AQA A Level Psychology Topic ESSAYS...Page 4 AQA A LEVEL Psychology topic ESSAYS: ATTACHMENT opyright tutor2u imited / School etwork icense Photocopying Permitted Outline and evaluate

Joseph Sparks & Helen Lakin

AQA A Level Psychology

Topic ESSAYSAttachment

Page 2 AQA A LEVEL Psychology topic ESSAYS: ATTACHMENT

Copyright tutor2u Limited / School Network License / Photocopying Permittedwww.tutor2u.net/psychology

With reference to reciprocity and interactional synchrony, discuss infant–caregiver interactions. (16 marks) Interactionsbetweencaregiversandinfantsprovideaninsightintothetypeandnatureofattachment.Reciprocityiswhenaninfantrespondstotheactionsofanotherbyturntaking.Theactionsoftheprimarycaregiverelicitaresponsefromtheinfant.Theinteractionbetweenbothindividualsflowsbackandforth.Meltzoff&Moore(1977)conductedanobservationalstudywherebyanadultdisplayedfacialexpressionsorahandgesture.Followingthedisplayfromthemodel,adummywasremovedfromthechild’smouthandtheirexpressionsfilmed.Therewasanassociationbetweentheinfants’behaviourandthatoftheadultmodel,showingreciprocity.Interactionalsynchronytakesplacewheninfantsmirrortheactionsoremotionsofanotherperson,e.g.theirfacialexpressions.Thechildwillmovetheirbody,orcarryoutthesameactastheircaregiversimultaneously,andthetwoaresaidtobesynchronised.Thisservestosustaincommunicationbetweenthetwocaregiverandinfant.Onelimitationofresearchintocaregiver–infantinteractionsisthequestionablereliabilityoftestingchildren.Thisisbecauseinfantsmovetheirmouthsandwavetheirarmsconstantly,whichisanissueforresearchersinvestigatingintentionalbehaviour.Therefore,wecannotbecertainthattheinfantswereengagingininteractionalsynchronyorreciprocity,assomeofthebehaviourmayhaveoccurredbychance.Thisquestionsthevalidityofresearchinrelationtoreciprocityandinteractionalsynchronyandsuggeststhatpsychologistsshouldbecautiouswheninterpretingthefindingsfromresearchinthisarea. Therearemethodologicalproblemswithstudyinginteractionalsynchronyusingobservationalmethods.Thereisthepossibilityofobserverbiaswheretheresearchersconsciouslyorunconsciouslyinterpretbehaviourtosupporttheirfindings.Toaddressthisproblem,morethanoneobservershouldbeusedtoexaminetheinter‐observerreliabilityoftheobservations.RecentresearchbyKoepkeetal.(1983)failedtoreplicatethefindingsofMeltzoff&Moorewhichsuggeststhattheirresultsofresearchexamininginfant–caregiverinteractionsareunreliable. AfurthercriticismofMeltzoff&Moore’sresearchisthatrecentresearchhasfoundthatonlysecurelyattachedinfants

Agoodintroductionoutliningkeyspecialistterminologyfromtheonset.Abriefoutlineofrelevantresearchintoreciprocityhighlightsdeeperunderstandingoftheconcept.Bothkeytermsnamedinthequestionhavebeenfullyaddressed.Aninterestingcriticismtobegintheevaluativecommentary.Awell‐elaboratedlimitationofresearchintointeractionalsynchronyasaninfant–caregiverinteraction.Thisevaluationpointisdevelopedwelltoenhancethe

Copyright tutor2u Limited / School Network License / Photocopying Permitted www.tutor2u.net/psychology

AQA A LEVEL Psychology topic ESSAYS: ATTACHMENT Page 3

engageininteractionalsynchrony.Isabellaetal.(1989)foundthatthemoresecurelyattachedtheinfant,thegreaterthelevelofinteractionalsynchrony.ThissuggeststhatnotallchildrenengageininteractionalsynchronyandthatMeltzoff&Moore’soriginalfindingsmayhaveoverlookedindividualdifferenceswhichcouldbeamediatingfactor.Psychologistssuggestthatcaregiver–infantinteractions,suchasreciprocity,arepresentfrombirthandthereforearetheproductofnatureinordertohelpinfantsformandmaintainanattachment.However,suchinnatebehavioursdonotactinisolationandinteractwiththeenvironment(caregivers)topromptaresponse(e.g.attention).Consequently,researchersshouldconsidertheinteractionofinnateinfantbehaviourswiththeenvironment(e.g.theircaregivers)tofullyappreciateandunderstandthecomplexnatureofcaregiver–infantinteractions.[~475words]

discussion.Arelevantreferencetothenature–nurturedebateistiedintotheanswer.

Examinerstylecomments: Markband4Thisisanexcellentresponsetoacomplexquestionwhichdemandstwoconceptstobediscussedinabalancedway.Theanswerprovidesdetailedknowledgeofbothreciprocityandinteractionalsynchrony,whicharehighlyaccurate.Furthermore,thediscussioniscentredtoprovideanin‐depthcommentarythatisthoroughandeffective,withappropriatesupportfromrelevantresearchstudies.



