1
WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW…
Early Social Development
 Attachment
1. Explanations of Attachment
- Learning theory and Evolutionary theory
2. Types of Attachment
- Secure, insecure-avoidant and insecure-resistant
3. Use of the “Strange Situation” in attachment research
4. Cultural variations in attachment
5. The effects of disruption of attachment
- Deprivation and Privation
- Effect of institutional care
 Attachment in Everyday life:
1. Impact of Day Care
- Social development, aggression and peer relations.
2. How research into day care has influenced child care practises
2
Explanations of attachment
Attachment: is an emotional relationship between two people, in which each seeks closeness and feels more
secure when in the presence of the attachment figure.
You need to know two explanations of attachment
Learning theory
Bowlby’s theory
(attachment is learned)
(attachment is innate)
Learning Theory
A view put forward by the BEHAVIOURISTS.
Suggests attachments are formed through conditioning
CLASSICAL CONDITIONING
………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………...
……………………………………………………………………………………………….
……………………………………………………………………………………………….
……………………………………………………………………………………………….
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………...........
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………...
OPERANT CONDITIONING
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
3
Evaluation of learning theory:
Schaffer and Emmerson (1964) studied babies in Glasgow and found that
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
This criticises learning theory because…
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Harlow (1959) used Rhesus monkeys to test the
learning theory. The newborn monkeys were
immediately separated from their mother and
placed in a cage with 2 wire ‘mothers’. One had a
feeding bottle attached to it; the other was
wrapped in a soft cloth but offered no food.
According to learning theory, which ‘mother’
should the infant form an attachment to? Why?
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
However, this is not what Harlow found. The monkey’s spent most of
their time with the soft ‘mother’, and would cling to it especially when
they were frightened. In fact the monkeys would frequently reach over
to the wire monkey only to get food while still clinging to the soft
mother. This strongly suggests that the providing of food is not likely to
be an explanation for attachment.
BUT can you think of any problems with Harlow’s research?
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
4
Lorenz (1952) suggests that newborns ‘imprint’ an image of
their parents within hours of being born. This then allows
them to stick closely to this important source of protection
and food. This criticises learning theory and suggests that
attachment is innate because the infants are far too young
to have learned anything at this stage.
There is substantial evidence that we do learn through
association, however, food may not be the main reinforcer
(as suggested by learning theory). Attention and responsiveness from a caregiver are also
rewarding.
Bowlby’s Evolutionary Theory
Bowlby’s theory is largely rooted in evolutionary theory. He proposed that infants become
attached to a caregiver because attachment is adaptive. This means that it is good for their
reproductive success. Infants who do not become attached are less likely to survive and
reproduce. Therefore those with the ‘attachment’ gene are more likely to pass it on and as a
result infants are born with an innate drive to form an attachment to a caregiver. This means
that the infant is more likely to be well cared for when young and defenceless.
Innate programming
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
A critical period
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
The continuity hypothesis
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
5
Monotropy
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Evaluation of Bowlby’s theory:
Bowlby’s theory has had an enormous influence, in terms of practical applications and the
vast amount of subsequent research that has been generated.
There is evidence that infants learn an attachment template (as suggested by Bowlby –
continuity hypothesis) which is then echoed in their later relationships. What did Hazen and
Shaver (1987) find?
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Schaffer and Emmerson found that infants had multiple attachments rather than a single
attachment. What part of Bowlby’s theory does this go against?
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Rutter et al (1998) looked at abandoned orphans raised in institutions before being
adopted. They still managed to form attachments and develop as healthy individuals.
Does a critical period therefore exist?
6
Homework 1:
1. What is meant by the term attachment? [2 marks]
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
2. Outline the learning explanation of attachment [4 marks}
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
