Does Research Show Mothers Are Essential for Baby's Neural Development

Mary Ainsworth

The Strange Situation | Attachment Styles

Past Saul McLeod, updated 2018

The Strange situation is a standardized procedure devised by Mary Ainsworth in the 1970s to observe attachment security in children within the context of caregiver relationships. It applies to infants between the age of nine and eighteen months.

The process involves series of 8 episodes lasting approximately 3 minutes each, whereby a mother, child and stranger are introduced, separated and reunited.

John Bowlby (1969) believed that attachment was an all or zippo procedure. However, research has shown that at that place are individual differences in attachment quality. Indeed, i of the chief paradigms in zipper theory is that of the security of an individual'due south zipper (Ainsworth & Bell, 1970).

Much research in psychology has focused on how forms of zipper differ amongst infants. For case, Schaffer and Emerson (1964) discovered what appeared to be innate differences in sociability in babies; some babies preferred cuddling more than than others, from very early on, before much interaction had occurred to crusade such differences.

It'southward easy enough to know when you are attached to someone because you know how you feel when yous are autonomously from that person, and, being an adult, you lot can put your feelings into words and describe how information technology feels.

However, most attachment research is carried out using infants and young children, and then psychologists have to devise subtle ways of researching attachment styles, unremarkably involving the observational method.

Psychologist Mary Ainsworth devised an cess technique chosen the Strange Situation Nomenclature (SSC) in club to investigate how attachments might vary between children.

The Strange State of affairs was devised by Ainsworth and Wittig (1969) and was based on Ainsworth'southward previous Uganda (1967) and afterwards Baltimore studies (Ainsworth et al., 1971, 1978).

Mary Ainsworth'southward (1971, 1978) observational study of individual differences in attachment is described below.

Strange Situation Process

The security of attachment in one- to two-year-olds were investigated using the foreign situation paradigm, in gild to determine the nature of zipper behaviors and styles of attachment.

Ainsworth adult an experimental procedure in social club to find the multifariousness of attachment forms exhibited between mothers and infants.

The experiment is set up in a small room with one way glass so the behavior of the infant tin be observed covertly. Infants were aged between 12 and eighteen months. The sample comprised of 100 eye-course American families.

The process, known equally the 'Strange Situation,' was conducted by observing the beliefs of the infant in a series of 8 episodes lasting approximately 3 minutes each:

(1) Mother, babe, and experimenter (lasts less than one minute).

(ii) Female parent and infant lone.

(3) A stranger joins the mother and infant.

(iv) Mother leaves babe and stranger alone.

(5) Mother returns and stranger leaves.

(6) Mother leaves; infant left completely alone.

(seven) Stranger returns.

(viii) Mother returns and stranger leaves.

Scoring

Strange Situation classifications (i.e., attachment styles) are based primarily on four interaction behaviors directed toward the mother in the two reunion episodes (Ep. five & Ep. 8).

Proximity and contacting seeking

Contact maintaining

Abstention of proximity and contact

Resistance to contact and comforting

The observer notes down the beliefs displayed during 15-2nd intervals and scores the behavior for intensity on a scale of 1 to seven.

strange situation scoring

Other behaviors observed included:

Exploratory behaviors e.k., moving around the room, playing with toys, looking around the room.
Search behaviors, e.yard., following mother to the door, banging on the door, orienting to the door, looking at the door, going to female parent's empty chair, looking at mother's empty chair.
Affect Displays negative, eastward.thousand., crying, smile.

Results - Attachment Styles

Ainsworth (1970) identified three main zipper styles, secure (type B), insecure avoidant (type A) and insecure ambivalent/resistant (blazon C). She concluded that these attachment styles were the result of early on interactions with the mother.

A fourth attachment style known as disorganized was later identified (Main, & Solomon, 1990).

	Secure	Resistant	Avoidant
Separation Anxiety	Distressed when mother leaves	Intense distress when the mother leaves	No sign of distress when the the mother leaves
Stranger Feet	Avoidant of stranger when alone, just friendly when the mother is nowadays	The infant avoids the stranger - shows fear of the stranger	The babe is okay with the stranger and plays normally when the stranger is present
Reunion behavior	Positive and happy when female parent returns	The infant approaches the mother, merely resists contact, may even button her abroad	The Infant shows little interest when the mother returns
Other	Uses the mother equally a condom base to explore their environment	The infant cries more and explores less than the other two types	The female parent and stranger are able to comfort the baby equally well
% of infants	70%	15%	15%

B: Secure Attachment

Securely attached children comprised the majority of the sample in Ainsworth'due south (1971, 1978) studies.

