Notes · PsychologyUK · A-Levels

Attachment

An attachment is a close, enduring emotional bond between two people, typically an infant and a primary caregiver. This chapter examines how attachments form through early interactions, the animal studies that shaped attachment theory, the learning and evolutionary explanations of attachment, how it is classified in the Strange Situation and across cultures, the effects of deprivation and institutionalisation, and the influence of early attachment on later relationships.

6 sections~21 min reading time3 competenciesLevel Foundation 1 · Standard 2 · Advanced 3

T·0333 / 17

Exam profile

AO1 · Describe caregiver-infant interactions, animal studies, explanations, the Strange Situation, deprivation and institutionalisationAO2 · Apply attachment concepts to novel scenarios and to observational and cross-cultural dataAO3 · Evaluate the explanations and studies, including methodology, cultural bias and determinism

Operators:describeoutlineexplainapplyevaluatediscuss

basic level

AS-Level covers caregiver-infant interactions, the stages of attachment, animal studies, the explanations, the Strange Situation and deprivation.

higher level

The full A-Level adds cultural variations, the effects of institutionalisation (Romanian orphan studies) and the influence of early attachment on adult relationships via the internal working model.

Depth

Text

Contents · 6 sections

Attachment

Caregiver-infant interactions and the stages of attachment#

FoundationAQA 7182 3.1.3DfE GCE Psychology - caregiver-infant interactions

Schaffer and Emerson's stages of attachment

Fig. 1The four stages unfold across the first year; stranger and separation anxiety appear at the specific-attachment stage (approximate ages).

Attachments begin in the earliest interactions between infant and caregiver, and psychologists identify two key features. Reciprocity is a two-way, mutual process in which the infant and caregiver respond to and elicit responses from each other, taking turns like a conversation - the caregiver responds to the infant's 'alert phases' and the infant becomes an active participant. Interactional synchrony is the temporal coordination of their behaviour: the infant and caregiver mirror each other's facial and bodily movements in a synchronised way, as Meltzoff and Moore (1977) showed when infants as young as two weeks imitated adults' facial expressions. High levels of synchrony are associated with better-quality attachments.

Schaffer and Emerson (1964) studied 60 Glasgow babies over the first eighteen months of life and identified four stages of attachment. In the asocial stage (first few weeks) the baby's behaviour towards objects and people is similar, though it prefers familiar people. In the indiscriminate stage (from about 6 weeks to 7 months) the baby shows a clear preference for people over objects and accepts comfort from any adult, without stranger or separation anxiety. In the specific attachment stage (from about 7 months) the baby forms a primary attachment to one particular caregiver and now shows stranger anxiety and separation anxiety. In the multiple attachment stage (shortly after) the baby forms secondary attachments to other regular caregivers.

Their study also examined who infants attach to. The primary attachment was most often to the mother, but by the age of one year the majority of infants had formed multiple attachments, and the father frequently became an important attachment figure. This informs the debate about the role of the father: research suggests fathers are less likely to be the primary attachment figure but play a distinctive role, often as a playmate providing stimulating, challenging interaction, and that the key factor is the quality of the caregiver's response rather than their gender.

These interactions are evaluated for both strengths and difficulties. A methodological strength is that observations of interactions are usually filmed, so behaviour can be re-analysed reliably by more than one observer, reducing bias. A serious difficulty is that we cannot know what an infant's imitation or synchrony means - we are inferring internal states from observable movements, and it is hard to be certain that a baby's mirroring is a deliberate social response rather than a general response. Research on the father is also socially sensitive, as conclusions can be used to make judgements about family structures and working parents.

Worked example

Identifying the stage of attachment

A five-month-old smiles at any adult who picks him up and shows no distress when handed to a stranger. Identify the stage and justify your answer.

Note the key behaviours
The infant prefers people to objects but accepts comfort from anyone and shows no stranger or separation anxiety.
Match to a stage
These are the features of the indiscriminate attachment stage (about 6 weeks to 7 months).
Justify
Because specific attachments (and the anxieties that mark them) have not yet appeared, the infant cannot be in the specific-attachment stage.

Result: The infant is in the indiscriminate attachment stage.

Typical mistakes

Confusing reciprocity (turn-taking, eliciting responses) with interactional synchrony (simultaneous mirroring).
Placing stranger anxiety too early - it appears in the specific-attachment stage, not the indiscriminate stage.

Active revision

A seven-month-old cries when her mother leaves the room and is wary of a visitor. Identify the stage of attachment and the behaviours shown.

Active recall

Recall the key points — then reveal.

