Year 12s: what will be the first way you research your future options? >>

AQA Psychology John Bowbly theory

I just really do not understand it, how much times I read the book, or research online could someone please kindly explain it to me.

Thank you

Reply 1

amyamy

you mean john bowlby - maternal deprivation/attachment theory?

Reply 2

jojospacemunky

John Bowlby - Attachment Theory just read that it's pretty self explainatory

a fellow person in this area to compare John Bowlby with is Helen Ainsworth.

Reply 3

Flying Cookie

John Bowlby's is an evolutionary theory.

His theory suggests that babies are born with the inherent instinct to form attachments.

The theory has three main features:

1. Monotropy - the infant attaches primarily to only one maternal figure i.e. caregiver

2. Internal working model - the relationship with the main caregiver will form a base for how to deal with others in the future e.g. if the caregiver offers physical comfort, the the infant will expect physical comfort from friends/lovers later in life

3. Sensitive period - the infant can form -the- attachment until about 3 years old, after which the infant is no longer able to attach

Evidence FOR: Hazan's study of relationships i.e. adults who had formed good attachments as infants had better relationships as opposed to those who hadn't; this backs up the idea of an internal working model

Evidence CON: Zimmerman found that divorce affected adult relationships negatively more than a bad infancy - challenges the idea of an internal working model; and there was also a study showing a positive correlation between the number of nappies fathers changed and the strength of their attachment to their children - challenges the idea of monotropy.

Reply 4

Phalange

These are from my personal notes:

Evolutionary Theory by Bowbly
4 concepts from his theory:

1) Innate: Argued attachment is innate. Proposed infants are pre-programmed to become attached and adults are pre-programmed to form a relationship with their infants.

2) Monotropy: Suggested infants form one social bond with person who responds most sensitively to infants social releases (any behaviour of a child that makes an adult react like crying or smiling).

3) Internal Working Model: Bowlby suggested the infant develops an IWM which acts as a template for future relationships based on relationship between primary caregiver and infant

4) Critical period: Suggested if attachment not made in 2.5 years (the critical period), it will not be possible to. If an attachment had not been made by this time then the child would later suffer social and emotional problems

Evaluation of the Evolutionary Theory

INNATE: Lorenz and goslings
Lorenz found a clutch of goslings because attached to the first thing they saw when they were born – him. For instance, they followed him everywhere.
This suggests there is an innate drive to form attachments.
Evaluation of this: However, as it is done to animals, we cannot generalise to humans.

MONOTROPY: Schaffer and Emerson
Conducted large scale observational study of attachment of infants. Found in many cases infants formed multiple attachments to people.
Bowlby suggested infants form one social bond but in this case they formed multiple bonds, contradicting the concept of monotropy.

INTERNAL WORKING MODEL: Hazan and Shaver’s love quiz
Found P’s that had been classified as having a secure attachment as a child were more likely to have stable and long-lasting relationships later in life than those who were classified as being insecurely attached.
Supports the idea that relationship between child and caregiver does form a template and affects for future relationships.

CRITICAL PERIOD
Cases of privation such as Genie suggest that not having made an attachment by the critical period DID lead to problems in social and emotional development in her later life, supporting the concept of the critical period. However, this is not true for others, such as the Czech twins.
Psychologists argue the concept of the critical period is too harsh also.

Extra evaluation:
Also there is the debate that maybe some children simply find it easier to form attachments just by their personality.

Lastly, the learning theory suggests that attachments are learned, whereas Bowlby proposed they were innate.