment (where the outcome of a behaviour is either that 'something positive stops' or that 'something negative occurs')

• both forms of conditioning have been used to explain the development of attachment.
• within a classical conditioning framework - food produces a sense of pleasure.
• the person providing the food (usually mother) is linked to food - so she becomes a source of pleasure.

neutral stimulus (NS): Mother --> no particular response.

unconditional stimulus (UCS): Food -->

                           unconditional response (UCR): pleasure.

neutral stimulus (NS): Mother        --> UCR: pleasure.

unconditional stimulus (UCS): Food --> UCR: pleasure.

conditional stimulus (CS): Mother -->

                               conditioned response (CR): pleasure.

• feeding is reinforcing to a hungry child.
• as the mother is close to the child during feeding
• feeding positively reinforces attachment

• Schaffer and Emerson
• Harlow and Zimmerman (1959)

• found that quite a large propertion of infants formed their primary attachment with someone who seldom, if ever, fed them
• SO, attachment cannot adequately be explained by feeding alone.

Harlow and Zimmerson (1959)

AIMS

• to investigate the basis of attachment in rhesus monkeys

Harlow and Zimmerson (1959)

PROCEDURE

• infant monkeys seperated from their mothers shortly after birth
• raised in isolation
• had access to 2 surrogate mothers, wire frames that looked like an adult monkey

1. covered in soft terry cloth
2. left bare but had a teat through which the infant could obtain milk

• infants deliberately frightened by a clock work teddy bear beating a drum into the cage.

Harlow and Zimmerson (1959)

RESULTS

• showed extreme distress (screaming/rocking/crouching in a corner/thumb sucking)
• most of the time - clung on to cloth mother, even though it didn't give milk.
• clung to her when frightened
• no attempt to cling to wire monkey

Harlow and Zimmerson (1959)

CONCLUSIONS

• mothering isn't just about feeding
• young primates also need a source of psychological warmth
• Harlow called it contact comfort

Secondry drive hypothesis

Dollard and Miller (1950)

the proposed that:

• Primary drives: motivational states arising from basic psychological needs, such as hunger.
• Repeatedly met by mother
• This becomes associated with the satisfaction of the need and so becomes a secodary drive.

1. infants who form a strong attachment would be more likely to survive to matuirty and reproduce, passing on their genes, including those coding for attachment to their offsprings
2. for the mother - attachment is adaptive in that it will motivate her to care for the infant + so promote its survival of her genes.

• smiling
• crying
• sucking
• clinging

1. a child needs its mother for food and warmth. 
2. the mother needs its child to pass on its genes.

Bowlby (1969)

The Development of attachment

1. birth - 8 weeks: the infant is friendly towards other people, but shows little discrimination between them.
2. 8 weeks - 6 months: while still generally friendly, the infant starts to show a preferance towards one primary caregiver.

3. 6 months - 2 years: the infant seeks proximately to the attatchment figure and uses him/her as secure base. 

• Is distressed when seperated from attachment figure = seperation anxiety. 
• is less friendly towards others and is wary of strangers = stranger anxiety.

4. 2 years onwards:

• the infant develops insight into the primary caregiver's behaviour and can consciously influence what he/ she does.
• this marks the beginning of a relationship that is a more equal partnership between child and caregiver

:) he was a trained psychoanalyst.

- the psychodynamic perspective is concerned with unconscious drives.

- recognises the importance of early childhood experiences for later development.

(including development of relationships)

:( problems with extrapolation

- problematic to apply findings from non human animal research to humans.

(eg. findings from the imprinting behaviour of goslings to humans.)

:) support from studies into monkeys.

- genetically closer to humans than geese.

- monkeys develop longterm social and sexual problems when reared without a mother

• withdrawn/rocked back and forth
• aggressiive
• self-harming
• couldn't mate and if they did they were poor, cruel mothers

BUT

• they had no social contact either. 
• behaviour may not have just to do with lack of attachment.

:) further support from cross-cultural research

-Kagan et al (1978)

• found that the pattern of the development of seperation anxiety was similar: emerges in 2nd half of 1st yr and declines steadily.
• NOTE: when there is evidence for univerity of any behaviour, this is support for it being innate.

:) used the term.

• Bowlby believed: seperation and anxiety showed an attachment bond had been formed.
• believed that at the same time children develop fear of strangers

:( Monotropy to explain seperation anxiety BUT problems with this:

• Monotropy: the need to become attached to ONE person.
• he said that these behaviours were adoptive.
• ideas on monotropy have been challenged

:) Support for his Internal Working Model

• research has shown - early attachment patterns Do have a link with later relationships.

:( His theory rests on evolutionary ideas

• can't test what the evolutionary respective claims

:( Problems with his suggestion that early attachment acts as a template for future relationships

• IWM - even if it were correct, there could be other explanations for

1. attachment as infant
2. relationships later in life: eg, personality