Bowlby (1951), Goldfarb (1943), Spitz and Wolf (1946) all researched the effects of attachment deficiency of infants raised in orphanages and residential nurseries. They concluded that the infants did display signs of lacking maternal deficiency, a term Bowlby referred to as maternal deprivation hypothesis. However, in the various findings Bowlby, Goldfarb, Spitz and Wolf overlooked and failed to acknowledge the nature of these environments, the absence of maternal care and the diverse types of deprivation these children go through. Bowlby's research concluded that there are two types of deprivation that being firstly, if a child was to stay at a nursery while the mother attended hospital (short term effects), the child displays signs of protest, despair and detachment. Secondly, due to death or divorce (long term effects) the child will display aggressive behaviour, between clinging and detachment towards the parent/caregiver.
Schaffer and Emerson (1964) challenged Bowlby's claims. They concluded two main points of a person's behavioural patterns, which decided whether the person would become an attachment figure for the infant. One being the responsiveness to the infant's behaviour and two, the total amount of time the caregiver gave. In addition, Schaffer and Emerson showed that infants form numerous attachments of various strengths and that an attachment to a specific person started to occur at around 7 months and the power of this attachment was not related to the length of time spent with the infant but rather the quality and intensity.
A colleague of Bowlby, Mary Ainsworth, increasingly looked at the infant-parent separations and recognised an understanding of these individual differences and fully supported Bowlby in his theory of attachment. Ainsworth developed a system called the Strange Situation (1967). The Strange Situation involved 12-month-old infants and their parents brought to a laboratory and separated and reunited. In the strange situation, 60% of the infants behaved in the same manner as Bowlby had implied being an attachment behavioural system in that becoming upset when the parent leaves the room but when the parent returns the infant keenly seeks the parent and is easily comforted by the parent. Infants who exhibit this pattern of behaviour were noted as securely attached. Approximately, 20% of other infants are insensitive initially, and, upon separation, become tremendously distressed. Importantly, Ainsworth found when these infants were reunited with the parent, these infants had a difficult time being soothed and pacified, and often exhibited conflicting behaviours that suggest they wanted to be comforted, but that they also wanted to punish the parent for leaving. These infants were distinguished as having behaviour known as anxious-resistant. The remaining 20% of the pattern of attachment that Ainsworth documented is called anxious-avoidant whereby the infants were not distressed by the separation of the parent, and, upon reunion, actively avoid seeking contact with their parent, perhaps even turning their attention to play with objects on the laboratory floor.
Ainsworth’s work was important for three reasons. First, she provided one of the first empirical demonstrations of how attachment behaviour is patterned in both safe and frightening contexts. Second, she provided the first empirical classification of individual differences in infant attachment patterns. According to her research, at least three types of children exist: those who are secure in their relationship with their parents, those who are anxious-resistant, and those who are anxious-avoidant. Finally, she demonstrated that these individual differences were concurrent with infant parent interactions in the home during the first year of life. According to Ainsworth, such correlations show that the Strange Situation provides a good index of the quality of the early mother-child relationship, which then provides the foundation for later social and emotional adjustment.
From the foregoing essay, I believe the importance of attachment in the development of an infant and this cannot be underestimated, as it is from this bond that an infant finds comfort, security and a base from which to explore his/her environment from infant years to adult years. For this reason, I agree with Bowlby's findings that infants form only one attachment and the foundation of that attachment determines the social emotional and intellectual development of the infant's future.
References:
Bowlby J (1998) Attachment, Random House
Cochrane R and P Carroll (1991), Psychology and Social Issues, Falmer Press, London
Gleitman H, Fridlund A J, Reisberg D (1999) Psychology (5th Edition)
Gross R (2001) Psychology – The Science of Mind and Behaviour, Hodder & Stoughton (4th Edition)
Schaffer H R (1996) Social Development, Blackwell publishing, pages 135 and 136.
Schaffer H R (1990, 1998) 2nd Edition, Making Decisions about Children.
Internet Sites:
24 January 2003
24 January 2003
24 January 2003
1 February 2003