Outline and evaluate the role of the father in the development of attachment. (16 marks) Traditionally,theroleofthefatherinattachmentwouldhavebeenlimited,astheywouldgotoworktoprovideresourcesforthefamilywhilstthemotherstookcareofthechildren.Althoughrecentlytheroleofthefatherhaschangedsignificantly.However,psychologistsdisagreeovertheexactroleofthefather.Someresearchersclaimthatmenaresimplynotequippedtoformanattachment.Suchpsychologistspointtobiologicalevidencewhichsuggeststhatthehormoneoestrogenunderliescaringbehaviourinwomenandthelackofoestrogeninmeniswhytheyareunabletoformacloseattachment.Otherresearchersarguethatfathersdonottakeonacaregiverroleand,infact,provideadifferentrole,asaplaymate.Finally,someresearchersarguethatfatherscandemonstratesensitiveresponsivenessandreacttotheneedsoftheirchildrenandthuscanformastrongemotionaltieorbond.Thereisresearchevidencethatprovidessupportfortheroleofthefatherasa‘playmate’.ResearchbyGeiger(1996)foundthatfathers’playinteractionsweremoreexcitingincomparisontomothers’.However,themothers’playinteractionsweremoreaffectionateandnurturing.Thissuggeststhattheroleofthefatheris,infact,asaplaymateandnotasasensitiveparentwhorespondstotheneedsoftheirchildren.Theseresultsalsoconfirmthatthemothertakesonmoreofanurturingrole.Furthermore,researchevidencealsosuggeststhatfathersdonotprovideasensitiveandnurturingattachment.Hrdy(1999)foundthatfatherswerelessabletodetectlowlevelsofinfantdistress,incomparisontomothers.Theseresultsappeartosupportthebiologicalexplanationshighlightedabove;thelackofoestrogeninmenmeansthatfathersarenotbiologicallyequippedtoformcloseattachmentswiththeirchildren.Thissuggeststhattheroleofthefatheris,tosomeextent,biologicallydeterminedandthatafather’sroleisrestrictedbecauseoftheirbiologicalmakeup.Thisprovidesfurtherevidencethatfathersarenotabletoprovideasensitiveandnurturingtypeofattachment,astheyareunabletodetectstressintheirchildren.However,researchsuggeststhatfathersareabletoformsecureattachmentswiththeirchildreniftheyareinanintimateorclosemarriage.Belskyetal.(2009)foundthatmaleswhoreportedhigherlevelsofmaritalintimacyalso

Aconciseintroductiontotheroleofthefatherinattachment.Anaccurateanddetailedoverviewofthedifferentrolesfathersarethoughttoplayinattachment.Awell‐elaboratedevaluationpointdrawingonrelevantresearchsupport. Thesecondevaluationpointiswelldeveloped,referringtoissuesanddebatesappropriatelyinthecontextoftheroleofthefather.Anexcellentevaluationpointhighlightingthepositiverolethatfatherscanplayinattachment.



displayedasecurefather–infantattachment,whereasmaleswithlowerlevelsofmaritalintimacydisplayedinsecurefather–infantattachments.Thissuggeststhatmalescanformsecureattachmentswiththeirchildren;however,thestrengthoftheattachmentdependsonthefatherandmotherrelationship.Therefore,whilefathersmaybebiologicallydeterminedtoformadifferentrelationshipwiththeirchildren,thisrelationshipismediatedbytheirenvironment(theintimacyoftheirmarriage)suggestingthatwhileafather’srolemaybedetermined,itisonlydeterminedtoanextentandthereforeasofterviewofdeterminismismoreappropriate.[~475words] Examinerstylecomments: Markband4Thisisasufficientlydetailedandaccurateaccountoftheroleofthefatherinattachmentprovidingtheappropriatecontentforasixteen‐markessayquestion.Theevaluationiswell‐detailed,thoroughandeffective.



Outline and evaluate animal studies of attachment. (16 marks) Lorenzconductedanexperimentwherehedividedgooseeggsintotwobatches.Onebatchwashatchednaturallybythemotherandthesecondbatchwereplacedinanincubator,withLorenzmakingsurehewasthefirstlargemovingobjectthatthegoslingssawafterhatching.Lorenzfoundthatstraightafterbirththenaturallyhatchedgoslingsfollowedthemothergoose,whereastheincubator‐hatchedgoslingsfollowedLorenz.Lorenznotedthatthisimprintingonlyoccurredwithinacriticalperiodof4–25hoursafterhatchingandtherelationshippersistedovertimeandprovedtobeirreversible.SinceLorenzonlystudiedanimals,wecannotgeneralisetheresultstohumansasweareunabletoconcludethattheywouldbehaveinthesameway.Theattachmentformationinmammalsappearstobeverydifferenttothatofbirdspecies.Humanparents,specificallymothers,showmoreemotionalreactionstotheiroffspringandcanformattachmentsbeyondthefirstfewhoursafterbirth.So,whilstsomeofLorenz’sfindingshaveinfluencedourunderstandingofdevelopmentandattachmentformation,cautionmustbeappliedwhendrawingwiderconclusionsabouttheresults.LaterresearchhascastdoubtonsomeoftheconclusionswhichLorenzdrew.Forexample,Guitonetal.(1966)foundthatchickenswouldimprintonyellowwashingupglovesifthatwasthelargestmovingobjecttheyfirstsawafterbirth.Later,theywouldthentrytomatewiththatobjectinadulthood.However,theydisagreedwithLorenz’spredictionsthatthisrelationshippersistsandisirreversible.Thisisbecausewithexperience,thechickenscouldeventuallylearntoprefermatingwithotherchickensinstead,suggestingthattheeffectsofimprintingmaynotbeaspermanentasinitiallythought.Harlowinvestigatedattachmentbehaviourinrhesusmonkeys.Heconstructedtwosurrogatemothers:oneharsh‘wiremother’andasecondsoft‘towellingmother’.Theamountoftimethatthebabymonkeyspentwitheachmotherwasrecorded.Findingsshowedthatthebabymonkeyspreferredtomakecontactwiththesoft‘towellingmother’andthemonkeyswouldevenstretchacrosstothe‘wiremother’forfoodwhilststillclingingontothe‘towellingmother’.Harlowconcludedthatbabyrhesusmonkeyshaveaninnatedrivetoseekcontactcomfortsuggestingthatattachmentwith

AnaccuratesummaryofLorenz’sresearchisprovided.Gooduseofspecialistterminology:imprinting.Aneffectiveevaluationpointdrawingontheuseofanimals.Anexcellentevaluationpoint,drawingonresearchtosupporttheargument.KnowledgeofHarlow’sresearchisclearlyevident.Awell‐detailedexplanationofthefindingsandconclusion.