3. Evaluate Bowlby’s theory of attachment [6 marks]
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
7
Types of attachment and use of the ‘Strange Situation’
Complete the following storyboard by correctly illustrating each episode of Ainsworth’s
Strange Situation.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
How would each of the following children describe their behaviour? What percentage of
infants in Ainsworth’s study were each of these attachment types?
Secure
Insecure-avoidant
Insecure-resistant
8
Which three behaviours were measured in the Strange Situation?
1.
2.
3.
STRENGTHS
WEAKNESSES
9
CULTURAL VARIATIONS IN ATTACHMENT
Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg (1988)
Carried out a meta-analysis by summarising the results of 32
studies taken in 8 different countries which replicated the
strange situation.
Country
No. of Studies
Percentage of each attachment type
Secure
Avoidant
Resistant
West Germany
Great Britain
Netherlands
Sweden
Israel
Japan
China
USA
Overall Mean
What do the results show?
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Takahashi (1990)
Aim:
To test whether the strange situation is a valid procedure for cultures other
than American middle class, white children and their mothers
Procedure:
60 middle class Japanese mothers and their children were observed in the
Strange Situation. All the families were middle class and raised at home.
Results:
Securely attached = 68%
Avoidant-insecure = 0%
Resistant-insecure = 32%
However, Japanese children were very distressed when left alone. In 90%
of the cases the 'child alone' stage was removed as the children were very
10
distressed. If this had not happened it is suggested that even more children
may have been class as securely attached.
Conclusions:
Evaluating Cross-cultural research
 Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg (1988) study – sample size?
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
 Ethical issues?
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
 Can the strange situation (developed for use in the USA) be generalised to other
countries? (ethnocentrism)
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
11
Homework 2:
1. Outline the method used in Ainsworth’s strange situation [4 marks]
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
2. Explain how the behaviour of a child showing insecure-avoidant attachment type
would differ from the behaviour of a child showing insecure-resistant attachment
type [4 marks]
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
3. Outline one strength and one limitation of the strange situation as a measure of
attachment type [4 marks]
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
12
4. Outline one piece of research which investigates cultural variations in attachment
types [4 marks]
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
5. Why must we be careful when interpreting attachment research from other
cultures? [3 marks]
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
13
DISRUPTION OF ATTACHMENT
Ainsworth’s strange situation test illustrates the distress experienced by infants when
physically separated from their primary caregiver. The Robertsons (1967-1973) made some
landmark films of ‘children in brief separation’. One of the children filmed was ‘John’, a 17month-old who was cared for in a residential nursery while his mother was in hospital.
Over the course of 9 days John went from a happy well-adjusted child to a child so distressed
by the experience that upon reunion with his rejection of her was clear:
‘A few minutes later his father entered the room and John struggled away from his mother
into his father’s arms. His crying stopped, and for the first time he looked directly at his
mother. It was a long hard look, one she had never seen before’. (Robertson and Robertson,
1989)
INSTITUTIONAL CARE – Refers to situations where children spend part of their childhood
in hospital, an orphanage or a residential children’s home.
Deprivation
Deprivation means the loss of care that is normally provided by a primary caregiver.
Bowlby’s Maternal Deprivation Hypothesis (MDH)
Bowlby believed that continuous emotional care between a child
and its mother was as important for development as physical
care. Bowlby believed that if a separation occurs (bond
disruption) between mother and infant within the first few years
of the child’s life, then the bond would be irreversibly broken,
leading to severe emotional consequences for the infant later in
life. Bowlby believed that the continuous emotional care must
occur during a ‘critical period’. If separation (maternal deprivation) occurs during this critical
period (before the age of 2 ½ ), then there would be permanent consequences for the child.
The consequences include aggressiveness, depression, delinquency, dwarfism, affectionless
psychopathy. The child may also suffer intellectual and social maladjustment.
14
Key study – The effects of maternal deprivation: The 44 thieves - Bowlby (1944)
Aim:
