
Attachment
Paper 1
Caregiver-infant interactions
AO1
Reciprocity
-
Reciprocity is where each party responds to the other’s signals to sustain interaction. It can be seen as turn-taking or like a non-verbal conversation. The behaviour of each party elicits a response from the other.
-
Traditional views saw the baby as passive and the receivers of care. Modern research sees babies as active participants and take turns in interacting.
-
Babies start to reciprocate more around 3 months old.
-
Feldman and Eidelman (2007) found that mothers successfully respond to infants signals around two thirds of the time.
​
Interactional synchrony
-
Interactional synchrony is when the caregiver and the infant mirror each others actions. They move in time with each other.
​
Meltzoff & Moore (1977) Interactional synchrony​
Procedure: Controlled observation on infants aged 12-21 days to investigate imitation. An adult model displayed one of three facial expressions (e.g., tongue protrusion) or a hand movement, and the infants’ responses were recorded analysed.
​
Findings: Infants as young as 12 days old imitated the facial expressions and gestures of the adult model. The independent observers identified a significant association between the model’s actions and the infants’ responses. This suggested that imitation is an innate ability rather than a learned behaviour.
AO3
+ Highly controlled research
- Koepke (1983) failed to replicate M&M
- Isabella (1989) securely attached children more likely to interact
- Methodological issues: babies
You can purchase fully written out, A* quality AO3 paragraphs from the resources page.
Back to menu
Schaffer's stages of attachment
AO1
-
Asocial stage (0-2 months): Infants produce similar responses to all objects, whether they are animate or inanimate.
-
Indiscriminate attachment stage (2-7 months): Babies start to prefer human company and can distinguish between familiar and unfamiliar people. However, they are still relatively easily comforted by anyone, and therefore do not show separation or stranger anxiety.​
-
Specific attachment stage (7-12 months): Most infants begin to form a special attachment to one person known as their primary attachment figure. They therefore start to demonstrate separation anxiety and joy at reunion with that person.
-
Multiple attachment stage (12 months+): About a month after forming its first attachment, an infant can form secondary attachments. Schaffer and Emerson found that within one month of being attached 29% of infants had multiple attachments to someone else. Within six months this had risen to 78%. Within one year the majority of infants had developed at least 5 multiple attachments.
​
It helps to recall the stages by remembering the mnemonic All Infants Smile at Mum.
​​
Schaffer and Emerson (1964) Glaswegian baby study​
Procedure: Naturalistic, longitudinal observation. Sample: 60 infants aged 5 – 23 weeks and mothers from working class families in Glasgow. Observed at home every 4 weeks until 1 year old, and again at 18 months. At each visit mother reported infant’s separation protest to different people on a 7 point scale. Stranger anxiety measured by assessing infant’s response to the interviewer at each visit.
​
Findings: It was found that infants do go through stages of attachment (identified above).
Caregiver sensitivity is the key to attachment. There is little relationship between the time spent together and attachment. Infants can create multiple attachments once a primary attachment has been established.
​ AO3
- Social desirability bias affecting results of the study
- Results of the study lack population validity
- Practical applications to nursery settings
- Methodological issues of observing babies in asocial stage
​
You can purchase fully written out, A* quality AO3 paragraphs from the resources page.
​
Back to menu
The role of the father
AO1​​
-
Schaffer & Emerson (1964) found that the father is rarely the primary attachment figure, only in 3% of cases. But babies are attached to the adult that is most responsive to their needs and this could be the father.
-
The father does have an important secondary role. 78% of babies in S&E had formed an attachment with their father by 18 months, noted by separation anxiety when he left.
-
Grossman et al (2002) also found a relationship between quality of fathers play in childhood and the quality of their adolescent attachments. This shows males have a different role to mothers which is more to do with play and stimulation and less to do with nurturing.
-
Field (1978) found that fathers can be the emotional caregiver when they are the primary caregiver.
