Relational Development
How critical is it to form a deep attachment to a caregiver for an infant? An adult?
Bowlby’s 1960 observation of hospitalized toddlers
• 15 – 30 mo.old toddlers were separated from mothers for long periods
• They went through 3 stages emotionally:
– Protest- crying for mom to return
– Despair- apathetic & unresponsive
– Detachment- indifferent to mom when she returned
– Permanent withdrawal from relationships- occurs if separation is
prolonged or there is a series of interruptions. Child loses interest in any
human contact
Attachment: a close relationship between 2 people, with affection & desire to maintain
proximity
• Reciprocal- both members feel comforted by the other’s presence
• Neonates- parents are preparing to bond during gestation, anticipating pleasure
with this child
• Emotional bonding- strong affectional tie felt toward infant, particularly
developed during the sensitive period after birth
– Close physical contact after birth enables bonding
– Interruption of contact can affect bonding
Interactional synchrony and Attachment
Synchronized routines contribute to attachment
Both partners adjust their behavior in response to the other’s behavior
Babies begin gazing at mom’s faces between 4 and 9 weeks
If she responds to the gaze with a smile, baby often responds with a smile
“Still face” experiments show distress in baby when expectations are
violated by mom’s nonresponse
Interactional synchrony develops most if caregiver attends closely to baby’s state &
responds to baby’s alert state, and allows for downtime when baby is overstimulated
or distressed
This also gives baby a sense of some control over his environment- Control lets
all of us feel more safe and secure. If there is not a sense of respect for one’s needs- even
by a baby- the baby will try harder to exert control and an oppositional relationship can
develop. The better the caregiver is at reading the baby’s signs and responding
appropriately to them, the more relaxed the baby can become.
Development of Attachment
Phases of attachment (Schaffer & Emerson, 1964)
Asocial- (B – 6 wks) babies respond to all sorts of stimuli with interest, with little
protest
Indiscriminate attachments- (6 wks to 7 mo.) infants show preference for social
stimulation & protest when an adult tries to put them down. They show soothing by the
regular caregiver, but enjoy attention from most people
Specific attachment phase- (7 – 9 mo.) infants show attachment to a particular
person- usually mother. They protest when separated from her, try to crawl to her, &
greet her happily when she returns. They seem skeptical of strangers. Secure attachment
represents a secure base for exploring the world.
Multiple attachments phase- (from 9 mo.) baby begins forming close
attachments to others, broadening their comfort base. There is a hierarchy of attachments
& different people represent different functions for baby (Daddy is better for playing,
Mom for feeding, sleeping, sense of safety)
Theories of Attachment
Psychoanalytic Theory: I love you because you feed me
Freud: Infants are in the oral phase and will get maximum pleasure from sucking,
so anyone who provides that satisfaction will become the attachment object.
Erikson: Satisfaction & bonding is due more to mother’s overall responsiveness,
not just feeding. A consistent & effective responder will engender trust in baby:
inconsistent or incompetent responsiveness breeds mistrust
Learning Theory: Reward leads to love
Baby will attach to anyone who gratifies his/her needs- feeding is one way, but
it also associates with smiles & interactions that are satisfying. The caregiver then
becomes a secondary reinforcer- associated with comfort.
Harlow’s surrogate monkey mother study- baby monkeys separated from
mothers are provided a cloth surrogate or a wire one fitted with a bottle for feeding. In
spite of the feeding, babies ran to cloth mother when afraid- contact comfort is more
powerful an influence on attachment than feeding, reducing hunger. So reinforcement is a
complex influence & is probably mostly about overall satisfaction of all needs. Two
aspects of mom’s behavior that are most important: her responsiveness to infant behavior
and total amount of stimulation she provided. Playing is important…
Cognitive-Developmental Theory: To love you, I must know you will be there
Babies must be able to discriminate a person to attach- this implies object
permanence is essential for bonding- I must have enough memory to realize you’re gone
when you are out of sight. (7 – 9 mo. During 4th sensorimotor substage)
Bowlby’s Ethological Theory: Perhaps I was born to relate and love
Attachment is essential for survival- without a strong bond, babies will not
thrive and parents won’t make an effort to keep them alive. It’s protective.
Lorenz’s Imprinting experiments- Imprinting is the instinctual form of
attachment of animals to moving objects- usually the mother. It is automatic, limited in
timing, & permanent. So it’s an inborn adaptation to keep babies from wandering into
danger.