To test the Maternal Deprivation Hypothesis (MDH). Bowlby used 44 child
thieves, from the child guidance clinic where he worked, who lacked
normal signs of affection, shame and sense of responsibility and compared
them to another group of children (not thieves). He aimed to find out
whether the thieves experienced more deprivation during their childhood.
Procedure:
44 child thieves were used, 14 of which were diagnosed as ‘affectionless
psychopaths’ (someone who lacks emotional sensitivity). A further 44
children acted as a ‘control group’, they were not thieves but had
experienced emotional problems. The children and their parents were
interviewed about their early life experiences with special attention paid
to early separations.
Results:
86% of the ‘affectionless psychopath’ thieves had experienced frequent
early separations from their mothers
17% of the other thieves
4% of the non-thieves
These early separations often consisted of continual or repeated stays in
foster homes or hospitals, when the children were often not visited by
their families.
Conclusions:
Evaluation points:
 The evidence is correlational
 Data collected retrospectively
15
Evaluation of the Maternal Deprivation Hypothesis:
Can we be sure from the studies that it’s only MATERNAL deprivation
which affects subsequent development – i.e. what about physical
deprivation?
Deprivation doesn’t always lead to maladjustment – i.e. Robertson and
Robertson (1971) – arranged for children to visit their mothers in
hospital and cared for children in foster home – avoided separation
affects
Practical applications – change in hospital practices – visiting hours
changed, nurses shifts redesigned so that they had regular contact
with the same children
Privation
Privation is the lack of ever having had/formed any attachments
Key study – The effects of Privation: Hodges and Tizard (1989)
Aim:
The aim of the study was to look at the long term effects that privation had
on children. The researchers wanted to investigate whether a complete
lack of emotional care had permanent and irreversible effects on a child’s
emotional and social development.
Procedure:
The study focused on 65 children who had been institutionalised before
they were 4 months old (before they had formed any attachments). The
institution had a policy that no ‘caretakers’ were to form attachments with
the children (a high turnover of staff also ensured this). By the age of 4, 24
of the children had been adopted, 15 had returned to their natural homes
(restored) and the rest remained in the institution.
16
The children were assessed at the ages of 4, 8 and 16 by means of
interviews with the children, their parents and teachers regarding their
attitudes and behaviour. This was compared with a control group of
children who were raised in a ‘normal’ home environment.
Results:
At 4 years of age none of the institutionalized children had formed
attachments, but by 8 years of age those who were adopted had formed
good attachments. Also their social and intellectual development was
better than that of children returned to their own families.
All those children who had spent their early years in institutions were more
attention-seeking from adults and showed some difficulties in their social
relationships, particularly with their peers.
Some of these children were interviewed again at 16 years of age, as were
their parents and care-workers. They were compared with a new control
group as the original control children no longer matched the children in
the adopted and restored groups.
Hodges and Tizard found that the adopted children still had good
attachments which compared favorably with the control children. Fewer
restored children were reported as having good attachments but the
children who had been brought up in institutional care had experienced
most instability and showed some difficulties in their later attachments.
Conclusions:
Attrition: Due to the study being longitudinal, there was a reduction
in the sample numbers at each assessment. This results in a biased
sample because those that drop out are likely to be a particular type
of person (e.g. it may be that the more ‘troubled’ children drop out).
Biased Groups: Furthermore, it may be that those who were
adopted were less ‘troubled’, (parents select which child to adopt
and they are likely to select those who are easy to get on with). It
may therefore be because of the type of children in the ‘adopted’
group, that they were able to form close attachments with their
parents.
17
Natural Experiment: The IV was the place in which the child was
brought up from age 4 onwards. This was not fully controlled by the
researchers which is why the biased groups may have occurred.
Rutter et al (2007) followed a group of Romanian orphans, who had spent their early years
in conditions of extreme physical and emotional privation. They assessed them at ages 4,
6, and 11 and found that…..
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Case studies:
Genie
The Czech Twins
BUT these are case studies – what evaluative points can be made?