Sources: GCE AS and A level subject content for psychology (Department for Education) · AQA A-level Psychology 7182 specification (AQA)

Animal studies of attachment: Lorenz and Harlow#

StandardAQA 7182 3.1.3DfE GCE Psychology - animal studies of attachment

Harlow's contact-comfort finding

Fig. 2Infant monkeys clung to the soft cloth mother for comfort and visited the milk-providing wire mother only briefly (illustrative hours per day).

Animal studies allowed psychologists to test ideas about attachment experimentally in ways that would be unethical with humans, and two are on the specification. Lorenz (1935) studied imprinting in greylag geese. He divided a clutch of eggs: half hatched with the mother present and half hatched in an incubator with Lorenz the first moving thing they saw. The incubator group imprinted on Lorenz and followed him everywhere, while the control group followed their mother - and the two groups stayed loyal to their respective 'mothers' even when mixed together. Lorenz concluded that imprinting is an innate, rapid form of attachment that occurs during a critical period (a few hours after hatching); if imprinting does not happen then, it may never occur.

Lorenz also proposed that imprinting has long-term effects on later mate choice (sexual imprinting): birds imprinted on humans later showed courtship behaviour towards humans. This introduces the idea that early attachment shapes later relationships, a theme Bowlby developed for humans. Evaluation notes that imprinting may be more flexible and reversible than Lorenz first thought, and - crucially - that findings from birds may not generalise to the more complex attachment systems of mammals, including humans.

Harlow (1958) studied contact comfort in infant rhesus monkeys. Each monkey was raised with two wire 'mothers': one bare wire mother that dispensed milk and one wire mother covered in soft cloth that gave no milk. Learning theory ('cupboard love') predicts the infant should prefer the mother that feeds it, but Harlow found the opposite: the monkeys spent almost all their time clinging to the cloth mother and only went to the wire mother briefly to feed, returning to the cloth mother for comfort - and ran to the cloth mother when frightened. This showed that contact comfort, not food, was the basis of attachment.

Harlow also found devastating long-term effects: monkeys raised with the surrogate mothers grew up socially and sexually abnormal, were aggressive, and were poor parents themselves, and there was a critical period (about 90 days) after which normal development could not be recovered. Harlow's work was hugely influential in showing the importance of early emotional care, with real-world applications to childcare, but it raises serious ethical objections because of the lasting suffering caused to the monkeys, which must be weighed against the theoretical and practical benefits.

Worked example

Using Harlow to evaluate learning theory

Construct one AO3 point that uses Harlow's study to argue against the learning-theory explanation of attachment.

Point
Harlow's monkey study provides evidence against the learning-theory claim that attachment forms through feeding.
Evidence
The infant monkeys spent most of their time on the cloth mother that gave no milk and only fed briefly from the wire mother, seeking the cloth mother for comfort when frightened.
Explain
If attachment were based on the association with food, the monkeys should have attached to the feeding wire mother; because they did not, comfort rather than food underlies attachment, undermining the cupboard-love account (with the caveat that generalising from monkeys to humans is uncertain).

Result: A developed AO3 point using contact-comfort evidence to challenge learning theory, with a generalisation caveat.

Typical mistakes

Saying Harlow's monkeys preferred the wire mother because it had food - they preferred the cloth mother for comfort.
Over-generalising from geese to humans without acknowledging the difference in attachment systems.

Active revision

Explain how Harlow's findings challenge the learning-theory ('cupboard love') explanation of attachment.

Active recall

Recall the key points — then reveal.

Sources: GCE AS and A level subject content for psychology (Department for Education) · AQA A-level Psychology 7182 specification (AQA)

Explanations of attachment: learning theory and Bowlby's monotropic theory#

AdvancedAQA 7182 3.1.3DfE GCE Psychology - explanations of attachment

Bowlby's monotropic theory

Fig. 3Innate social releasers elicit care; a monotropic bond forms in the critical period and builds an internal working model that shapes later relationships.

Learning theory explains attachment as a set of learned associations, summed up as 'cupboard love'. Through classical conditioning, the food (an unconditioned stimulus) that produces pleasure (an unconditioned response) is repeatedly paired with the caregiver (a neutral stimulus), so the caregiver becomes a conditioned stimulus that produces pleasure (a conditioned response) - the infant becomes attached to the source of pleasure. Through operant conditioning, the infant's crying is reinforced: crying brings food and comfort (positive reinforcement for the infant) and stops the crying (negative reinforcement for the caregiver), so the behaviours that maintain closeness are strengthened. Food is treated as the primary reinforcer and the caregiver as a secondary reinforcer.

