Attachment: An enduring emotional tie that unites one person to another, over time and across space (Ainsworth, Blehar, Waters,

1

• Attachment An enduring emotional tie that
  unites one person to another, over time and
  across space (Ainsworth, Blehar, Waters, Wall,
  1978)

2

• Attachment Behaviors
• Behaviors that function to bring the infant/child
  physically closer to the caregiver
• Exs crying, smiling, clinging, following

3

• Evidence (Ethological Attachment Theory)
• Animals that stray from a group are much more
  vulnerable to attack
• Attachment behavior in animals and humans
• Occurs more frequently in those most vulnerable
  to predators (e.g., the young)
• Increases in frightening situations

4

• Individual Differences in Attachment Security
• Infancy Strange Situation
• Mother and infant in laboratory playroom
• Stranger enters, talks to mothers, engages infant
• Mother leaves (stranger stays)
• Mother returns (stranger leaves)
• Mother leaves (baby alone)
• Stranger returns
• Mother returns

5

• Secure (B)
• About 60-65 of American middle-class samples
• May or may not be distressed by separation
• Respond positively to parents return
• If distressed by separation, easily comforted by
  parent and able to return to play (parent
  secure base)

6

• Insecure-Avoidant (A)
• 15-20 of American middle-class samples
• Usually not distressed by separation from parent
• Avoid the parent during reunion (to different
  degrees)

7

• Insecure-Resistant or Ambivalent (C)
• 10-15 of American middle-class samples
• Usually distressed by separation
• Show a combination of angry, resistant behavior
  and proximity-seeking behavior during reunion
  with parent
• Have difficulty being comforted by parent and
  returning to play

8

• Insecure-Disorganized (D)
• 10-15 of American middle-class samples
• More common in infants who have been maltreated
• Infants behavior does not reflect an organized
  strategy for dealing with the stress of
  separation
• Contradictory behaviors
• Expressions of fear or disorientation when
  caregiver returns

9

• Influences on Infant Attachment Security
• According to attachment theory, the major
  influence is parental behavior (especially
  sensitivity)
• Sensitivity Consistent, prompt, and appropriate
  responses to infant signals

10

• Infants develop expectations about how caregivers
  are likely to respond to their signals
• Expectations form the basis of an internal
  working model
• IWM Expectations about the nature of
  relationships and beliefs about the self

11

• Expectations result from the quality of
  mother-infant interaction
• Sensitive Care Infants expect caregiver to be
  available and responsive
• Insensitive Care Infants expect caregiver to be
  unresponsive/inconsistent or rejecting

12

• Infants behavior in the Strange Situation
  reflects their expectations (early IWM)
• Secure infants expect caregiver to be responsive
• Insecure infants expect caregiver to be
  unresponsive/inconsistent or rejecting

13

• Evidence for Parental Behavior as the Major
  Influence on Infant Attachment Security
• Parental sensitivity is correlated with infant
  attachment security, but the correlation is not
  strong
• Disagreement about the importance of parental
  sensitivity in influencing attachment security
• Other factors also affect attachment security

14

• Temperament and Attachment Security
• Some studies find that insecure infants are
  higher in distress during the first year of life
• Difficult to know if this reflects temperament or
  parental behavior
• In general, temperament is not strongly related
  to attachment security

15

• Attachment and Later Development
• A secure attachment in infancy is related to
• More positive interactions with parents in the
  second year of life
• More positive relationships with others (e.g.,
  day care teachers, peers) when children are
  toddlers and preschoolers

16

• Infant attachment security is not strongly
  related to the quality of older childrens
  relationships (in most studies)
• Debate about how strongly infant attachment
  security relates to later social development

17

• Why does infant attachment security predict later
  behavior (at least short-term)?