Attachment in humans- babies natural characteristics tend to elicit attention
from adults: Kewpie doll effect. Infants look attractive to adults & elicit a certain
protectiveness & desire to nurture. The sounds & behaviors, smiles, etc. also elicit
interest in adults. “Big smiles” signal baby’s interest in interacting with adults & are
reinforcing to adults- “I made her happy.” Unfortunately some adults don’t respond
appropriately, and when a baby can’t get a response, he may give up trying. We learn
how to respond to others by how others responded to us…
How can parents ease the pain of separation?
Offer an explanation for the separation
Give baby some reminder of home (lovey, blanket, favorite toy)
Find a sensitive substitute caregiver (one who knows how to play/distract
baby)
Criticisms of the Strange Room assessment
Bronfenbrenner believes the very strangeness of the condition exacerbates the
baby’s reactions. Not very useful for older babies who have adapted to separations. Other
methods of assessment may be more useful: Attachment Q-set (AQS) (based on
observations of child’s behaviors at home up to preschool age) & Adult Attachment
Interview (AAI) (clinical interview re: memories of childhood relationships with
parents)
Cultural differences
Germany stresses independence, discouraging clinginess, so babies show a more
avoidant style
Japan discourages parents from leaving babies with others, so babies develop a more
resistant style, with greater separation & stranger anxieties. Japanese mothers have more
close contact with babies, trying to anticipate their needs, rather than waiting for them to
express unhappiness. They prefer to develop Amae- baby’s total dependence on the
mother, with a certain parental indulgence. What looks to us like a resistant style, to
Japanese parents it seems adaptive in producing a healthy communal approach to others.
Japanese children learn to be interdependent, cooperative, & willing to work toward
group goals.
Western families emphasize babies developing independence & willingness to explore
on one’s own toward individual goals with protective caregivers overseeing this.
Israel kibbutz culture raises babies in communal infant houses with a variety of
caregivers & parents not available at night
So different patterns of caregiving produce variations in attachment styles. But most
babies in most countries develop secure attachments.
So what produces attachment security?
Quality of caregiving – caregiving hypothesis – how one has been cared for determines
what level of attachment security is developed. Securely attached babies were treated
with sensitivity, positive affect, synchrony, mutual interactions, warmth & support, and
stimulations that are desirable to infant. These mothers are insightful, empathic to baby’s
distress & aware of how to respond best. Resistant babies had parents who were more
inconsistent in caregiving- often moody or unresponsive. So baby ramps up clinginess,
crying, then becoming angry & resentful when his efforts are fruitless. Avoidant babies’
parents show 2 patterns: impatience, unresponsiveness, negativity, & expressing little
enjoyment of baby (these mothers appear rigid, self-centered & rejecting) OR mothers
are excessively stimulating, talking a lot, & demanding baby’s attention even when baby
is showing signs of tiring. These babies’ signals were not appropriately attended to so
they often give up trying. Disorganized/disoriented babies have had enough disturbing
interactions with their caregivers that while they are drawn to the parent, they are also
fearful of what awaits them. There has been an unpredictable pattern of neglect, care, and
abuse that keeps the baby from producing useful expectations & security. This can also
occur if caregiver is depressed, suffering an extreme loss, or displays a disorganized
attachment style herself. She may respond to baby’s distress with laughter, rejection,
causing pain or nonchalance.
Insensitive Caregiver
Clinically depressed, those who were abused or rejected as children themselves,
those who have unrealistic expectations of babies & the parenting experience
(wanting baby to make up for the rejection they felt early in life), those who had
unplanned & unsupported pregnancies to manage (unwanted children whose mother
had requested an abortion but did not get one display more life difficulties than children
who were wanted.) Negative environments (poverty, impaired health of parent,
domestic abuse, parent in prison) compromise baby’s outcome. Unhappy marriages
tend to produce nonsynchronous interactions with baby that can interrupt attachment.
What can be done to improve Caregiver sensitivity & foster attachment?