Learning theory is evaluated as having some value but being incomplete. Its strength is that conditioning plausibly plays a role in the association of caregivers with comfort. Its decisive weakness is the evidence against it: Harlow's monkeys attached to the comforting cloth mother rather than the feeding wire mother, and Schaffer and Emerson found that many infants formed their primary attachment to someone who was not the person who fed them. Attachment therefore cannot be reduced to feeding.

Bowlby's monotropic theory is an evolutionary alternative: attachment is an innate system that evolved because staying close to a caregiver promotes survival. Its key ideas are captured by mnemonics. Monotropy is the idea that an infant forms one special attachment to a primary caregiver (usually the mother), and this bond is qualitatively different and more important than others; Bowlby's law of continuity and law of accumulated separation stress the importance of constant, predictable care. Infants are born with social releasers - innate 'cute' behaviours such as smiling, cooing and gripping - that unlock an innate tendency in adults to care for them, so attachment is reciprocal.

Bowlby argued attachment must develop within a critical period of about the first two and a half years (up to five at most), or it may not develop at all. The lasting importance of the first attachment lies in the internal working model - a mental template of relationships formed from the first bond - which shapes the child's expectations of later relationships and, through the continuity hypothesis, their own future parenting. Bowlby's theory is well supported (by evidence for social releasers and for the influence of early attachment on later relationships) but criticised as socially sensitive (implying mothers should not work) and for the concept of monotropy, which may underplay the value of multiple attachments.

Worked example

Mapping classical conditioning onto attachment

Set out the classical-conditioning account of how an infant becomes attached to a caregiver, labelling each stimulus and response.

Before conditioning
Food (UCS) naturally produces pleasure (UCR); the caregiver is a neutral stimulus (NS) producing no attachment response.
During conditioning
The caregiver (NS) is repeatedly present when the infant is fed, so is paired with the food (UCS).
After conditioning
The caregiver becomes a conditioned stimulus (CS) that alone produces pleasure (now a conditioned response, CR); the infant is attached to the source of that pleasure.

Result: Food (UCS) -> pleasure (UCR); caregiver + food -> pleasure; caregiver (CS) -> pleasure (CR): attachment as a learned association.

Typical mistakes

Getting the conditioning the wrong way round - the caregiver is the neutral/conditioned stimulus, food is the unconditioned stimulus.
Treating monotropy as meaning infants form only one attachment - it means one is primary and special, not the only one.

Active revision

Compare the learning-theory and monotropic explanations of attachment, identifying one strength of each.

Active recall

Recall the key points — then reveal.

Sources: GCE AS and A level subject content for psychology (Department for Education) · AQA A-level Psychology 7182 specification (AQA)

The Strange Situation, attachment types and cultural variations#

AdvancedAQA 7182 3.1.3DfE GCE Psychology - types of attachment and cultural variations

Classifying the three attachment types

Fig. 4The reunion behaviour is the key discriminator between the three attachment types.

Ainsworth's Strange Situation (1970) is a controlled observation designed to measure the security of an infant's attachment. An infant (aged about 12-18 months) and caregiver are observed in an unfamiliar room through a series of eight scripted episodes, including the caregiver leaving, a stranger entering, and the caregiver returning. Observers record five behaviours: exploration and secure-base behaviour, stranger anxiety, separation anxiety, and - most importantly - the infant's response at reunion.

Ainsworth identified three attachment types from the pattern of behaviour. Securely attached infants (type B) use the caregiver as a secure base to explore, show moderate stranger and separation anxiety, and are easily comforted at reunion; in her sample about 66% were secure. Insecure-avoidant infants (type A) explore freely, show little stranger or separation anxiety and avoid or ignore the caregiver at reunion (about 22%). Insecure-resistant infants (type C) explore little, show high stranger and separation anxiety and, at reunion, seek but resist contact - they are hard to comfort (about 12%). Security is linked to the caregiver's sensitivity: sensitive, responsive caregiving predicts secure attachment (the caregiver sensitivity hypothesis).

Van IJzendoorn and Kroonenberg (1988) examined cultural variations in a meta-analysis of 32 Strange Situation studies across eight countries. They found that secure attachment was the most common type in every culture, supporting the idea that it is the universal norm, but that the distribution of the insecure types varied: insecure-avoidant attachment was relatively more common in individualist Western cultures such as Germany, while insecure-resistant attachment was relatively more common in collectivist cultures such as Japan and Israel. They also found that variation within a country was greater than variation between countries.