parentsisformedthroughanemotionalneedforsecurity.TheresultsfromHarlow’sstudyareoflargepracticalvaluesincetheyprovideinsightintoattachmentformationwhichhasimportantreal‐worldapplicationsthatcanbeusefulinarangeofpracticalsituations.Forexample,Howe(1998)reportsthattheknowledgegainedfromHarlow’sresearchhashelpedsocialworkerstounderstandriskfactorsinneglectandabusecaseswithhumanchildrenwhocanthenservetopreventitoccurringor,attheveryleast,recognisewhentointervene.Inaddition,therearepracticalapplicationswhichareusedinthecareofcaptivewildmonkeysinzoosorbreedingprogrammestoensurethattheyhaveadequateattachmentfiguresaspartoftheircare.Harlowwascriticisedheavilyfortheethicsofhisresearchonanimals.ThebabyrhesusmonkeyssufferedgreatlyintermsofemotionalseparationfromtheirbiologicalmotheratsuchanearlyageduetotheprocedureHarlowused.Ifthespeciesofprimatesareconsideredsufficientlyhuman‐liketogeneralisetheresults,thenitstandstoreasonthattheeffectsofpsychologicalharmthattheywillhaveenduredaresimilartothatofahumanbaby.Thereis,however,thequestionofwhethertheinsightobtainedwassufficientlyimportanttopsychologists’understandingofattachmentthatHarlowwasjustifiedinhisapproach.[~575words]

Asimpleyeteffectiveevaluationpointwhichhighlightsthereal‐worldapplicationofHarlow’sresearch.Thisevaluationpointhighlightsanimportantquestionintheuseofanimalsinpsychologicalresearch.

Examinerstylecomments: Markband4Thisessaydemonstratesanexceptionallyclearunderstandingoftworelevantanimalstudiesinattachment.Theoutlineknowledgeisaccurateanddetailed,strikingabalancebetweenthetwostudiesinequaldepth.Theevaluationcommentaryisthorough,effectiveandfocusedonthedemandsofthequestion.Theevaluationdrawsonsuitableissuesanddebatesandresearchevidencetoprovideaninterestingdiscussion.



Outline and evaluate Bowlby’s explanation of attachment. (16 marks) Bowlbyarguedthatinfantsarebornwithaninnatetendencytoformattachmentswiththeirparentstoincreasechancesofsurvival.AccordingtoBowlby,infantspossessinbornsocialreleasers,whichunlockabiologicaltendencyinadultstocareforthem.Examplesinclude‘babyface’featuresorsmilingandcooing.Babiesmustformanattachmentduringthecriticalperiodwhichisbetweenthreeandsixmonthsofage.However,Bowlbylateracknowledgedthatinfantscouldformanattachmentafterthisperiod(uptothreeyearsofage);however,hemaintainedthatthesuccessfulformationofanattachmentwouldbeincreasinglydifficultafterthisinitialperiod.Bowlbysaidthatifanattachmentdidn’tformduringthistimeframethenthechildwouldbedamagedforlife–socially,emotionally,intellectuallyandphysically.Furthermore,infantsformonespecialattachmentwhichBowlbycalledmonotropy.Throughthemonotropicattachment,theinfantformsaninternalworkingmodelwhichisamentaltemplateforfuturerelationshipexpectations.Ifthere’sahealthyattachmentwiththecaregiverthentheinfantwilldevelopstrongrelationshipslaterinlife.However,ifthechildhasanegativerelationshipwiththeircaregiver,theywillhavedifficultsocialandromanticrelationships.AstrengthofBowlby’stheorycomesfromresearchbyHazanandShaver(1987).Theyusedaself‐reportquestionnairecalled‘TheLoveQuiz’toassesstheinternalworkingmodel.Theyfoundapositivecorrelationbetweenearlyattachmenttypesandlateradultrelationships.ThissupportsBowlby’sideaofaninternalworkingmodelandsuggeststhatourearlychildhoodexperiencesdoaffectourlateradultrelationships.Sroufeetal.(2005)alsoprovideevidenceforthisintheirMinnesotaparent–childstudy,showingtheoutcomeofearlyattachmenttypebeingcarriedforwardandprojectedontoexpectationsofsubsequentrelationships.Bowlby’stheorysuggeststhatattachmentsareaninnatemechanismtoaidsurvival,thereforesupportinganatureview.Hisnotionofaninternalworkingmodelsuggeststhatadultrelationshipsare,tosomeextent,determinedbyaninnatemechanismshapedbyournurturingearlyrelationshipexperiences.Thissuggeststhataninteractionofnatureandnurtureiscriticalwhenconsideringtheeffectsofearlyattachmentsandtheinternalworkingmodel,andthat

Agoodintroductionoutliningkeyspecialistterminologyfromtheonset.ClearunderstandingofBowlby’sexplanationisevident.AnexcellentoutlineofBowlby’sworkandthemonotropicexplanationofattachment.AneffectiveevaluationpointdrawingonmultiplestudiestosupportBowlby’sexplanationofattachment.AninterestingdiscussionpointaboutwhereBowlby’stheorysitswiththenatureandnurturedebate.



psychologistsshouldconsiderbothbiologicalandenvironmentalfactorswhenexaminingattachment.Thereismixedevidencefortheimportanceofmonotropy.SchafferandEmmerson(1964)refutetheideathatinfantsmustformonespecialattachmenttotheircaregiverwhichsupersedesallothersandprovidesthefoundationforsubsequent,multipleattachments.Theydidrecognisethatsomeinfantsdo,infact,followthispatternbutthatthereareotherswhocanformmultipleattachmentswithdifferentcaregiversatthesametime(e.g.themotherandfathersimultaneously).ThisgoesagainstBowlby’snotionof‘monotropy’whichformsacentralpartofhistheoryofattachment.Thereisanalternativeexplanationforattachment.Kagan(1984)proposedthetemperamenthypothesiswhichsuggeststhatachild’sgeneticallyinheritedpersonalitytraits(temperament)havearoletoplayinforminganattachmentwithacaregiver.Itisthoughtthatinfantshavedifferingtemperamentsbecauseoftheirbiologicalmakeupwhichmeansthatsomearemoresociableand‘easy’andothersaremoreanxiousand‘difficult’babies.ItisarguedthatBowlbyignoredtheroleoftemperament,preferringinsteadtofocusontheearlychildhoodexperiencesandqualityofattachment,whichwasanoversightsincepersonalitydifferencesinthechildcaninfluencewhethertheybecomesecurelyorinsecurelyattached.[~575words]

Aninterestingcounter‐argumentisprovidedandlinkedtothequestion.Anothereffectiveevaluationpoint,drawingontherolethattemperamentplaysinexplainingattachmentformation.