Such children feel confident that the attachment figure will exist available to see their needs. They use the attachment figure as a safe base to explore the surround and seek the attachment figure in times of distress (Main, & Cassidy, 1988).

Securely attached infants are hands soothed by the attachment figure when upset. Infants develop a secure attachment when the caregiver is sensitive to their signals, and responds appropriately to their needs.

According to Bowlby (1980), an individual who has experienced a secure zipper 'is likely to possess a representational model of attachment figures(south) every bit being available, responsive, and helpful' (Bowlby, 1980, p. 242).

A: Insecure Avoidant

Insecure avoidant children do not orientate to their attachment figure while investigating the surroundings.

They are very contained of the attachment effigy both physically and emotionally (Behrens, Hesse, & Primary, 2007).

They practise not seek contact with the zipper effigy when distressed. Such children are likely to accept a caregiver who is insensitive and rejecting of their needs (Ainsworth, 1979).

The attachment figure may withdraw from helping during difficult tasks (Stevenson-Hinde, & Verschueren, 2002) and is often unavailable during times of emotional distress.

C: Insecure Clashing

The tertiary attachment style identified past Ainsworth (1970) was insecure clashing (also called insecure resistant).

Here children adopt an ambivalent behavioral style towards the zipper figure. The child volition commonly exhibit clingy and dependent behavior, simply volition be rejecting of the attachment figure when they appoint in interaction.

The child fails to develop whatever feelings of security from the attachment figure. Appropriately, they exhibit difficulty moving away from the attachment effigy to explore novel environs.

When distressed they are hard to soothe and are non comforted by interaction with the zipper figure. This beliefs results from an inconsistent level of response to their needs from the primary caregiver.

Strange State of affairs Decision

Ainsworth (1978) suggested the 'caregiver sensitivity hypothesis' as an explanation for different attachment types. Ainsworth's maternal sensitivity hypothesis argues that a child'due south attachment style is dependent on the behavior their mother shows towards them.

'Sensitive' mothers are responsive to the child's needs and respond to their moods and feelings correctly. Sensitive mothers are more likely to accept securely attached children.
In contrast, mothers who are less sensitive towards their child, for example, those who respond to the child'south needs incorrectly or who are impatient or ignore the child, are likely to accept insecurely fastened children.

For instance, securely fastened infant are associated with sensitive and responsive primary care. Insecure clashing attached infants are associated with inconsistent primary intendance. Sometimes the child'south needs and met, and sometimes they are ignored by the mother / father.

Insecure-avoidant infants are associated with unresponsive primary care. The child comes to believe that communication of needs has no influence on the female parent/male parent.

Ainsworth's (1971, 1978) findings provided the offset empirical evidence for Bowlby's attachment theory.

For example, deeply attached children develop a positive working model of themselves and have mental representations of others as beingness helpful while viewing themselves as worthy of respect (Jacobsen, & Hoffman, 1997).

Avoidant children think themselves unworthy and unacceptable, caused by a rejecting primary caregiver (Larose, & Bernier, 2001). Ambivalent children take a negative self-image and exaggerate their emotional responses equally a way to gain attention (Kobak et al., 1993).

Accordingly, insecure attachment styles are associated with an increased risk of social and emotional behavioral problems via the internal working model.

attachment styles

Theoretical Evaluation

This caregiver sensitivity theory is supported by inquiry from, Wolff and Van Ijzendoorn (1997) who conducted a Meta-analysis (a review) of inquiry into zipper types.

They found that there is a relatively weak correlation of 0.24 between parental sensitivity and zipper type – generally more sensitive parents had deeply attached children.

However, in evaluation, critics of this theory debate that the correlation betwixt parental sensitivity and the kid's zipper blazon is only weak. This suggests that there are other reasons which may better explicate why children develop different attachment types and that the maternal sensitivity theory places too much accent on the mother.