-
Hormonal differences may mean men are not psychologically equipped to form an intense attachment because they lack emotional sensitivity. Estrogen and oxytocin promote caring and empathy behaviours whereas testosterone promotes aggression.
-
Eagly and Wood (1987) argued that gender role division is social not biological. There are cultural expectations that affect male behaviour, such as it being thought of as “feminine” to be sensitive towards the needs of others.
​
​​​​ AO3
+ A distinct role of playmate (Grossman, 2002)
+ Hrdy (1999) fathers less likely to detect distress
- Belsky (2009) depends on security of adult relationship
-/+ Impact on the economy
​
You can purchase fully written out, A* quality AO3 paragraphs from the resources page.
​
Back to menu
Animal studies
AO1 Lorenz​​
Imprinting is a form of attachment whereby an animal keeps close contact with the first large moving object it encounters.
​​
-
Lorenz (1935) Imprinting​
-
Procedure: Lorenz randomly divided a large clutch of greylag goose eggs into two batches. One batch hatched naturally with the mother, the other batch hatched in an incubator with Lorenz making sure that he was the first moving object the goslings encountered. He then placed all the goslings under an upturned box. The box was then removed and the gosling’s behaviour was recorded. Lorenz also lengthened the time in which the geese saw the first moving object to see how long the critical period was for geese.
-
​​​
-
Findings: When released from the upturned box, the naturally hatched goslings went straight to their mother whereas the incubator hatched goslings went straight to Lorenz, showing no bond to their natural mother. Lorenz noticed how the process of imprinting had to occur within 25 hours or the geese would not imprint at all, known as the critical period. He found that geese had an innate tendency to imprint and these bonds were irreversible.
​​​
​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​ AO3
+ Guiton (1966) sexual imprinting on yellow glove
- Issues with animal extrapolation
+ Application to human attachment. Inspiration for Bowlby = critical period, monotropy
​​​​
AO1 Harlow​​
-
Harlow (1958) Contact comfort​
-
Procedure: Harlow constructed two surrogate mothers, one ‘wire mother’ which dispensed milk and a soft ‘cloth mother’ with no milk. The amount of time the infant rhesus monkey spent with each mother was recorded (DV). To test for mother preference during periods of stress, the monkeys were startled with a loud noise and their responses recorded. A larger cage was used in some conditions in order to observe the degree of exploration by the baby rhesus monkeys.
-
​​​​
-
Findings: The infant monkeys spent more time with cloth mother showing that attachment is not purely based on food which is predicted by learning theory. The infants who grew up with the cloth mother exhibited 'normal' behaviour when presented with stressful variables e.g. cuddling the cloth mother until the monkeys were calm. When they were raised with a wire mother they threw themselves on the floor, rocking back and forth and not going to the wire mesh mother for comfort.
-
-
When Harlow raised the monkeys in complete isolation and forced them to breed he found that the monkey mothers killed their infants by chewing off fingers and toes, or even crushing the infants’ head with their teeth.
​​
AO3
+ Guiton (1966) sexual imprinting on yellow glove
- Issues with animal extrapolation
+ Application to human attachment. Inspiration for Bowlby = critical period, monotropy
​
You can purchase fully written out, A* quality AO3 paragraphs from the resources page.
​​
Back to menu
Learning theory of attachment
AO1​​
Interference is when two pieces of information conflict or disrupt each other which can lead to forgetting or distorting one or both pieces of information.
​
There are two types of interference proactive and retroactive interference:
-
Proactive interference is when old information interferes with new information. An example is having difficulty remembering a friend’s new mobile number because the old number keeps disrupting your recall.
-
Retroactive interference is when new information interferes with old information. An example is forgetting your old address because you’re the details of your new address keep disrupting your recall.