Visits by social services professionals can encourage moms as well as offer specifics
of more adequate responses
Parenting classes with support from others mothers (outcomes of this intervention
include higher IQ of baby & higher levels of secure attachment)
Poor mothers with irritable babies were taught more effective ways to soothe babies
& engender more positive responses from baby. Mothers were more responsive &
attentive at end of study, and babies were more sociable, exploring, & cried less (van den
Boom, 1994) (63% of tx babies were securely attached vs. 22% of those in control group)
Infant temperament
Kagan (1989) believed baby’s temperament also contributed to attachment style
Thomas and Chess (1977) showed babies’ temperament fell into 3 general styles:
Easy
Difficult
Slow to warm up
Kagan’s Temperament Hypothesis suggests that babies’ own nature determine the
nature of their attachments. Other researchers disagree, saying that babies may securely
attach to their chief caregiver but show resistance to other people. And the van den Boom
study showed a causal connection between improved caregiver sensitivity & baby’s
secure attachment likelihood. Babies’ attachment style is much more related to mother’s
problems than babies’ problems. Twin studies also show that 70% of identical twins
developed the same kind of attachment, & 64% of fraternal twins also develop the same
attachment style. This suggests shared environment has more to do with attachment than
genetics (there wasn’t enough difference between identicals and fraternals)
Kochanska (1998) tried to tease out the relationship between caregiving and infant
temperament and determined that the nature of attachment- secure vs. insecure is
determined by parental responsiveness. But infant temperament determined whether an
insecurely attached baby would be resistant or avoidant. This is based on infant
fearfulness vs. fearlessness. Fearful children are more behaviorally inhibited in novel
situations. Fearless children are more uninhibited. Fearful children were more likely to
develop resistant attachments; fearless children were more likely to show avoidant
attachments. This supports Thomas & Chess’ Goodness of fit model. This suggests that
when an infant is parented by flexible, responsive parents then his/her temperament can
develop a healthy attachment to mom. Sensitive caregiving by nature is responsive to
what the baby needs, regardless of what that is…
Fathers have been discounted as important contributors to baby’s development until the
1970s when they were studied on their own. Fathers become engrossed with their babieslooking for similarities with themselves, wanted to understand their baby’s behavior.
Fathers most show interest and attention to babies when the marriage is happy and when
moms encourage dads to interact and take responsibility for baby. Many moms are
threatened by dads getting involved, fearing they will take the mom’s place somehow. It
may take a bit longer for babies to form an attachment with dad, simply because most
dads are working and not with babies for many hours every day. Dads do interact with
babies slightly differently than moms- playing more unexpected and active games. So
dads may be preferred as a playmate, even though babies tend to want moms when they
are upset. If dads are responsible for caregiving regularly they are skillful at most routine
care.
What does a dad add to a child’s emotional development?
Main & Weston (1981) compared social behavior of children securely attached to
fathers vs. those who were insecurely attached. They found that toddlers exposed to a
clown who played with the toddlers, was told to leave, and cried when he left showed
greatest social responsiveness when they were securely attached to both parents. Secure
attachment to at least one parent also predicted that the child would be more friendly
toward the clown and less conflicted. Recent experiments have also found that children
who are securely attached to both parents are less anxious and socially withdrawn and
they make better adjustments to school. Children who are securely attached to their dads
also have better self-regulation, better social competencies with peers, and show fewer
problem behaviors or delinquency. Even if dad is no longer in the home, the benefits of a
secure attachment aid positive development.
Long-Term Effects of Attachment Style
Securely attached babies are better problem solvers by 2, more creative in symbolic
play, display more positive emotions than negative, & are more attractive as playmates to
other toddlers. Even by preschool these kids were social leaders. They initiated social
activities, showed greater sensitivities to others’ feelings, & were popular with peers.
They were more curious, self-directed, & eager to learn. By 11 – 15 years old, they
showed better social skills, were more likely to have close friends.
Insecurely attached babies were more socially withdrawn, hesitant to join others, less
curious, less interested in learning, less goal directed. They are more likely to engage in
more conflicted emotional discussions with parents rather than being in sync with
parents. They are less willing to take on challenges, less open to facing academic/ social
stresses, more often to have poorer relationships with peers, and more likely to engage in
deviant behavior. Poorer bonds with parents in middle childhood strongly relate to poorer
marital relationships by 25.
Disorganized/ disoriented babies are at higher risk of becoming hostile and aggressive
even by preschool, and more likely to be rejected by peers.
So early quality of relationships set the stage for later attachments in adulthood. And
early bonding in infancy and early childhood often even becomes more secure in later
life.
Attachments as Working Models of Self and Others
Bowlby (1988) suggested that stability of attachment is due to babies developing an
internal working model of themselves and others. This model sets babies up for certain
expectations of relationships and that expectation will become a self-fulfilling prophecy.
The baby will decide others are safe or not, and that she is deserving of love and care- or
not. Belsky et al (1996) also found that attachment style predicts memory. Securely
attached children tend to remember more positive events and insecurely attached babies
tend to remember more negative events. Their internal working model determined what
was most important to remember. It’s easy to see how this could contribute to difficult
relationships with adults as some people focus on the positive aspects of a relationship
and others focus on the negative. This internal working model affects parents as well.
Those who described a negative expectation for their babies (whether the baby would
securely attach or not) were accurate 75% of the time. What you expect to get, you
get…Mothers with more positive working models for babies and parenting provided
more sensitive care and the babies responded well to that. Also these moms show more
joy and happiness related to their children. This can only aid the bonding for both.
