Explanations of attachment

• There are three main explanations that are needed for the exam:
  • Learning Theory 1: Classical conditioning
  • Learning Theory 2: Operant conditioning
  • Bowlby's Evolutionary Theory
• We will look at Learning Theories first.
• These assume?that all behaviour is learned?and is not innate.
• This is in?direct opposition to Bowlby.

Learning theories of attachment: Classical conditioning

• This is based on the classical conditioning idea that we learn via association.
• We learn when we associate a stimulus with a response.
• Key concepts here are:
  • Unconditioned stimulus (UCS)
  • Unconditioned response (UCR)
  • Conditioned stimulus (CS)
  • Conditioned response (CR)
  • Neutral stimulus (NS)
• The unconditioned stimulus produces an unconditioned response.
• If the unconditioned stimulus is paired enough times with a neutral stimulus, then over time the neutral stimulus will become the conditioned stimulus and a conditioned response will happen.

How does classical conditioning work with infants and attachment?

• ?The infant is hungry and this is not a comfortable feeling so they crave food
• The food is the?unconditioned stimulus
• The food gives the infant pleasure so pleasure is the?unconditioned response
• The Primary Care Giver (PCG) provides the food and, to start with, is the?neutral stimulus
• When the infant has been fed several times by the PCG, they begin to?associate?the PCG with food
• The PCG is now the?conditioned stimulus?and the?conditioned response?is pleasure
• The attachment has begun as the infant wants the PCG around, not due to food anymore, but because they like having them around

Learning theories of attachment: Operant conditioning

• This is based on the idea that we learn via punishments and rewards.
• The key concepts are:
  • Rewards
  • Punishments (less so in attachment)
  • Positive reinforcement
  • Negative reinforcement
  • Primary reinforcer
  • Secondary reinforcer

How does operant conditioning work with infants and attachment?

• We learn via rewards, punishments and reinforcement
• Infants learn that they can receive attention from the PCG if they cry, laugh, giggle etc
• These behaviours are?positively reinforced?for the infant: As it is rewarded, the infant repeats the action even more
• The child learns that whatever it wants; food, a changed nappy, a cuddle, it can receive if it behaves in the right way
• The PCG is also rewarded as a?negative reinforcer?is removed: the infant stops crying
• This means that the PCG is also likely to repeat the behaviour as it is rewarding, and something unpleasant is removed

Primary and Secondary Drives

• A?primary drive?is something the infant needs, biologically, to survive, such as food
• A?secondary drive?is a stimulus that reinforces behaviour after it has been associated with the?primary drive
• In this case, food is the primary reinforcer and the PCG is the?secondary drive?as they provide the food
• The attachment begins when the infant forgets about the?primary drive?and looks for the?secondary drive-?the PCG

Evaluation of learning theory as an explanation for attachment

• Animal studies (Harlow and Lorenz) do not support learning theory explanations:
  • The goslings in?Lorenz?imprint within minutes of being born so have no time to learn
  • Harlow's?monkeys prefer the cloth mother that provides comfort to the mother that provides food
  • In both studies, food is not the primary reason for attachment
• Schaffer and Emerson?also demonstrated that food was not a factor in the attachment:
  • In over 1/3rd of cases, the mother did not do all of the day-to-day?care for the infant such as feeding or bathing/nappy changing
  • Yet in all cases, she became the PCG
  • Schaffer and Emerson?stated that the attachment was more about who was the most sensitive and loving in responding to the baby: Clearly the mother in these cases
  • So again, food has nothing to do with attachment
• Therefore the learning theory is highly?reductionist?in only looking at food as the main drive behind attachment
• It could be said to be?over-simplistic in ignoring reciprocity, sensitivity and innate qualities?that may also be factors