You are on page 1of 7

CONTENTS Basic skills Overview of Developmental Psychology Definitions in Developmental Psychology Studies

Schaffer & Emerson Ainsworth & Bell VanIjzendoorn & Kroonenberg Takahashi Learning Theory of Attachment Bowlby’s Theory of Attachment Harlow & Zimmerman Hazan & Shaver Robertson & Robertson Bowlby - 44 thieves Bowlby et al - TB study Genie – Curtiss Czech Twins – Koluchova Hodges & Tizard Burchinal et al Andersson Belsky & Rovine Egeland & Hiester 1 7 9 11 13 16 17 19 20 21 22 23 25 26 28 30 32 35 37 39 41

Question C
• • • • • • • • To what extent is research into the stages of attachment useful/valid? Outline and evaluate research (theories and/or studies) into individual differences and attachment. To what extent are there cross-cultural variations in attachment? Outline and evaluate 1 or more psychological explanations of attachment/consider the extent to which psychological theories have been successful in explaining attachment . To what extent does research (theories/studies) support the view that maternal deprivation can have long term effects on individuals? To what extent does research (theories and/or studies) support the view that the effects of deprivation and/or privation can be overcome? Assess the extent to which research (theories and/or studies) supports the view that day care has a positive effect on children’s cognitive and/or social development. Assess the extent to which research (theories and/or studies) supports the view that day care has a negative effect on children’s cognitive and/or social development. iv 44 46 48 50 53 55 57 59

Consider the extent to which research into memory has helped our understanding of reconstructive memory/eye witness testimony. Consider the strengths and weaknesses of explanations of forgetting in LTM. 92 94 95 98 100 103 References 105 v . Consider the strengths and weaknesses of explanations of forgetting in STM.References Overview of Cognitive Psychology Definitions in Cognitive Psychology Studies Miller Peterson & Peterson Baddeley Bahrick et al Multistore Model – Atkinson & Shiffrin Levels of Processing – Craik & Lockhart Waugh & Norman McGeoch & McDonald Tulving & Psotka Levinger & Clark Conway et al Bartlett Loftus & Palmer 62 64 66 69 70 71 73 75 77 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 Question C • • • • • • Consider the extent to which the multistore model of memory is supported by psychological research (theories and/or studies). Consider what psychological research (theories and/or studies) have told us about the role of emotional factors in forgetting. Outline and evaluate one alternative to the multistore model of memory.

Bowlby believes that if this bond is not formed.20 – . in providing economic support).5 years it would not occur at all. Affectionless psychopathy may result (see the maternal deprivation hypothesis) GENERAL CRITICISMS • • • • • Infants display more than one attachment so the concept of monotrophy can be criticised. This is where the child should ideally form an attachment in the first 2. then there would be permanent emotional damage because children only develop socially and emotionally when an attachment provides them with feelings of security. If the child does not therefore have an attachment then they will not develop emotionally. by Rutter). This means that if the attachment is not formed within the first 2. The attachment develops between the infant and caregiver because the infant displays ‘social releasers’ – these are behaviours that elicit/produce a reaction from the caregiver and include crying. The idea of a CRITICAL PERIOD has also been criticised (for example. A ‘monotrophic bond’ is formed – that is a special bond with just one other person. High self esteem and emotional and social development is therefore derived from having a sensitive. Bowlby assumed that the father had no direct emotional significance but was only of indirect value (for example. Attachment is a biological (innate) process and there is a CRITICAL PERIOD of development. Schaffer & Emerson's stages of attachment demonstrate that multiple attachments can be formed. • • . Instead a SENSITIVE PERIOD has been suggested.BOWLBY’S THEORY • The adult/caregiver is genetically programmed to form an attachment with the infant in order to protect it.5 years of life but it can be formed later. It gives children the opportunity to be around adults and therefore provides a safe base from which the infant can explore the world. This has been criticised by many psychologists who believe that father’s have their own unique contribution to make. emotionally responsive and supportive caregiver with whom the child has developed an attachment (the internal working model). The mother is therefore unique. smiling etc. or is broken.