Is attachment set in stone?
Caregivers can learn better means of interacting with their babies and enhance their
ability to bond well. And a secure attachment can be interrupted by life stresses for baby
or parents. Later positive interactions with healthy people can override early unfortunate
experiences with bonding. This can be mentors, therapists, lovers, friends. Early positive
bonding can insulate a child to some extent from later stressors, as well. (Pollyanna)
The Unattached Infant
Extreme social deprivation often occurs in unstable cultures where children are
orphaned or extremely abused or neglected. As recently as the 1940s orphanages rarely
held babies, simply propping up bottles to get to all the babies more rapidly. For 3 – 6
months they seemed to develop normally, crying for attention, babbling, cooing when
they thought they would be picked up. But by 6 mo. Old they gave up their vocalizations,
becoming rigid even when picked up. They appear withdrawn and depressed. Many
Romanian children ended up in orphanages after the social upheaval of 1990. These
orphanages were so understaffed that the children got little attention of any kind. They
developed rocking behaviors, withdrawal, indiscriminate reaching out to strangersreactive attachment disorder. This meant they had an inability to form secure
attachments to others, even when they were adopted and got one-on-one care. These
institutionalized children displayed few secure attachments and a great number of
disorganized attachments. Outcomes depended on how long they stayed in the orphanage
before being adopted out. Those who were in the institution 3 years or more had
developmental delays across the board: lower IQ, poorer language skills, more likely to
act out, greater levels of hyperactivity, more socially immature, more dependent on
adults, more likely to be loners as teens who didn’t relate well to anyone. IQ can be
impaired after as little as 6 months in an institution.
Is there a sensitive period for social stimulation?
Maternal deprivation hypothesis suggests that children deprived of a single caregiver
to whom they can bond will develop abnormally in many areas. There are examples of
children raised in institutions in Russia, China and Israel who develop normally. But
these institutions employ sensitive caregivers for the children. And in China they often
raise 2 babies in a bed, so the babies can bond with each other.
Social stimulation hypothesis says this poor development is due to the fact these
children in unresponsive environments are not being responded to when they initiate
social signals. Early non-responsiveness of caregivers tells the baby that her efforts to
signal others are useless – they develop learned helplessness and stop trying to get
attention for their needs. Their behavior becomes more apathetic, withdrawn & passive.
Is there hope for these children?
When they are placed in an affluent and highly educated home and don’t have to stay in
an institution more than 6 months, their chances of developing a secure attachment are
much greater. Asian adoptees coming out of a war torn area who were even
malnourished, once adopted by a responsive family developed even above average IQ
and social maturity.
Children who are left in these unresponsive environments longer than 6 months, however
have a much greater chance of developing reactive attachment disorder. So 6 months may
be a sensitive period for secure attachment. This may be due to insults to the brain from
the lack of social stimulation.
Maternal Employment, Day Care, and Early Emotional Development
Does it make a difference if baby is at home all day or spends some time in day care?
60% of all moms work. 40% of all babies and toddlers are cared for mostly by their
parents, but 21% are cared for also by other relatives, and 4% are at home with a sitter.
14% are in some home day care and 31% are in a large day care center. High quality day
care actually helps sociability and IQ for children from disadvantaged homes. Attachment
security is not affected by attending day care. The one negative effect of early day care is
greater aggressiveness and disobedience during the school years than for children cared
for at home. This was even more evident if the children had mostly been cared for in
large day care centers.
Quality of care makes a big difference in outcome. If the child is in high quality
care, even early attendance does not have a negative impact on development. But US care
is uneven in quality. It is especially difficult to get high quality care for infants. And
children in lower quality day cares are also often dealing with stressful home
environments. So which affects what?
Employment status matters- mom is happier and a better caregiver when she likes her
job- whether it is at home or in the workplace. And it is optimized if mom also has
positive attitudes about parenting. It also helps if her spouse or the child’s father is
supportive of her choices and engages in active parenting himself.
The US only mandated that workplaces accommodate parental needs with the Family and
Medical Leave Act- passed in 1993. This 12 week leave is not mandated to be paid leave,
and it only affects businesses that employ more than 50 people. This is very different
from most of Western Europe. Longer leave times (4 mo. As opposed to 2 mo.) for
parents enable mothers to display more positive affect and behavior toward their babies.
It particularly helped moms who had some issues of depression or were dealing with
irritable babies. Middle class families are the ones most affected by limited leave time
without pay. Good day care is expensive and parents are squeezed in other ways when
considering care for their babies. If we as a society realized the potential benefit to all of
us in caring better for our infants, we could come up with some cost effective solutions to
this problem. So far it’s just not a priority to the majority of voters…