18

• Attachment Theory Perspective
• Attachment security reflects infants internal
  working models

19

• IWM generalizes to new relationships
• Children with secure attachments
• Expect others to respond positively to them
• Children with insecure attachments
• Expect others to respond negatively to them
  (e.g., by ignoring or rejecting them)

20

• IWMs tend to be self-perpetuating
• Children behave in ways that elicit certain
  responses from others
• Others responses confirm childrens internal
  working models

21

• Continuity of Care Perspective
• Parents who are sensitive in infancy are likely
  to remain sensitive as children grow older
• Sensitivity is related to secure attachment in
  infancy and to more positive adjustment as
  children get older

22

• Secure attachment in infancy does not CAUSE more
  positive later adjustment (no IWM)

23

• Relevant Evidence
• Most evidence indicates that infant attachment
  classifications do not predict later behavior if
  quality of caregiving does not remain stable

24

• Parent-Child Relationships After Infancy
• Baumrinds Parenting Styles
• Parental behavior varies along at least two
  dimensions
• Sensitivity/Acceptance
• Control (Demandingness)

25

• Authoritarian
• High control
• Low acceptance/responsiveness
• Power-assertive discipline
• Ex Do it because I say so
• More likely to use physical punishment

26

• Authoritative
• High acceptance/responsiveness
• Moderate control
• Set clear standards and consistently enforce
  rules
• Responsive to childrens needs and point of view

27

• Discipline based on reasoning/explanation and
  less power-assertive punishment (e.g., time
  out, loss of privileges)
• Its not ok to hit people because it hurts
  them.

28

• Permissive
• High acceptance/responsiveness
• Low control
• Make few demands for mature behavior

29

• Neglecting/Disengaged
• Low acceptance/responsiveness
• Low control
• Parents often overwhelmed by stress have little
  time/energy for children

30

• Authoritarian
• Childhood
• Anxious
• Unhappy
• Dependent/Easily Frustrated (esp. girls)
• Hostile/Aggressive (esp. boys)

31

• Authoritarian
• Adolescence
• Poorer social skills and lower academic
  achievement than children of authoritative
  parents
• Better school performance and less problem
  behavior (e.g., drug use, truancy) than children
  of permissive or neglecting parents

32

• Authoritative
• Childhood
• High self-esteem
• High self-control
• Generally positive mood

33

• Authoritative
• Adolescence
• Good social skills
• High academic achievement
• Low in problem behaviors (e.g., drug use, truancy)

34

• Permissive
• Childhood
• Low self-control
• Overly demanding and dependent on adults

35

• Permissive
• Adolescence
• Low academic achievement
• More problem behaviors (e.g., truancy drug use)

36

• Neglecting/Disengaged
• Childhood
• Low self-control
• Low self-esteem
• Disturbed attachment relationships (disorganized)

37

• Neglecting/Disengaged
• Adolescence
• Low academic achievement
• Poor social skills
• Many problem behaviors
• Truancy, drug use, delinquency, sexual
  promiscuity, depression

38

• Issues Related to Parenting Research
• Bidirectional Influences
• How do childrens characteristics and behavior
  affect parenting style?
• General agreement that socialization processes
  are bidirectional rather than unidirectional
• Parental behavior influences childrens behavior,
  but childrens behavior also affects parental
  behavior

39

• Example
• Infants and children with difficult temperament
  characteristics receive less optimal parenting
  under some conditions
• Less optimal parenting may increase childrens
  problem behaviors

40

• Correlation vs. Causation
• Most research on parenting styles is
  correlational
• Cant randomly assign kids to different kinds of
  parents
• Therefore, cant infer cause-and-effect
  relationships
• Cant say that parenting style CAUSES childrens
  behavior (positive or negative)

41

• However, some research has examined experimental
  parenting interventions
• Designed to improve parenting behavior
• Use random assignmentsome families receive the
  intervention and others do not
• Can infer cause-and-effect relationships

42

• Experimental parenting interventions have shown
  improvements in parenting behavior and
  improvements in childrens adjustment

43

• Parenting styles (and their effects) may not
  generalize to all ethnic/cultural groups
• Example
• Chinese parents more likely to be classified as
  authoritarian (high control)
• Authoritative parenting and authoritarian
  parenting show equally positive relations with
  childrens adjustment (for 1st generation
  Chinese-American children)