Then came Harry Harlow, with his theory of attachment as “contact comfort.” Harlow was most famous for his wire-mother experiment (Harlow, 1958). Through this experiment he “revealed the importance of a mother's love for healthy childhood development.” Taking just born rhesus monkeys away from their mother’s to a lab surrogate mothers, the monkeys were observed to see which surrogate they would pick, the wire monkey with a feeding bottle (providing nutrition) or the soft terry cloth mother (physical contact). In the end the monkeys chose the terry cloth mother as their secure mother even though extending them selves to reach for the milk bottle of wire mother. “These data make it obvious that contact comfort is a variable of overwhelming importance in the development of affectional response, whereas lactation is a variable of negligible importance” (Harlow 1958). This disproved existing theories of love which focused on the idea that “the earliest attachment between a mother and child was merely a means for the child to obtain food, relieve thirst, and avoid pain” (Van Wagner, 2009).
Both Harlow and Bowlby have theories of their own about attachment, and consequently they support each other. Both reject the traditional view that affection and mother-infant attachment is based merely on food and the infant’s huger drive (van der Horst & van der Veer, 2008). Harlow’s conclusion of the rhesus monkeys and their attachment to the terry cloth mother (representing as their monkey mother counterparts) rather than nourishment (wire mother) support this rejection. Both theories also conclude that early types of attachment affect relationship and life later on. "Attachment can be defined as the strong bond that develops first between parent and child, and later in peer and romantic relationships,” said the great Bowlby (1969). A later experiment of Harlow supports this development. Harlow created a strange situation setting where the monkeys used the surrogate mother as their secure base (caregiver). But when the mother left for a period of time, they no longer had a secure base and so “would often freeze up, crouch, rock, scream, and cry” The reason for this violent act could be explained because of a non- responsive mother. “Harlow’s experiments offered irrefutable proof that love is vital for normal childhood development. Additional experiments by Harlow revealed the long-term devastation caused by deprivation, leading to profound psychological and emotional distress and even death” (van der Horst & van der Veer, 2008). The relationships between mother and infant and their later affects can be supported by Mary Ainsworth’s Strange Situation. Ainsworth had four steps following Bowlby’s four characteristics of attachment. The infant would be in a room would be in a room with their caregiver/attachment-figure and would be let to explore, then a stranger would walk in, then the caregiver would leave for a period of time, and finally the attachment-figure would return. At each of the four stages, Ainsworth observed the infants actions and reactions and concluded the following. There were four types of attachment. A normal secure attachment would be able to separate from caregivers without too much distress; will seek comfort of parent when frightened; will show positive emotions with return of caregivers; and prefer caregivers over strangers. Ambivalent attachment consists of an infant who is distressed, clingy, and over-dependent. Avoidant attachment has infants who show no preference between strangers or caregivers, and doesn’t really care for contact or attention either. And finally the fourth and last attachment called the disorganized attachment consists of a child who is confused because their caregiver is a symbol of fear and comfort. All these different insecure attachments have great negative impact later on in the infants’ lives including forming insecure relationships, taking a parental role over the caregivers, not being able to share thoughts and feelings, etc.
Overall, it can be said that although the theory of Harlow and the theory of Bowlby focuses on two different aspects of attachment, in the end the theories support each other. While Harlow focuses on attachment as “contact comfort” while Bowlby focuses his theory on attachment as an innate process. In the end both theories agree with each other, supporting the fact that animals and humans are born with a pre-disposition to form an attachment that deals with more than relieving the child of hunger.
Reference
http://psychology.about.com/b/2007/11/16/attachment-theory.htm
http://social.jrank.org/pages/103/Bowlby-John-1907-1990.html
http://psychology.cse.edu/DuarteEdwardsMendoza%20AinsworthAttachment%202006/b
efore_mary_ainsworth.htm
http://www.healthline.com/galecontent/attachment-between-infant-and-caregiver
http://psychology.about.com/od/historyofpsychology/p/harlow_love.htm
http://www.springerlink.com/content/e646773071l7k276/fulltext.pdf