Examinerstylecomments: Markband4ThisisahighlydetailedandaccurateessayexaminingBowlby’sexplanationofattachment.Theuseofspecialistterminologyisimpressive.Theevaluationisfocused,thoroughandeffective.Overall,aremarkableaccountofthemonotropictheory.



Outline and evaluate learning theory as an explanation of attachment. (16 marks) Learningtheoryexplainshowinfantslearntobecomeattachedthroughtheprocessesofclassicaloroperantconditioning.Itissometimescalledthe‘cupboardlove’theorybecauseofthefocusonfood.Classicalconditioningislearningbyassociation.Beforeconditioning,foodisanunconditionedstimulus(UCS)whichproducesanunconditionedresponse(UCR)ofpleasureasarelieffromhunger.Thecaregiverisaneutralstimulus(NS),whoproducesnoconditionedresponse.Duringconditioning,thechildassociatesthecaregiver(NS)whofeedsthemwiththefood(UCS).Throughrepeatedpairing,thecaregiverbecomesaconditionedstimulus(CS)whoisassociatedwiththepleasurefromfeeding.Thisresultsinthecaregiverelicitingaconditionedresponsefromthechildandtheformationofanattachment.Operantconditioningproposesthatwhenaninfantfeelshungeritismotivatedtoreducetheunpleasantfeelingssocriestoreceivecomfort.Whenthecaregiverprovidesfood,afeelingofpleasureisproducedwhichisrewarding.Attachmentwilloccurbecausetheinfantwillseekthecaregiverwhocansupplythereward.LearningtheoryisunderminedbyresearchfromHarlow.Hefoundthatbabyrhesusmonkeysspentmoretimewithasofttowellingmonkeywhichprovidednofood,incomparisontoawiremonkeythatprovidedfood.Thisshowsthatbabymonkeysdonotformattachmentsbasedonpresenceoffoodaloneandprefercontactcomfort.Thesefindingsgoagainstthelearningtheoryexplanationofattachmentandsuggestalternativeprocessesmayhavebeenignored.Thiscounter‐argumentisfurthersupportedbySchaffer&Emmerson’sresearchwhichdemonstratedthatinfantsformedattachmentstotheirmothersdespiteoftenbeingfedbyothercarers.Therearemethodologicalissueswiththeresearchevidenceforlearningtheory.Muchofthesupportingresearch,forexamplePavlov’sresearchondogsandSkinner’sresearchwithratsandpigeons,iscriticisedforitsover‐relianceonanimals.Thisisanissuebecausepsychologistsarguethatbehaviouristexplanationsprovideanoversimplifiedaccountofattachmentformation,whichisinfactacomplexemotionalbondbetweenahumaninfantandtheircaregiver.Asaresult,

Agoodintroductiontothelearningtheoryexplanationofattachment.Effectiveuseofkeyterminologyrelatingtoclassicalconditioning.Abrieferexplanationofoperantconditioningbutanappropriatebalanceforthe6marksavailablefortheoutline.Effectiveevaluationusingkeyresearchtodemonstratethelimitationsoflearningtheoryasanexplanationforattachment.Specialistvocabularyusedwelltoenhancetheevaluativecommentary.



thelearningtheoryexplanationmaylackvaliditysinceitisdifficulttogeneraliseanimalfindingstohumanswithconfidencethattheywouldbehaveinthesameway.Thereisanalternativetothelearningtheorytoexplainhumanattachment,asproposedbyBowlby.Hebelievedthatinfantshaveaninnatereadinessduringthecriticalperiodtoformanattachmenttotheircaregivertoprotectthemfromharmwhilsttheyareyoungandvulnerable.Theevolutionaryperspectivenotonlyexplainshowanattachmentforms,butalsowhy–toenhancesurvival.ItisacceptedthatBowlby’stheoryprovidesamorecomprehensiveexplanationofattachmentratherthanreducingacomplexbehaviourtoasimplestimulus–responseassociation.Thelearningtheoryexplanationsuggeststhatattachmentsaretheresultoflearningwhichthereforesupportsanurture‐basedviewofbehaviour.Consequently,suchtheoriesarereductionist(environmental)astheyreduceacomplexbehaviour,theformationofanattachmentbetweeninfantsandtheircaregivers,toasimplestimulus–responseassociation.Manypsychologistswouldarguethathumanattachmentsarefarmorecomplexandlearningexplanationsprovideanoverlysimplifiedaccountofhumanattachment.[~525Words]

AppropriatecomparisondrawntoBowlby’stheoryofattachmentinthispenultimateevaluationpoint.Soundunderstandingofissuesanddebatesdemonstratedhere.

ExaminerStyleComments: Markband4Thisisafirst‐rateresponsetothisquestion.Theanswerprovidescomprehensiveknowledgeofbothclassicalandoperantconditioningasexplanationsforattachment,bothofwhichareextremelyaccurate.Furthermore,thediscussionprovidesanin‐depthevaluativecommentarythatisdetailedandeffectivewithanexcellentuseofspecialistterminologyandreferencetoappropriateissuesanddebates.



Discuss the strange situation as a way of assessing types of attachment. (16 marks) AinsworthdevisedacontrolledobservationcalledtheStrangeSituationtoassesstypesofattachmentin9–18montholdinfants.ThestrangeSituationinvolvesplacingachildandtheirmotherinanovelenvironmentofmildstress,wherebytheywouldbeobservedandvideoedthroughaone‐waymirrorduringaseriesofeightdifferentsituations.ThepurposeoftheStrangeSituationistomeasurefourkeybehaviours,including:explorationbehaviours–howthechildexplorestheenvironmentandwhethertheyusethemotherasasafebase;separationanxiety–howthechildrespondsto/behaveswhenthemotherleavestheroom;strangeranxiety–howthechildrespondsinthepresenceofastranger;andreunionbehaviours–howthechildactswhenreunitedwiththeirmother.DependingonhowthechildrespondsintheStrangeSituationwouldleadtooneofthreeattachmentclassifications:secure,insecure–avoidantandinsecure–resistant.Inheroriginalexperiment,Ainsworthfoundthefollowingdistributionofattachmenttypes:securelyattached–66%,insecure–avoidant–22%,andinsecure–resistant–12%.AmethodologicalweaknessofAinsworth’sStrangeSituationisthetypeofobservationsheused,whichwasanovertobservation.TheparentsinAinsworth’sstudyknewtheywerebeingobservedthroughtheone‐waymirrorandthereforemayhavedisplayeddemandcharacteristics.Thismeantthatthemothersmayhavebeenoverlyaffectionatetowardstheirchildrenastheybelievedthisisthebehaviourthatthescenariodemandedofthem.Inturn,thiscouldhavealteredthechildren’sbehaviourandthereforelowerstheinternalvalidityoftheexperimentmakingtheStrangeSituationalessvalidmethodofassessingattachment.Furthermore,Ainsworth’sStrangeSituationdemonstratesaculturebias.HertheoryandmethodswerebasedonWesternidealsinrelationtoinfantbehaviour,categorisingahigherproportionofchildrenfromotherculturesasinsecure–avoidant(e.g.Japan)orinsecure–resistant(e.g.Germany).Consequently,theStrangeSituationmaynotbeavalidmethodofassessingattachmentinother,non‐American,cultures.However,theStrangeSituationmethodofassessing