​
The effects of similarity means that interference is more likely when the two pieces of information are similar.​​
​
The effects of time means that interference is more likely when information is learnt close in time to each other.​​
​
McGeoch and McDonald (1931) Synonym study
​Procedure: Ppts were asked to learn a list of words until they got 100% accuracy. They were then given a new list of words to learn. There were different conditions including lists of synonyms, consonant syllables, and unrelated words. Ppts were then asked to recall the words from the original list of words.
​
Findings: The synonym list produced the least accurate recall as the words had the same meaning as the original list and were therefore more similar to the original list. This shows that retroactive interference is greater when the two lots of information are similar.
​​
​​​​ AO3
- Harlow's research
- Quality time is most important to form attachment (S&E 1964)
- Environmentally reductionist
- Hay and Vespo (1988) SLT better explains modelling attachment behaviour and vicarious reinforcement of wanted behaviours
​​
You can purchase fully written out, A* quality AO3 paragraphs from the resources page.
​
Back to menu
Bowlby's theory of attachment
AO1​​
Retrieval failure is where information is available but cannot be recalled because of the absence of appropriate cues.
Tulving (1983) proposed the encoding specificity principle, suggesting that the same cues need to be present at the time of encoding and retrieval for recall to be most successful. If cues are different at these times, there will be some forgetting.
There are two types of retrieval failure:
-
Context dependent forgetting: this suggests that if the external environmental cues are different at the time of encoding and recall there will be some forgetting.
-
State dependent forgetting: this suggests that if the internal emotional cues are different at the time of encoding and recall there will be some forgetting.
​
Context dependent forgetting
Godden and Baddeley (1975) Diver study
Procedure: Participants were asked to learn a list of words on land or sea. They were then asked to recall the words on land or sea, creating four conditions.
Findings: Accurate recall was 40% lower in the mismatched environments compared to when the recall was in the same environment. It was concluded that the retrieval failure was due to an absence of environmental, context dependent cues at the time of recall.
​
State dependent forgetting
Carter & Cassaday (1998) Antihistamine study
Procedure: Participants were asked to learn a list when they had taken an antihistamine (making them drowsy) or with no drug. They were then asked to recall the words when they had taken an antihistamine or with no drug, creating four conditions.
Findings: Accurate recall was worse in the mismatched emotional states compared to when the recall was in the same emotional state. It was concluded that the retrieval failure was due to an absence of state dependent cues at the time of recall.​
​​
​​​​ AO3
+ Brazleton (1975) importance of social releasers
+ Bailey (2007) IWM: 99 mothers - those with insecure attachment style had poor attachment with own child
+ Rutter (2011) importance of critical period
- Social sensitivity: expectations of females
- S&E (1964) multiple attachments
​​
You can purchase fully written out, A* quality AO3 paragraphs from the resources page.
​
Back to menu
Types of attachment
Eyewitness testimony is the account of someone who has seen or witnessed a crime. It is used in the criminal justice system to help convict offenders.
​
Misleading information is a key factor that can reduce the accuracy of eye witness testimony and is incorrect information given to an eyewitness after an event.
​
Leading questions
AO1​​
Loftus and Palmer (1974) Car crash study
Procedure: 45 participants watched a film clip of a car accident and what asked about how fast will the cars going when they verb each other. The IV was the intensity of the verb which included hit, contacted, bumped, collided or smashed.
Findings: The verb ‘contacted’ produced a mean estimate of 31.8mph and the verb ‘smashed’ produced a mean estimate of 40.5mph. This suggests that the leading question biased eyewitness recall, as the word smashed yielded a faster estimate than contacted.
There are two explanations as to why this occurred:
-
Response bias explanation: Participants memory did not actually change but the leading question influenced the response they gave to the researcher.
-
Substitution explanation: The wording of the question actually did affect the participants memory. This is supported by Loftus and Palmer’s follow up ‘broken glass’ experiment. More participants in the ‘smashed’ condition reported seeing broken glass when indeed there was not any.