18
Homework 3:
1. Explain the difference between privation and deprivation. Use examples to help
you. [4 marks]
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
2. Outline one study which investigates the effect of institutionalisation. [4 marks]
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
3. Describe two evaluative points of this study [4 marks]
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
19
4. Outline Bowlby’s maternal deprivation hypothesis [3 marks]
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
5. Evaluate the maternal deprivation hypothesis [4 marks]
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
20
ATTACHMENT IN EVERYDAY LIFE
Effects of Day Care on Social Development
Day Care - Regular form of childcare that takes place during the day whilst parents/carers
are engaged in activity that prevents them looking after their children (e.g. nurseries,
playgroups, child-minders).
Social Development – The growth of a child’s abilities to interact with others and behave
appropriately – i.e. helping and sharing.
Why might day care encourage greater social development?
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Why might day care negatively impact on social development?
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Belsky and Rovine (1988) used the strange situation and found that children
who spent more than 20 hours per week in day care were more insecurely
attached than home-cared children.
But….
The High/Scope Perry Pre-school Project (Schweinhart et al, 1993)
Aim:
Procedure:
Results:
21
Conclusions:
Effects of Day Care on Aggression
The Effective Provision of Pre-school Education (EPPE)
(Sylva et al, 2003)
Studied 3000 children from 141 different pre-school centres.
Children were assessed at 3-4 years old and again at entry to primary school.
Found that….
But also that high levels of group care before the age of 3 was associated with higher levels
of aggression.
The National Institute for Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) - 1991
Examined the behaviour of over 1000 American children, aged 4 ½ years old, from families
with very different backgrounds. They found that the more time children spent in day care
(specifically over 10 hours a week) the greater the number of problems with their conduct –
i.e. disobedience and aggression by the time they reached kindergarten.
HOWEVER….
Shea (1981) observed children aged 3-4 years who attended pre-school
for 2, 3 or 5 days a week. Over a 10 week period, aggression decreased in
all three groups. The children who attended day care for 5 days a week
showed a quicker reduction in aggression than those who only attended
day care 2 days a week.
22
Effects of Day Care on Peer relations
The Effective Provision of Pre-school Education (EPPE)
Attending a pre-school institution was associated with….
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Field (1991) examined the amount of time children spent in day care and the quality of the
day care they received. She found that…
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
BUT…
Pennebaker et al (1981) found that shy or unsociable children find the nursery experience
threatening, which can actually have a negative effect on their later relationships with others.
Evaluation of day care research
STRENGTHS
WEAKNESSES
23
Write a short article for The Sun newspaper outlining the negative effects of day-care on
aggression and peer relations, and a contrasting one for The Times, outlining the benefits
of day-care on social development.
DAY CARE HARMS KIDS!
Research finds day care
may be beneficial to
social development
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………...…
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………..…
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………..
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………..……………
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
…………………………………………………………………………
ARMS KIDS!
24
HOW RESEARCH INTO DAYCARE HAS INFLUENCED CHILDCARE PRACTICES
High Quality Day care:
-
Low caregiver to child ratio/ use of keyworkers -
-
Low staff turnover -
-
Appropriate training of staff -
Attachment research:
Hospital Admissions
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Adoption
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
Day-care research:
Sure Start
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
EPPE Project
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
25
Homework 4:
1. Outline one research study into the effects of day care on peer relations. [4 marks]
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
2. Discuss research investigating the effect of day care on aggression [5 marks]
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
3. Provide one strength and one limitation of day care research [4 marks]
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
26
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
4. Describe how child care practises have been influenced by attachment research [4
marks]
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
27
Potential 12-mark questions:

Outline and evaluate the evolutionary explanation of attachment

Outline and evaluate the learning explanation of attachment

Outline and evaluate research into cultural variations in attachment

Outline and evaluate research into the effects of failure to form attachments
(privation)

Discuss research into the effects of day care on children’s social development,
aggression and peer relations.

Outline and evaluate Ainsworth’s Strange Situation as a measure of attachment type

Discuss research into the effects of deprivation
28