Anexcellentintroduction,settingthesceneforthisessay.Awell‐detailedandaccuratesummaryofAinsworth’sStrangeSituationispresented.KnowledgeofAinsworth’skeyfindingsisaccurate.Asoundevaluationpointwhichprovidesawell‐detailedlimitationoftheobservationmethodologyused.Aninterestingissueenhancesthediscussionhere.Acounter‐argumentisused



attachmenttypeissaidtohavehighreliability.Theobservationstookplaceunderstrictandcontrolledmethods(includingvideorecording)usingpredeterminedbehaviouralcategories.SinceAinsworthhasseveralobserverswatchingandcodingthesameinfantbehaviours,agreementonattachmentclassificationscouldbeensured.Ainsworthetal.(1978)found94%agreementbetweenobserversandwheninter‐observer/inter‐raterreliabilityisassumedtoahighdegreethefindingsareconsideredmoremeaningful.Finally,thereisthepossibilitythatAinsworth’sclassificationsystemofattachmenttypesisincomplete.Main&Solomon(1986)conductedsubsequentresearchwherebytheyanalysedseveralhundredStrangeSituationepisodesviavideotapeandsuggestedthatAinsworthoverlookedafourthtype.ItwasnotedthatsomeinfantsshowedinconsistentpatternsofbehaviourwhichtheytermedTypeD;insecure–disorganised.Furthersupportforthisclaimcomesfromameta‐analysisofstudiesfromtheUSconductedbyvanIjzendoornetal.(1999)whichfoundthat15%ofinfantswere,infact,classifiedasTypeD,suggestingthatAinsworth’soriginalassessmentofattachmentisunabletofullyexplainallofthedifferenttypesofattachmentsinchildren.[~500words]

wellheretobalancetheevaluationbetweenstrengthsandlimitations.Arangeofappropriateresearchevidenceisusedtosupportthepointbeingmade.

Examinerstylecomments: Markband4Thisisawell‐structuredandcoherentessaydiscussingAinsworth’sStrangeSituation.Anaccurateandwell‐detailedaccountofhermethodologytoassessattachmentispresentedwitharangeofeffectiveevaluationpointsusedascritique.Theessayisclearandfocusedwithspecialistterminologyusedappropriatelythroughout.



Outline and evaluate research into cultural variations in attachment. (16 marks) vanIjzendoorn&Kroonenberg(1988)conductedameta‐analysisof32studiesfromeightdifferentcountriesthathadusedAinsworth’sStrangeSituation.Intotal,theresultsofover1,990infantswereincludedintheanalysis. Theirresearchproducedseveralkeyfindingsinrelationtothedistributionofattachmentindifferentcountrieswithsecureattachmentbeingthemostcommontypeofattachmentinallculturesexamined.JapanandIsrael(collectivistcultures)showedhigherlevelsofinsecure–resistantattachmentwhereasGermany(individualisticculture)showedhigherlevelsofinsecure–avoidantattachment.Tronicketal.(1992)studiedtheEfetribefromZairewholiveinextendedfamilygroups.Theinfantsarelookedafterandbreastfedbydifferentwomenwithinthesocialgroupbutinfantssleepwiththeirownmothersatnight.AlthoughthechildrearingpracticesdifferfromWesternnorms,theinfantsstillshowedapreferenceforaprimaryattachmentfigureatsixmonthsold,echoingthenotionthatsecureattachmentisthemostcommonglobally.AcriticismofvanIjzendoorn&Kroonerberg’sresearchisthattheymayhavebeencomparingcountriesandnot,infact,cultures.Forexample,theycomparedGreatBritainwithIsraelintheirmeta‐analysis.Withineachcountrytheremaybemanydifferentsubcultures,eachwiththeirownuniquewaysofrearingchildren.Interestingly,theresearchersnotedthatvariancewithincountrieswasfargreaterthanbetweencountries.Itthereforestandstoreasonthattheydid,infact,collectdataonsubcultureswithinthecountriestheyinvestigatedratherthanthewholenation.Additionally,thesampleusedintheirinvestigationwasbiasedwith27/32ofthestudiesintheirmeta‐analysiscarriedoutinindividualisticcultures.Therefore,theirresultsarebiasedtowardsindividualisticnormsandvaluessowecannotaccuratelygeneralisetheresultstocollectivistcultures,loweringthepopulationvalidityofthefindings.Furthermore,vanIjzendoorn’sresearchfurtherhighlightstheculturebiasdemonstratedinAinsworth’sStrangeSituation,byreportingsignificantdifferencesinthedistributionofattachmenttypes(secure,insecure–avoidantandinsecure–resistant)indifferentcultures.Forexample,Germanyhasthehighestrateofinsecure–avoidantattachmentwhichmaybe

Awell‐detailedaccountofaprominentstudyintoculturalvariationsinattachmentwithkeyfindingspresentedclearly.Asecondcreditworthystudywhichillustratesbothcross‐culturaldifferencesandsimilaritiesclearly.Aneffectiveevaluationpointhighlightingtheproblemswithstudyingattachmentcross‐culturally.Asimple,yeteffective,evaluationpointexploringpopulationvalidity.Thisfinalevaluationpointposesaninterestingandin‐depthexaminationofculturalbias,demonstratingsignificantunderstandinginthisarea.