The research is evaluated for validity and cultural bias. The Strange Situation has good reliability - trained observers show high inter-observer agreement - and secure attachment predicts later outcomes, giving it predictive validity. However, it is criticised as an imposed etic: it was designed in the USA and assumes American norms of behaviour, so behaviour that looks 'insecure' in one culture (e.g. Japanese infants' high distress at separation, because they are rarely separated from their mothers) may not mean the same thing, so the tool may not be valid across cultures. Cross-cultural samples are also often small and unrepresentative of whole nations.

Cultural variations in attachment type

Fig. 5Secure attachment is the majority type everywhere; avoidant is relatively higher in Germany, resistant relatively higher in Japan (illustrative figures from van IJzendoorn and Kroonenberg).

Worked example

Reasoning about cross-cultural data

A meta-analysis finds that variation in attachment type within a country is about 1.5 times greater than the variation between countries. What does this suggest, and what caution is needed?

Interpret the comparison
Greater within-country than between-country variation means the differences among sub-groups inside one nation exceed the average difference between nations.
Draw an inference
This warns against treating a single small sample as representative of a whole 'culture', since one country is not uniform.
State the caution
Cross-cultural conclusions should not over-generalise; sub-cultural factors (e.g. social class, child-rearing practices) may matter more than nationality, and small unrepresentative samples limit validity.

Result: The finding cautions against national stereotypes: within-culture variation is large, so samples must not be taken as representative of an entire country.

Typical mistakes

Confusing avoidant and resistant - avoidant infants ignore the caregiver at reunion; resistant infants seek yet resist contact.
Saying secure attachment is not universal - it was the majority type in every culture in the meta-analysis.

Active revision

An infant explores little, is very distressed when the caregiver leaves, and at reunion reaches for but pushes the caregiver away. Identify the attachment type and justify your choice.

Active recall

Recall the key points — then reveal.

Sources: GCE AS and A level subject content for psychology (Department for Education) · AQA A-level Psychology 7182 specification (AQA)

Maternal deprivation and institutionalisation#

StandardAQA 7182 3.1.3DfE GCE Psychology - deprivation and institutionalisation

Deprivation and its possible effects

Fig. 6Bowlby's maternal-deprivation hypothesis: prolonged early separation can lead to intellectual and emotional harm.

Bowlby's theory of maternal deprivation (1951) argues that a child needs a continuous, warm relationship with a primary attachment figure, and that prolonged separation from that figure during the critical period (the first two and a half years) can cause serious and often irreversible harm to emotional and intellectual development. Bowlby distinguished deprivation (the loss of an attachment that was formed) from privation (never forming an attachment at all). He believed the consequences could include a lower IQ and, most strikingly, affectionless psychopathy - the inability to feel guilt or strong emotion for others, which prevents normal relationships.

Bowlby's own '44 thieves' study (1944) provided his evidence: he found that a large proportion of a group of juvenile thieves who showed affectionless psychopathy had experienced prolonged early separation from their mothers, whereas this was rare in a control group. Evaluation notes serious weaknesses: Bowlby carried out the diagnoses and interviews himself (investigator bias), the study is correlational so cannot prove that separation caused the affectionless psychopathy, and later work distinguished deprivation from privation more carefully, suggesting Bowlby confused the two and overstated how irreversible the effects are.

The effects of institutionalisation - being raised in an institution such as an orphanage with little individual care - were studied in the Romanian orphan studies after the fall of the Ceausescu regime left thousands of children in poor institutions. Rutter's longitudinal English and Romanian Adoptee study followed Romanian orphans adopted into British families and compared them with British adoptees. Children adopted before six months showed near-normal development, but those adopted later showed lasting effects, including disinhibited attachment (over-friendly, attention-seeking behaviour towards all adults) and, for some, lower IQ - and the later the adoption, the worse the outcomes.

These studies show the effects of institutionalisation include disinhibited attachment, difficulties forming relationships and intellectual under-functioning, and support the idea of a sensitive period for recovery: the earlier a child leaves the institution for good-quality care, the better. Real-world application has been significant, improving how children's homes and adoption are run (favouring early placement and a key worker). The natural-experiment design has good ecological validity, but confounding variables are hard to rule out (the Romanian institutions were exceptionally poor, so the findings may not generalise to all institutional care), and there are ethical issues in following a vulnerable group.

Worked example

Interpreting the adoption-age pattern

In a study, orphans adopted before 6 months had a mean IQ near 100, while those adopted after 2 years had a markedly lower mean IQ. Explain the pattern using attachment theory and note one confound.