Focusing just on maternal sensitivity when trying to explicate why children take dissimilar attachment types is, therefore, a reductionist arroyo.

An alternative theory proposed by Kagan (1984) suggests that the temperament of the child is actually what leads to the unlike attachment types. Children with unlike innate (inborn) temperaments will take dissimilar attachment types.

This theory is supported by research from Fox (1989) who constitute that babies with an 'Easy' temperament (those who eat and sleep regularly, and accept new experiences) are likely to develop secure attachments.

Babies with a 'tiresome to warm up' temperament (those who took a while to get used to new experiences) are probable to have insecure-avoidant attachments. Babies with a 'Difficult' temperament (those who consume and sleep irregularly and who reject new experiences) are likely to take insecure-ambivalent attachments.

In decision, the most complete explanation of why children develop different attachment types would be an interactionist theory. This would argue that a child's attachment type is a result of a combination of factors – both the child's innate temperament and their parent's sensitivity towards their needs.

Belsky and Rovine (1987) propose an interesting interactionist theory to explain the different attachment types. They fence that the child's zipper blazon is a upshot of both the child's innate temperament and also how the parent responds to them (i.e., the parents' sensitivity level).

Additionally, the child's innate temperament may, in fact, influence the fashion their parent responds to them (i.east, the infants' temperament influences the parental sensitivity shown to them). To develop a secure attachment, a 'hard' kid would need a caregiver who is sensitive and patient for a secure attachment to develop.

Methodological Evaluation

The strange situation classification has been institute to accept good reliability. This means that it achieves consistent results. For example, a study conducted in Frg found 78% of the children were classified in the same manner at ages one and 6 years (Wartner et al., 1994).

Although, as Melhuish (1993) suggests, the Foreign State of affairs is the near widely used method for assessing infant zipper to a caregiver, Lamb et al. (1985) accept criticized it for beingness highly artificial and therefore lacking ecological validity.

The child is placed in a strange and artificial environment, and the process of the mother and stranger entering and leaving the room follows a predetermined script.

Mary Ainsworth concluded that the strange situation could exist used to place the child's type of zipper has been criticized on the grounds that information technology identifies only the blazon of attachment to the mother. The child may take a different type of attachment to the father or grandmother, for example (Lamb, 1977). This ways that information technology lacks validity, as it does not measure a general attachment style, but instead an zipper style specific to the mother.

In addition, some inquiry has shown that the same child may prove different attachment behaviors on unlike occasions. Children's attachments may modify, maybe considering of changes in the child's circumstances, so a securely attached child may appear insecurely attached if the female parent becomes ill or the family unit circumstances alter.

The strange situation has besides been criticized on upstanding grounds. Because the kid is put nether stress (separation and stranger anxiety), the written report has broken the upstanding guideline protection of participants.

However, in its defense, the separation episodes were concise prematurely if the kid became also stressed. Likewise, according to Marrone (1998), although the Strange Situation has been criticized for being stressful, it is simulating everyday experiences, every bit mothers do get out their babies for brief periods of time in different settings and ofttimes with unfamiliar people such as babysitters.

Finally, the study's sample is biased - comprising 100 center-class American families. Therefore, it is difficult to generalize the findings exterior of America and to working-class families.

How to reference this article:

How to reference this commodity:

McLeod, South. A. (2018, Baronial 05). Mary ainsworth. Simply Psychology. www.simplypsychology.org/mary-ainsworth.html

APA Way References

Ainsworth, Chiliad. D. (1964). Patterns of attachment behavior shown by the baby in interaction with his female parent. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly of beliefs and Development, 51-58.

Ainsworth, Thousand. D. S. (1967). Infancy in Republic of uganda: Infant care and the growth of love.

Ainsworth, M. D. Due south. (1979). Attachment every bit related to mother-infant interaction. In Advances in the study of behavior (Vol. 9, pp. 1-51). Bookish Printing.

Ainsworth, K. D. S., & Bell, S. Chiliad. (1970). Attachment, exploration, and separation: Illustrated past the behavior of one-twelvemonth-olds in a strange state of affairs. Child Development, 41, 49-67.