Post event discussion
AO1​​
Gabbert et al (2003) Stolen purse study
Procedure: Participants were put in pairs, and they watched a video of the same crime but from different perspectives. They were then allowed to discuss what they had seen on the video before completing a recall test.
Findings: 71% of participants wrongly recalled aspects of an event they did not see. 60% of participants said that the girl was guilty even though they had not seen her commit a crime. In the control group where there was no discussion there were no errors.
There are two explanations as to why this happens:
-
Memory conformity: This is when witnesses go along with each other to win social approval or because they believe the other witness is correct.
-
Memory contamination: When co-witnesses disturb discuss a crime they mix information from the other person into their own memory.
​​
​​​​ AO3 (for both topics)
+ Standardised procedure. High inter-rater reliability 94%.
+ Good predictive validity of future outcomes (Hazan & Shaver)
- Main & Soloman added Type D Insecure-Disorganised
- Ethnocentric bias - imposed etic to generalise to other cultures
- Ignores temperament (Kagan)
​​
You can purchase fully written out, A* quality AO3 paragraphs from the resources page.
​
Back to menu
Cultural variations of attachment
AO1​​
Anxiety can have both a positive and negative effect on the accuracy of recall in eyewitness testimonies.
Negative effect
Johnson and Scott (1976) Waiting room study
Procedure: Participants were led to believe they were in a waiting room, waiting for the actual experiment to begin not knowing the experiment had already started. In the low-anxiety condition, participants overheard a casual conversation and then a man walked out of an adjacent room carrying a pen with grease on his hands. In the high anxiety condition participants overheard an argument and a man walked out of the room holding a paper knife covered in blood. Participants were then asked to pick out the man from a set of 50 photos.
Findings: 49% of the low anxiety condition correctly identified the man 33% of the high anxiety condition correctly identified the man. This supports the tunnel theory of memory, which suggests that witnesses’ attention narrows to focus on a weapon because it is a source of anxiety. This is referred to as the 'weapons focus effect'.
Positive effect
Yuille & Cutshall (1986) Armed robbery study
Procedure: this study used a real life shooting in a gun shop in Canada, where the owner shut a thief dead. There were 21 witnesses and 13 agreed to take part in the study. Researchers interviewed the eye witnesses four to five months after the original incident and these were compared with the original police interviews made at the time of the shootings. Accuracy was determined by the number of correct details reported in each interview and participants were also asked to rate their anxiety levels At the time of the incident using a 7 point scale.
Findings: participants were very accurate in their accounts even after five months. Recall was most accurate in the high anxiety condition with 88% accuracy compared to 75% accuracy for the lower anxiety group.
Yerkes Dodson Inverted U Theory
Deffenbacher (1983) applied the Yerkes-Dodson Law to eye witness testimony. The inverted U theory explains how anxiety can have both a positive and negative effect on someone’s ability to accurately recall EWT.
When physiological arousal is low recall is poor due to individuals not paying attention. When physiological arousal is too high recall is poor as individuals are too stressed. However, where there is a moderate (optimal) level of physiological arousal this is where recall is most accurate
​​
​​​​ AO3
+ V&K (1988) - more difference within a country rather than across - cannot generalise
- V&K (1988) individualistic culture bias: 27/32 studies
- Imposed etic to use a Westernised test to judge others
+ Standardised procedure. High inter-rater reliability 94%.
​​
You can purchase fully written out, A* quality AO3 paragraphs from the resources page.
​
Back to menu
Maternal deprivation
AO1​​
The cognitive interview was devised by Fisher and Geiselman (1987). They claim that eyewitness testimony can be improved if police use the following four techniques to enhance recall.
Report everything: Witnesses are encouraged to include every single detail in their account of the crime, even if it appears to be irrelevant. This works based on the theory of retrieval cues, where the seemingly irrelevant small details may trigger further memories.
Reinstate the context: Witnesses are encouraged to return to the crime scene in their mind to take them back to the environment and their emotional state. This is based on the theory of context dependent forgetting and state dependent forgetting where cues may trigger better recall.
