Explanations of attachment:Bowlby’s theory -A-Level Psychology
Continuity hypothesis-the idea that emotionally secure infants go on to be emotionally secure,trusting and socially confident adults
Critical period-a biologically determined period of time,during which certain characteristics can develop
Internal working model-a mental model of the world which enables individuals to predict and control their environment e.g with attachment this refers to a person’s expectations about relationships
Montropy-the idea that the one relationship an infant has with their primary attachment figure is of special significance in emotional development
Social releaser-a social behaviour or characteristic that elicits caregiving and leads to attachment
Bowlby’s monotropic attachment theory(1956):
Why attachment forms:
-Imprinting research led Bowlby to assume that there is similar process in humans
-Attachment behaviour evolved as it increases a species chance of survival
-Attachment must occur in two directions,parents must be attached to their infants in order to care for them and thus aid survival.
How attachment forms:
Critical period-babies have an innate drive to become attached.This innate behaviour is biological and has a special time period for development.This is around 2-3 years.Infants who do not form attachments in this time frame struggle to form attachments later on.Learning theorists believed food was an important factor in attachment,however Bowlby believed that sensitivity was determined attachment.Mary Ainsworth explored this idea who found that infants that who seemed the most strongly attached were those with responsive,cooperative and accessible mothers.(This relates to the importance of reciprocity and interactional synchrony).
Social releasers-occur during the critical period,ensuring that attachment between the infant and caregiver occurs e.g smiling.These are innate mechanisms that explain how attachments to infants form.They elicit a caregiving response.
Montoropy-Bowlby suggested that infants have one important emotional bond(the primary attachment relationship)This is often the infant’s biological mother but not always.Secondary attachments are also healthy for social development .
The consequences of attachment:
-the importance of montropy is that the infant’s special relationship influences their mental representation of this relationship called an internal working model.
-In the short term ,this model gives the child an insight into the caregiver’s behaviour and enables the child to influence the caregiver’s behaviour,so a true partnership can be formed.
-In the long term,it acts as a format for future relationships and generates expectations for healthy relationships.
Evaluation:
Is attachment adaptive?-attachment may be less critical for survival.Bowlby suggested that attachment occurs after 3 months,this is quite late to act as a mechanism of protection.In the past,it would have been important for immediate attachments to form for survival.The age of attachment depends on the features of a species life.When infants begin crawling,attachment becomes vital.
Sensitive period-Some studies have observed children who fail to form attachments during the critical period.They have found that although it appears less likely that attachments will form after the critical period but it is not impossible.Researchers now call this time the sensitive period to reflect the fact that the developmental window is when infants are most receptive to form a certain behaviour,but these behaviours can still form outside this window.
Multiple attachment vs Montropy-These two explanations are quite similar,they both suggest that all attachments are integrated into one single internal working model.Bowlby explained that secondary attachments are important for social development,however healthy development mostly depends on one central person higher than all those in the hierarchy.Research from infant-father attachment suggests a key role for fathers as secondary attachment and in social development.
Continuity hypothesis-The Minnesota parent-child study followed participants from infancy to late adolescence and found continuity between early attachment and later social behaviour.Those who were classified as securely attached in infancy had higher social competence later in childhood and were more popular.
John Bowlby was a British psychologist who developed the theory of attachment in the 1950s and 1960s. According to Bowlby, attachment is a deep emotional bond that develops between an infant and their primary caregiver, usually the mother. The theory emphasizes the importance of early childhood experiences in shaping future relationships and behavior.
Bowlby identified three main types of attachment: secure attachment, insecure-avoidant attachment, and insecure-resistant attachment. Secure attachment is characterized by a sense of safety and trust in the caregiver, while insecure-avoidant attachment is marked by a lack of emotional closeness and avoidance of the caregiver. Insecure-resistant attachment is characterized by mixed emotions and difficulty separating from the caregiver.
Attachment is crucial to a child’s emotional and social development. A secure attachment can provide a strong foundation for healthy relationships and emotional regulation, while insecure attachment can lead to issues such as anxiety, depression, and behavioral problems.
Yes, attachment patterns can change throughout an individual’s life, particularly in response to significant life events or changes in relationships. However, early childhood experiences are thought to have a lasting impact on attachment patterns and future relationships.
Bowlby’s theory of attachment has been used to inform parenting practices, attachment-based therapies, and interventions for children who have experienced trauma or disruptions in attachment. By understanding the importance of secure attachment and the impact of early childhood experiences, individuals can work to foster positive relationships and emotional development in children.
Some critics have argued that Bowlby’s theory is overly focused on the mother-child relationship and doesn’t account for the role of other caregivers or social factors in attachment. Additionally, some have questioned the universality of the theory, as attachment patterns may differ across cultures and contexts.
Still got a question? Leave a comment
Leave a comment