Ainsworth, M. D. Due south., Bell, South. M., & Stayton, D. J. (1971) Private differences in strange- situation behavior of one-twelvemonth-olds. In H. R. Schaffer (Ed.) The origins of human social relations. London and New York: Academic Press. Pp. 17-58.

Ainsworth, M. D. S., Blehar, K. C., Waters, East., & Wall, S. (1978). Patterns of zipper: A psychological study of the strange situation. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Ainsworth, M. D. S., & Wittig, B. A. (1969). Attachment and exploratory behavior of one-yr-olds in a strange situation. In B. Chiliad. Foss(Ed. ), Determinants of infant behavior (Vol. 4,pp. 111-136). London: Methuen.

Behrens, One thousand. Y., Hesse, E., & Main, K. (2007). Mothers' zipper condition every bit determined past the Adult Zipper Interview predicts their 6-year-olds' reunion responses: A study conducted in Nippon. Developmental Psychology, 43(half-dozen), 1553.

Belsky, J., & Rovine, Yard. (1987). Temperament and zipper security in the foreign situation: An empirical rapprochement. Kid evolution, 787-795.

Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment. Zipper and loss: Vol. 1. Loss. New York: Basic Books.

Bowlby, J. (1980). Loss: Sadness & depression. Zipper and loss (vol. 3); (International psycho-analytical library no.109). London: Hogarth Printing.

Fox, Due north. A. (1989). Infant temperament and security of attachment: a new await. International Society for behavioral Evolution, J yviiskylii, Finland.

Jacobsen, T., & Hoffman, V. (1997). Children's attachment representations: Longitudinal relations to schoolhouse behavior and academic competency in middle babyhood and boyhood. Developmental Psychology, 33, 703-710.

Kagan, J., Reznick, J. S., Clarke, C., Snidman, N., & Garcia-Coll, C. (1984). behavioral inhibition to the unfamiliar. Kid development, 2212-2225.

Kobak, R. R., Cole, H. East., Ferenz-Gillies, R., Flemming, West. Due south., & Gamble, Westward. (1993). Attachment and emotional regulation during mother-teen problem-solving. A control theory analysis. Kid Development, 64, 231-245.

Lamb, Grand. Eastward. (1977). The development of mother-infant and begetter-infant attachments in the second year of life. Developmental Psychology, 13, 637-48.

Larose, S., & Bernier, A. (2001). Social support processes: Mediators of zipper state of mind and adjustment in later tardily adolescence. Attachment and Human Development, 3, 96-120.

Primary, Chiliad., & Solomon, J. (1990). Procedures for identifying infants as disorganized/disoriented during the Ainsworth Strange Situation. In M.T. Greenberg, D. Cicchetti & E.M. Cummings (Eds.), Attachment in the Preschool Years (pp. 121–160). Chicago, Academy of Chicago Press.

Marrone, M. (1998). Zipper and interaction. Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

Melhuish, E. C. (1993). A measure of beloved? An overview of the assessment of attachment. ACPP Review & Newsletter, xv, 269-275.

Schaffer, H. R., & Emerson, P. E. (1964) The development of social attachments in infancy. Monographs of the Guild for Research in Child Development, 29(3), series number 94.

Stevenson-Hinde, J., & Verschueren, Grand. (2002). Attachment in childhood. status: published.

Thompson, R. A., Gardner, W., & Charnov, Eastward. L. (1985). Infant-mother attachment: The origins and developmental significance of private differences in Strange Situation behavior. LEA.

Wartner, U. K., Grossman, Yard., Fremmer-Bombik, I., & Approximate, G. L. (1994). Attachment patterns in south Frg. Child Evolution, 65, 1014-27.

Wolff, 1000. S., & Ijzendoorn, K. H. (1997). Sensitivity and attachment: A meta‐analysis on parental antecedents of infant attachment. Child development, 68(four), 571-591.

How to reference this commodity:

McLeod, S. A. (2018, August 05). Mary ainsworth. But Psychology. www.simplypsychology.org/mary-ainsworth.html

Home | Virtually Us | Privacy Policy | Advertise | Contact Us

Simply Psychology'due south content is for informational and educational purposes merely. Our website is not intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment.

Ezoic

burnerfidifir.blogspot.com

Source: https://www.simplypsychology.org/mary-ainsworth.html

Does Research Show Mothers Are Essential for Baby's Neural Development