Reverse the order: Eyewitnesses are asked to recall the events in a different order for example from the end back to the beginning. This is to stop schemas (scripts) from distorting their memory of what happened.
Change perspective: Witnesses are asked to recall the event from another witnesses or perpetrators perspective. This is to prevent the expectations created by schemas distorting their recall.
The enhanced cognitive interview was developed by Fisher et al (1992) and includes the softer aspects of the interview. It suggests that interviewers should focus on the social dynamics of the interaction, to reduce anxieties and distractions. Examples include using appropriate eye contact and speaking slowly.​
​
​
​​​​ AO3
- Low reliability - Lewis did not replicate results on wider sample
- Social desirability bias of study
- Bowlby confused privation and deprivation
+ Too deterministic (irreversible) Romanian orphans reversed IQ damage before 6 mths
+ Social sensitivity
​​
You can purchase fully written out, A* quality AO3 paragraphs from the resources page.
​
Back to menu
Maternal deprivation
AO1​​
The cognitive interview was devised by Fisher and Geiselman (1987). They claim that eyewitness testimony can be improved if police use the following four techniques to enhance recall.
Report everything: Witnesses are encouraged to include every single detail in their account of the crime, even if it appears to be irrelevant. This works based on the theory of retrieval cues, where the seemingly irrelevant small details may trigger further memories.
Reinstate the context: Witnesses are encouraged to return to the crime scene in their mind to take them back to the environment and their emotional state. This is based on the theory of context dependent forgetting and state dependent forgetting where cues may trigger better recall.
Reverse the order: Eyewitnesses are asked to recall the events in a different order for example from the end back to the beginning. This is to stop schemas (scripts) from distorting their memory of what happened.
Change perspective: Witnesses are asked to recall the event from another witnesses or perpetrators perspective. This is to prevent the expectations created by schemas distorting their recall.
The enhanced cognitive interview was developed by Fisher et al (1992) and includes the softer aspects of the interview. It suggests that interviewers should focus on the social dynamics of the interaction, to reduce anxieties and distractions. Examples include using appropriate eye contact and speaking slowly.​
​
​
​​​​ AO3
+ Real world application
+ Longitudinal research -long terms effects
- Low generalisability - specific type of deprivation
- Complexity of institutions - confounding variables
​
You can purchase fully written out, A* quality AO3 paragraphs from the resources page.
​
Back to menu
Maternal deprivation
AO1​​
The cognitive interview was devised by Fisher and Geiselman (1987). They claim that eyewitness testimony can be improved if police use the following four techniques to enhance recall.
Report everything: Witnesses are encouraged to include every single detail in their account of the crime, even if it appears to be irrelevant. This works based on the theory of retrieval cues, where the seemingly irrelevant small details may trigger further memories.
Reinstate the context: Witnesses are encouraged to return to the crime scene in their mind to take them back to the environment and their emotional state. This is based on the theory of context dependent forgetting and state dependent forgetting where cues may trigger better recall.
Reverse the order: Eyewitnesses are asked to recall the events in a different order for example from the end back to the beginning. This is to stop schemas (scripts) from distorting their memory of what happened.
Change perspective: Witnesses are asked to recall the event from another witnesses or perpetrators perspective. This is to prevent the expectations created by schemas distorting their recall.
The enhanced cognitive interview was developed by Fisher et al (1992) and includes the softer aspects of the interview. It suggests that interviewers should focus on the social dynamics of the interaction, to reduce anxieties and distractions. Examples include using appropriate eye contact and speaking slowly.​
​
​
​​​​ AO3
+ Contradictory case study evidence e.g. Genie & Czech twins
- Retrospective nature of studies
- Methodological issues of Love Quiz
- Does highlighting a risk lead to a self fulfilling prophecy?
​​
You can purchase fully written out, A* quality AO3 paragraphs from the resources page.
​
Back to menu