. CRITICISMS • We must be careful about generalising Harlow’s study to human behaviour because monkeys and children will not necessarily act in the same way. The other ‘mother’ had a bottle but was covered in soft cloth and offered ‘contact comfort’ (was comfortable to touch).to examine if infant monkeys attach because of food.HARLOW & ZIMMERMAN (1959) – Support for learning theory of attachment AIM . had problems with mating or parenting their own offspring. CONCLUSION . e. these monkeys found it difficult to adjust. One of these ‘mothers’ had a feeding bottle and was made only of the wire. There was also a confounding variable in the study (something that may have unintentionally altered the results of the study because of poor methodology). PROCEDURE • • • • Young monkeys were removed from their mothers and placed in a cage which provided them with two wire ‘mothers’. however. In the experiment the two wire ‘monkeys’ had different shaped heads and it is possible that the material mother simply had a more appealing head rather than the infants finding this one more soft and comforting.21 – . FINDINGS The baby monkeys spent most of their time with the mother who was covered in material and not the one that offered it food so comfort appeared to be the key factor in developing attachment at this stage. Later in life.g.this study therefore supports the learning theory of attachment as it shows that the infant (monkey) will learn to go to the one that offers it the most comfort and that attachment is based on interaction. For some of the monkeys milk was given to them by the wire mother and for the others by the cloth mother. • .

Also the findings may be unreliable because they are retrospective. . If they had experienced unsuccessful adult relationships they may therefore recall negative childhood experiences as a way of explaining their later difficulties. Avoidant/insecure types feared intimacy and believed that they did not need love to be happy. CRITICISMS • The data is correlational – it only assumes a relationship between 2 things and we cannot prove they are related.This supports Bowlby’s theory as it shows that early attachments do act as a template for the future (in this case in establishing adult relationships).HAZAN & SHAVER (1987) – Support for Bowlby’s theory of attachment AIM . SO we can’t be certain that early attachment caused the later romantic style. Beliefs about romantic examine if attachment/lack of attachment does have an impact on later development as Bowlby’s theory had suggested. Anxious/insecure infants worried that partners didn’t love them and showed obsessive and jealous behaviour. Later experiences of adult romantic love. FINDINGS • • • Respondents who were securely attached as infants had trusting and lasting relationships. people are looking back on their lives and this may mean that they do not recall information accurately. for example. PROCEDURE • A ‘love quiz’ was printed in a newspaper to assess: (i) Early attachment experiences – measured using a checklist assessing both a child’s relationship with their parents in childhood and the relationship between the parents themselves. 620 participants aged 14 82 were involved. CONCLUSION. To test this they were looking at the styles of adult romantic relationships to see if they could be related to early attachment experiences. (ii) (iii) • Readers of a local newspaper sent in their answers to the quiz and therefore a self-selected sample was used.22 – • .

Even the children temporarily fostered by the Robertsons showed some of these signs of distress. It was a form of natural observation as the children were naturally experiencing separation. The films were therefore case studies as each child was recorded individually and their behaviour later coded by the psychologists. For example when studying just one child ‘John’ it was found that he clearly showed each phase.23 – . All of the children were experiencing short term deprivation usually due to the mother being admitted to hospital.ROBERTSON & ROBERTSON (1971) – The short term effects of deprivation AIM – to examine if separation of mother and child (often due to hospitalisation) would have immediate/short term effects. • • • • . PROCEDURES • A series of films were made by the Robertsons using an opportunity sample of children who were experiencing separation. He was therefore starting to show signs of despair. Despair – he began to cry more. gave up trying for attention and when the mother returned ignored her and refused to be comforted. became demanding and had difficulties sleeping.5 years). • FINDINGS • Evidence was found to support the protest-despair-detachment model. Therefore to look at the effects of bond disruption/deprivation. They studied a number of children who had either been placed in short term nursery/residential care (for example. Protest – he tried to make attachments with the adults in the nursery but they had little time to spend with him and he started to show signs of distress. Detachment – after a period of time he started to show detachment – for example. although this was less so than in the case of John. He would be comforted by an adult but was unable to receive ongoing individual attention due to the nature of the nursery. John) or whom the Robertsons were fostering themselves (they stayed between 10-27 days and were all aged below 2. refused food.

CONCLUSION – even in the short term deprivation has an effect on a child and Robertson and Robertson concluded that it is therefore crucial that in any period of separation a child is provided with good substitute care that closely resembles the child’s familiar routine. CRITICISMS • The children filmed represent a very small sample and the findings cannot therefore be generalised to all children – others may behave differently when deprived for a short time.24 – . It is also possible that the findings reported by Robertson & Robertson are biased because they were likely to have reported findings to support the idea that deprivation would have an effect. • . If they were aware that they were being observed/filmed then they may have not behaved naturally. There are a number of difficulties with methods used to study the children. as this is what they were looking for.