Attachment A03

Question 1

Strength of Lorenz

Answer 1

P: Research support for imprinting

E: Regolin and Vallortigara – chicks followed first moving shape (e.g., triangle)

E: Supports innate mechanism + critical period

L: Increases reliability/biological basis of Lorenz’s findings

H: Generalisability issue – animal → human (more complex social/cognitive systems)

Question 2

Lorenz Limitation

Answer 2

P: Limitation – Difficult to generalise animal research to humans.

E: Bird attachment is simpler, whereas mammalian attachment is two-way (both infant and mother form emotional bonds).

E: This means Lorenz’s findings on birds may not fully explain human attachment.

L: Therefore, the application of Lorenz’s theory to humans is limited.

H: However, Seebach proposed “baby duck syndrome”, where humans prefer the first system they learn, suggesting imprinting-like behaviour.

Question 3

Strength of Harlow

Answer 3

P: Practical applications of Harlow’s findings

E: Informed social workers/clinical psychologists about importance of early bonding; lack of bonding = developmental risk (Howe)

E: Influenced zoos/breeding programmes to ensure access to attachment figures

L: Shows research has real-world value for improving human and animal welfare

H: Ethical issues – severe distress to monkeys, but findings still highly influential

Question 4

Harlow Weakeness

Answer 4

P: Limitation – difficulty generalising from animals to humans

E: Monkeys are similar to humans but not identical (both mammals)

E: Humans have more complex cognitive and social processes

L: Therefore Harlow’s findings may not fully apply to human attachment

H: However, monkeys are more similar to humans than birds, so findings are more relevant than Lorenz’s

Question 5

Limitation of Explanation of attachment (animals)

Answer 5

P - Lack of support from animal studies

E - Lorenz’s geese imprinted regardless of food; Harlow’s monkeys preferred soft surrogate over wire one with food

E - Contradicts idea that attachment forms through food associations

L - Theory is reductionist

Question 6

Limitation Learning Theory (Baby Studies)

Answer 6

P - Lack of support from studies on babies

E - Schaffer & Emerson (1964) — babies attached to mother regardless of who fed them; sensitive responsiveness was key

E - Attachment may be due to responsiveness, not food

L - Other factors beyond food are important

Question 7

Learning Theory Strength (conditioning )

Answer 7

P - Elements of conditioning could be involved in some aspects of attachment

E - Baby associates warmth/comfort with a certain adult → influences choice of attachment figure

E - Comfort may play a central role alongside food, so conditioning may still be useful

L - Classical conditioning may have face validity as an explanation

Question 8

Learning Theory Strength (SLT)

Answer 8

P - SLT explanation acknowledges babies’ active involvement in attachment

E - Baby reciprocates the model’s behaviour through observation and imitation e.g. hugging

E - Learning theory coincides with other theories e.g. reciprocity and interactional synchrony

L - Higher validity as it has support from other attachment theorists