Who proposed learning theory and what is it?
Dollard & Miller
Learning theory (AKA behaviourism) sees all behav as acquired via association
Why is learning theory also called ‘cupboard love’?
Atts are seen as forming through an infant learning to associate a caregiver w feeding
What is classical conditioning?
When response produced naturally by a stimulus becomes associated w another stimulus not usually producing that response
How is classical conditioning related to learning theory?
Atts are seen as learned by the unconditioned stimulus of food which produces an unconditioned response of pleasure being associated a caregiver (neutral stimulus)
Eventually the infant associates the caregiver (conditioned stimulus) w pleasure (conditioned response)
What is operant conditioning?
Based on ‘Law of effect’ where any pleasure-evoking action will be repeated again in similar circumstances
OC involves reinforcement:
- Positive reinforcement - receiving something pleasurable for performing a certain behav
- Negative reinforcement - not receiving something non-pleasurable for a behav
How is operant conditioning related to learning theory?
Atts are seen as occurring through crying leading to being fed becoming a +ve reinforcement - and feeding stopping the baby crying becomes a -ve reinforcement
What are primary and secondary drives?
- Primary drive - innate biological motivator e.g. motivated to eat to reduce hunger
- Secondary drive - primary drive of hunger becomes associated w caregiver - att becomes secondary drive
What reduces support for the learning theory of attachment?
- Research contradicts cupboard love - animal studies showed young animals don’t need to attach to someone that feeds them - Lorenz geese imprinted before fed and maintained these atts no matter who fed them - Harlow monkey attached to soft cloth mother rather than wire one that provided food - shows att does not occur as a result of feeding - supported by S&E - found infants attached to mothers despite often being fed by other carers
- Infant-caregiver interaction contradicts learning theory - early inf-car interaction research e.g. Isabella et al found link between secure att and int sync - idea that best atts form w sensitive carers hard to reconcile w cupboard love - if att formation solely dependent on feeding then how can these findings be explained?
- Alt to the learning theory - Bowlby theory of monotropy believed infants have innate readiness during critical period to form att to their caregiver to protect them from harm whilst they are young and vulnerable - evolutionary perspective explains both how and why atts form - to enhance survival - Bowlby’s theory considered a more comprehensive explanation of att than learning theory that reduces att to a stimulus-response action
- Conditioning is reductionist - although conditioning can explain learning of simple behavs, atts are complex behavs w intense emotional element - behaviourist exp of att does not consider cognitive processes involved in att so is incomplete exp - therefore reductionist
What is Bowlby’s theory of monotropy?
An evolutionary expl of att influenced by animal studies (e.g. Lorenz & Harlow) that rejects learning theory
What is the ‘monotropy’ element of Bowlby’s theory?
Bowlby placed emphasis on child’s att to one primary caregiver (usually mother) - believed primary att supersedes others
He saw the quality of the primary att as dependent upon:
• The law of continuity - att is best when childcare is constant and predictable
• The law of accumulated separation - the effects of every separation w mother add up - best to avoid any separation
What are social releasers?
Evolution led to infants becoming genetically programmed to behave in ways towards mother that increased chances of survival - these behavs are social releasers such as:
- Crying to attract parent’s attention
- Looking, smiling and vocalising to main parental attention
- Following and clinging to gain and maintain proximity to parents
Why are social releasers important?
Atts are only formed if carers respond to social releasers in meaningful way as att is a reciprocal process
What is the critical period in Bowlby’s theory of monotropy?
Bowlby believed there is a CP in which att behavs between infant and carer must occur if att is to formed
He saw att behavs as useless for all children if delayed until after 2.5-3 yrs
If att not formed in this time child will have difficulty in forming later atts
What is the internal model component of Bowlby’s theory of monotropy?
Bowlby proposed child’s att w primary caregiver forms the template for the child’s future Rships - this internal working model creates consistency between early emotional experiences and later Rships - poor early att often leads to poor later atts
What support is there for Bowlby’s theory of attachment?
- Research supports internal working model - Hazan & Shaver used self-report Qnaire (‘Love Quiz’) to assess internal working model - found +ve correlation between early att types and later adult Rships - also Sroufe et al conducted Minnesota parent-child study - found outcome of early att type is projected into expectations of later Rships - lots of support
- Research supports social releasers - Brazleton et al research supports importance of social releasers eliciting response from caregiver - Brazleton observed mother-infant interactions and found int sync - then performed exp, asking mothers to ignore social releasers - babies initially showed distress and ended up curling up and lying motionless - shows importance of social releasers eliciting caregiving
What reduces support for Bowlby’s theory of attachment?
- Mixed evidence for importance of monotropy - S&E refute idea infants only formed multiple atts after forming primary att that supersedes all others - found babies do attach to one person first, but a signif no. babies could form atts w multiple caregivers at the same time - contradicts concept of monotropy
- Ethical implications - monotropy controversial bc affects lifestyle choices for mothers - Bowlby argues prolonged separation from prim caregiver can cause severe psych trauma - feminist critics argue this places burden on mothers - pushes them into certain role and not to return to work