theresultofdifferentchildrearingpracticesandnotamore‘insecure’population.InGermanythereisageneraldesiretokeepsomeinterpersonaldistancebetweenparentsandinfants;therefore,parentswouldgenerallydiscourageproximity‐seekingbehaviourswithintheStrangeSituationwhichmightbiastheresultsofattachmentresearchinGermanywhichthereforeincorrectlycategorisechildrenas‘insecure’.Thissuggeststhatthemeta‐analysisresearchinvestigatingculturalvariationsshouldbetreatedwithcautionastheunderlyingmethodologyofthestudies(theStrangeSituation)suffersfromasignificantculturebias.Usingamethodologyofassessmentbeyondthesampleforwhichitwasdesignedisreferredtoasanimposedetic.Thismattersbecauseattachmentbehavioursmeandifferentthingsfordifferentculturesandsotheresultsmaynotbevalidwhenusedwithsamplesfromnon‐westerncultures.[~475words] Examinerstylecomments: Markband4Thisessayexpressessoundknowledgeandunderstandingoftworelevantcross‐culturalvariationstudiesinattachment.Theoutlineisaccurateanddetailed,strikingabalancebetweenbreadthanddepthacrossthetwostudiesselected.Theevaluationcommentaryisthorough,effectiveandfocusedonthedemandsofthequestion.Theevaluationdrawsonthesuitableissueofculturalbiastoprovideaninterestingcommentary.



Psychologists have studied children who have lived in institutions such as orphanages. Outline and evaluate research into the effects of institutionalisation. (16 marks) RutterandSongua‐Barkeconductedalongitudinalstudyof165childrenwhohadspenttheirearlyyearsinaRomanianorphanage.111ofthesechildrenwereadoptedbeforetwoyearsold,andtheotherswereadoptedbyfouryearsold.Theywerecomparedtoacontrolgroupof52Britishchildren.Thesocial,cognitiveandphysicaldevelopmentofallinfantswasexaminedatregularintervals.Beforeadoption,theRomanianorphansshoweddelayeddevelopmentandwerephysicallysmallerwithmanyclassifiedas‘mentallyretarded’.AlmostalltheRomanianorphanswhowereadoptedbeforetheageofsixmonthscaughtuponthesemeasuresofdevelopment,whencomparedtotheBritishcontrolgroup.TheRomanianchildrenwhowereadoptedaftersixmonthscontinuedtoshowsignificantdeficitsinallareasofdevelopment;theywerealsomorelikelytoexperiencedifficultieswithpeerrelationshipsandoftenhaddisinhibitedattachments.OnestrengthofRutterandSongua‐Barke’sresearchfindingsistheirreal‐worldapplicationtosocialservices.Theirstudyhelpedchangethewaythatchildrenarelookedafter,especiallywhenitcomestotheadoptionprocess.Historically,motherswereencouragedtokeeptheirbabiesforasubstantialperiodbywhichtimethecriticalperiodforattachmentformationmayhavepassed.Nowadays,infantsareadoptedasearlyasone‐weekoldandSingeretal.(1985)statesthatchildrenareassecurelyattachedtotheiradoptivemothersasbiologicallyrelatedfamilies.Thisdemonstratesthebenefitofinstitutionalisationresearchtohelpimprovethelivesofchildren.AnotherstrengthofRutterandSongua‐Barke’sresearchisthattheirresearchwaslongitudinal.Theirresearchtookplaceovermanyyearsallowingthemtoassessboththeshort‐termandlong‐termeffectsofinstitutionalisationandsubsequentbenefitsfromadoption.Therefore,theresultsoftheirresearchappeartobeavalidrepresentationoftheeffectsofbeingplacedininstitutionalcareaswellasportrayingtheresultsofreceivingqualityfollow‐onemotionalcaregivinginatimelymanner.AcriticismofRomanianorphanresearchisthatdeprivationisonlyonefactorindevelopment.Theorphansexperienced

Awell‐summarisedoutlineofthiskeypieceofinstitutionalisationresearch.Effectivedescriptionofthefindingswhichdemonstratestheeffectsofinstitutionalisation.Anelaboratedevaluativepointaboutthereal‐worldimplicationsofresearch,withevidenceprovided.Highlightingstrengthsofthemethodology,usingkeyterminology,iscreditworthywhenappliedexplicitlytothequestion.Thefinalevaluationpointbalancestheessaywellwitha



verylittleornomentalstimulationandwereoftenmalnourished.Thissuggeststhattherearemultipleriskfactorsinvolvedinascertainingtheeffectsofinstitutionalcare.Furthermore,Romanianorphanstudiessuggestthataninfant’slifechancesaredeterminedbytheirearlyexperiences.However,notallinfantsininstitutionalcareexperiencethesamenegativeeffectswhichhighlightstheimportanceofanidiographicapproachwithintheresearch.Consequently,itisdifficulttointerprettheresultsoflongitudinalstudiesasthesoleeffectofdeprivation,astherearemanydifferentinfluencesthataffectedthesechildren,suchaslivinginpoverty,whicharenotfullyconsideredinsuchstudies. [~450words]

criticismandmakesanappropriatereferencetotheissueofidiographic/nomotheticresearch.

Examinerstylecomments: Markband4Thisisawell‐detailedandaccurateaccountofRutterandSongua‐Barke’sresearchontheeffectsofinstitutionalisation.Itisequallypossibletoaccessthetopmarkbandbyreferringtoonestudyindepth,suchasthis,ortwostudiesinlessdetailtoachievebreadthintheresponse.Theevaluationisthoroughandeffectiveinmostplaces,andthefinalparagraphprovidesaninterestinghigh‐leveldiscussionofthemultipleriskfactorsinvolvedwhichservesasaneffectiveconclusion.