Describe the pattern
Earlier adoption is associated with higher later IQ; later adoption with lower IQ and more disinhibited attachment.
Explain with a sensitive period
Leaving the institution earlier allows an attachment to form within the sensitive period, supporting normal emotional and intellectual development.
Note a confound
The design is a natural experiment, so the very poor quality of the specific institutions (not just the length of time) may have contributed, limiting how far the findings generalise.

Result: Earlier placement allows attachment within the sensitive period, aiding recovery, though institutional quality is a confounding variable.

Typical mistakes

Using 'deprivation' and 'privation' interchangeably - deprivation is losing a formed attachment; privation is never forming one.
Treating the 44 thieves study as proving causation - it is correlational and open to investigator bias.

Active revision

Explain why the age at which a Romanian orphan was adopted predicted their later development.

Active recall

Recall the key points — then reveal.

Sources: GCE AS and A level subject content for psychology (Department for Education) · AQA A-level Psychology 7182 specification (AQA)

The influence of early attachment on later relationships#

AdvancedAQA 7182 3.1.3DfE GCE Psychology - the influence of early attachment

The internal working model and continuity

Fig. 7The first attachment builds an internal working model that shapes expectations across the lifespan (a probabilistic, not fixed, influence).

Bowlby proposed that the first attachment creates an internal working model - a mental representation, or template, of relationships based on the child's experience of their primary caregiver. This model shapes what the child expects from relationships (whether others are trustworthy and available) and how lovable they see themselves as being, and it is carried forward, influencing childhood friendships, adult romantic relationships and eventually the person's own parenting (the continuity hypothesis).

Evidence for continuity comes from several sources. In childhood, securely attached infants tend to go on to have better-quality friendships and to be less likely to be bullies or victims, whereas insecurely attached children show more difficulty. In adulthood, Hazan and Shaver's (1987) 'love quiz' in a newspaper found that people's attachment type as classified from their childhood experiences was associated with their adult romantic style: securely attached people reported trusting, lasting relationships, avoidant people feared intimacy, and resistant people were preoccupied and anxious in love.

The internal working model also helps explain why relationship patterns can run in families: the way a person was parented shapes their own internal working model, which then influences how they parent their own children, so attachment types can be transmitted across generations. This has practical value in understanding and intervening in cycles of poor attachment.

The influence of early attachment is evaluated carefully. Much of the evidence is correlational: an association between early attachment and later relationships does not prove that the early attachment caused the later pattern, since a third factor (such as an inborn temperament) could influence both. The retrospective self-report methods used in studies like the love quiz are open to social-desirability and memory bias. It is also important not to be too deterministic: an unhappy early attachment does not doom a person to poor relationships, because later experiences can revise the internal working model - so the relationship is probabilistic, not fixed.

Worked example

Evaluating a correlational claim

A study reports a positive correlation between secure infant attachment and adult relationship satisfaction. Explain why this does not prove that secure attachment causes satisfying adult relationships.

State the limitation of correlation
A correlation shows the two variables tend to occur together but does not establish the direction or the cause of the relationship.
Offer a third-variable account
An inborn, stable temperament could make a child easy to attach to AND make them a rewarding adult partner, producing the correlation without early attachment causing the adult outcome.
Avoid determinism
Because later experiences can revise the internal working model, the link is probabilistic; a secure infancy raises the likelihood of, but does not guarantee, satisfying adult relationships.

Result: The correlation is consistent with, but does not prove, a causal effect of early attachment; temperament is a plausible third variable.

Typical mistakes

Presenting early attachment as fully determining later relationships - later experience can revise the internal working model.
Treating the love-quiz correlation as proof of causation, ignoring temperament as a third variable.

Active revision

Discuss the claim that early attachment type determines the quality of adult romantic relationships.

Active recall

Recall the key points — then reveal.

Sources: GCE AS and A level subject content for psychology (Department for Education) · AQA A-level Psychology 7182 specification (AQA)

References & sources

Sources

Department for Education

GCE AS and A level subject content for psychology

AQA

AQA A-level Psychology 7182 specification

Attachment

6 sections~21 min reading time3 competenciesLevel Foundation 1 · Standard 2 · Advanced 3

Attachment

Key points

Identifying the stage of attachment

Key points

Using Harlow to evaluate learning theory

Key points

Mapping classical conditioning onto attachment

Key points

Reasoning about cross-cultural data

Key points

Interpreting the adoption-age pattern

Key points

Evaluating a correlational claim

Sources

Attachment

Key points

Identifying the stage of attachment

Key points

Using Harlow to evaluate learning theory

Key points

Mapping classical conditioning onto attachment

Key points

Reasoning about cross-cultural data

Key points

Interpreting the adoption-age pattern

Key points

Evaluating a correlational claim

Sources