Discuss Bowlby’s theory of maternal deprivation. (16 marks) Maternaldeprivation,whichistheprolongedlossofemotionalcarefromthemotherfigure,canhaveseriouslong‐termconsequences.Bowlbybelievedthatongoingmaternaldeprivationwouldhavenegativeeffectsonachildintermsoftheiremotionaldevelopment,leadingtopossiblementalhealthproblemsormaladjustment.AlthoughBowlbybelievedthattheeffectsofmaternaldeprivationwouldbemostacuteduringthecriticalperiod,henotedthattherewasariskofadverseconsequencesupuntilthreeyearsold.Healsoacknowledgedthatthepresenceofamother‐substitutecouldpreventthelong‐termconsequencesiftheywereabletoprovideadequateandsensitivesurrogateemotionalcare.BowlbyclaimedthatmaternaldeprivationcouldresultindelayedintellectualdevelopmentwhichwouldleadtolowIQ.Furthermore,Bowlbyalsoarguedthatdeprivationcouldleadtoaffectionlesspsychopathycharacterisedbyindividualswithalackofshameorguilt.Thisleadstofurtherproblems,suchasdifficultyformingrelationshipsandahigherprobabilityofcriminaltendencies.Bowlbyprovidedresearchsupportforhistheoryofmaternaldeprivation.Heexamined88children,from5–16whowerereferredtoaguidanceclinicwhereheworked.44ofthesechildrenwerethieves.Bowlbyidentified14ofthesethievesasaffectionlesspsychopaths.Hethennotedthat86%oftheaffectionlesspsychopathsexperiencedearlyandprolongedattachmentseparationsincomparisontojust17%ofthe‘otherthieves’and4%ofthecontrolgroup.Thesefindingssuggestalinkbetweenearlyongoingseparationfromtheprimarycaregiverandlatersocialmaladjustment.Thematernaldeprivationhypothesisappearstoleadtoaffectionlesspsychopathyandgreaterriskofengaginginantisocialbehaviour.ThereisevidencewhichcountersBowlby’smaternaldeprivationhypothesisclaims.Lewis(1944)replicatedthejuvenilethievesstudywithalargersampleofchildrenbutdidnotfindthatearlydeprivation,causedbyprolongedseparationfromtheprimarycaregiver,predictedagreaterlikelihoodofcriminalbehaviourintheyouths.ThiscastsdoubtonBowlby’stheoryasitsuggeststhatotherfactorsmaybeinvolvedwhichmediatetheconsequencesofmaternaldeprivation.Forexample,Barrett(1997)foundthatsecurely

Agoodintroductionoutliningpsychologicalterminologyfromtheonset.AneffectivebalancedviewofBowlby’stheoryispresentedhere.Aninterestingoutlineofthekeyproblemsassociatedwithmaternaldeprivation.AstrengthofBowlby’stheoryispresentedwithreferencetoappropriateresearchfindings.Avalidcounter‐argumentbalancestheevidenceforandagainsttheimpactofmaternaldeprivation.



attachedchildrenaremoreresistanttothenegativeeffectsofmaternaldeprivationincomparisontoinsecurelyattachedchildren.Bowlby’stheoryandtheresearchofBarretthighlighttheimportanceofnatureandnurture.Bowlbyputsforwardacriticalperiodofdevelopmentwhichdemonstratestheimportanceofabiologicalmechanism;however,thismechanismisshapedbyaninfant’sinteractions,orlackofinteractions,withtheircaregivers.Thisdemonstratestheimportanceofconsideringtheinteractionofnatureandnurturewhenexaminingmaternaldeprivation.Finally,Bowlbywascriticisedfornotmakingthedistinctionclearbetweendeprivationandprivation.Rutter(1982)suggeststhatprivation–nothavinghadtheopportunitytoformanattachmentatall–leadstomoredamagingconsequencesforthechildthanexperiencingabrokenattachmentintheirearlyyears.RutterdisapprovedofBowlby’suseoftheworddeprivationforhebelievedthatBowlbywasconfusingthetwoconceptsandusingtheterminterchangeably.[~500words]

Commentaryissupportedwithembeddedreferencetothenatureandnurturedebate.ThefinalevaluationpointservestofurtherextendthediscussionaboutBowlby’stheoryofmaternaldeprivationtheory.

Examinerstylecomments: Markband4Thisisawell‐detailedandaccurateaccountofBowlby’smaternaldeprivationhypothesisanditsimpactonchildhooddevelopment.Theevaluativecommentaryisdetailed,thoroughandeffectiveasitdrawsonarangeofinterestingpoints.Theuseofspecialistterminologyiswell‐established,whichaddsclarityandfocustotheessay.



Jaqueline was removed from her biological family and placed into institutional care when she was only five months old because both of her parents were heavy drug users. Although she was adopted when she was six‐years old, she has problematic relationship with her adoptive parents now that she is in secondary school. Her teachers are often phoning home to say that she has been in trouble that day, often for violent outburst towards others. She struggles to engage in lessons and doesn’t care much about hurting the feelings of other students in the class. Discuss Bowlby’s theory of maternal deprivation. Refer to the experience of Jaqueline as part of your discussion. (16 marks) Bowlbyproposedhistheoryofmaternaldeprivationapproximately20yearsbeforehistheoryofattachment.AccordingtoBowlby,maternaldeprivation,whichisthelossofemotionalcare,canhaveseriouslong‐termconsequencesonachild’sphysical,intellectualandemotionalwell‐being.Bowlbyputforwardthenotionofacriticalperiod.Hebelievedthattheeffectsofmaternaldeprivationwouldbeattheirmostacuteduringthecriticalperiod(3–6months);healsonotedtherewasariskofadverseconsequencesupuntilthreeyearsold.However,Bowlbydidacknowledgethatthepresenceofamother‐substitutecouldpreventthelong‐termconsequencesofdeprivationifthesubstitutewasabletoprovidethenecessaryemotionalcare.AsJaquelineisunlikelytohaveformedanattachmentwhileshewasininstitutionalcareandshewasadoptedattheageofsix,shehaspassedthecriticalperiodanddidnothaveamother‐substitutewhocouldpreventthelong‐termconsequencesofdeprivationthatsheisnowexperiencing.Ifdeprivationdoesoccur,Bowlbyoutlinedaseriesoflong‐termconsequencesthatcouldaffecttheindividual.BowlbyclaimedthatmaternaldeprivationcouldresultindelayedintellectualdevelopmentwhichwouldleadtolowIQ.Furthermore,Bowlbyalsoarguedthatdeprivationcouldleadtoemotionalmaladjustmentintheformofaffectionlesspsychopathycharacterisedbyindividualswhofeelnosenseofshameorguilt.Thisresultsinotherproblemssuchasdifficultyformingrelationshipsandthepossibilityofcrime.Jaquelineisdemonstratingsignsofdelayedintellectualdevelopmentassheisstrugglingtoengageinherlessons,aswellasshowingsignsofaffectionlesspsychopathy,duetoherlackoffeelingswhenhurtingotherstudentsandthedifficultysheisexperiencingwhenitcomestoformingarelationshipwithherfosterfamily.Bowlbyprovidedresearchsupportforhistheoryofmaternaldeprivation.Bowlbyexamined88children,from5–16who

Interestingstarttosetthescenefortherestoftheessay.Effectiveuseofkeyterminology.AppropriateselectionofmaterialappliedtothecaseofJaqueline.Accurateanddetailedoutlineoftheeffectsofmaternaldeprivation,relatedspecificallytothescenario.AstrengthofBowlby’stheoryispresentedwithreferencetoappropriateresearchfindings.ReferencetoJaquelineremainsconsistentthroughoutthe



werereferredtoaguidanceclinic.44ofthesechildrenwerethieves;Bowlbyidentified14ofthesethievesasaffectionlesspsychopaths.Bowlbyfoundthat86%oftheaffectionlesspsychopathsexperiencedearlyandprolongedattachmentseparationsincomparisontojust17%ofthe‘otherthieves’and4%ofthecontrolgroup.Thesefindingssuggestalinkbetweenearlyseparationsandlatersocialmaladjustment.Thematernaldeprivationhypothesisappearstoleadtoaffectionlesspsychopathyandantisocialbehaviour–thegroupof86%,alsosufferedfromprolongedandearlyseparationwhichexplainsJaqueline’saffectionlessandantisocialbehaviour.However,researchalsodemonstratesthatnotallchildrenareaffectedbydeprivationinthesameway.Barrett(1997)reportedthatsecurelyattachedchildrenareabletocopebetterwithdeprivationincomparisontoinsecurelyattachedchildren.Interestingly,Bowlby’stheoryofmaternaldeprivationsuggeststhatchildrenwhoaredeprivedofanattachment,usuallywithinacriticalperiodofdevelopment,willsuffernegativelong‐termconsequences(e.g.emotionalmaladjustment,mentalhealthproblems,etc.).Thissuggeststhataninfant’slifechances,likeJaqueline’s,aredeterminedbytheirearlyattachmentexperiences.However,Barrettcontradictsthisassumptionandsuggeststhatlifechancesarenotdeterminedandcanbemediatedbyotherfactors.ThissuggeststhatthereareindividualdifferencesthatplayanimportantroleinmaternaldeprivationandnotallchildrenwillsufferthesamenegativeconsequencesthatJacquelineisexperiencing.[~550words]

outlineandevaluationelementsoftheessay.Commentaryissupportedwithembeddedreferencetothedeterminism.

Examinerstylecomments: Markband4Thisisawell‐detailedandaccurateaccountofBowlby’smaternaldeprivationtheoryandhowitappliestothecaseofJaqueline.Effectivematerialisdrawnfromthescenarioprovidedandintertwinedseamlesslyintothediscussionthroughouttheessay,demonstratingproficiencywiththisskill.Theevaluativecommentaryisdetailed,thoroughandeffectiveasitdrawsonarangeofinterestingpoints.Theuseofspecialistterminologyiswell‐establishedwhichaddsclarityandfocustotheessay.



Outline and evaluate research into the influence of early attachment on childhood and adult relationships. (16 marks) Theinternalworkingmodelofaninfantisthoughttopredictthelikelyoutcomesofbehaviourinchildhoodandadulthood.Kerns(1994)foundthatsecurelyattachedinfantsaremoreinclinedtohavegoodqualitypeerrelationshipsduringchildhood,whilstinfantswithinsecureattachmenttypesarelikelytohavedifficultieswithmakingormaintainingfriendships.Sroufeetal.(2005)conductedtheMinnesotachild–parentstudyandfoundthatinfantswhowereratedhighinsocialcompetenceduringchildhoodweremoreempathetic,popularandfeltlessisolated.HazanandShaverreportedapositivecorrelationbetweenearlyattachmenttypeandexperiencesinlove.Thosewhoreportedsecureattachmentsinchildhoodwerethemostlikelytohavelovingandlastingromanticrelationshipsinadulthood.Respondentstothequestionnairewhoseanswersindicatedaninsecure–avoidantattachmenttypefrominfancyweremorelikelytoreportfeelingsofdislikeinrelationtointimacy.Thoseindividualswithaninsecure–resistantattachmenttypeweremorelikelytohaveshorterrelationshipscomparedtosecurerespondents.Thereismixedresearchindeterminingcontinuityofattachmenttypefromchildhoodtoadulthood.Zimmerman(2000)suggeststhatinfantattachmenttypeandthequalityofrelationshipswithparentsduringadolescencearenotrelated.Thesefindingsdonotsupporttheroleoftheinternalworkingmodelbeingimportantinthedevelopmentofchildhoodandadultrelationships,castingdoubtontheemphasisplacedonthisconceptbydevelopmentalpsychologistssuchasBowlby.Anissuewithinvestigationsoftheinfluenceofattachmentonlaterrelationshipsandtheroletheinternalworkingmodelisthattheresearchiscorrelational.Whilstanassociationhasbeenfoundbymanyresearchersindicatingthequalityoflaterrelationshipsisheavilyinfluencedbyattachmenttypefrominfancy,thisisdoesnotdeterminecausality.Fraleyetal.(2002)foundthatthecorrelationswerenotalwaysstrongpositiveoneseither,withcorrelationcoefficientsrangingfrom+.10to+.50.Thismeansthatcorrelationalresearchinthisareaisnotveryreliableduetoanunstablearrayofresults.Therearemethodologicalissueswithassessingattachmenttyperetrospectively.Muchresearch,suchasthe‘LoveQuiz’

Keyterminologyisincludedfromtheoffset.Effectiveuseofresearchintheoutlinetodemonstrateaccurateanddetailedknowledgeandunderstandingofthetopic.Agoodbalanceofdescriptionhasbeenachievedbetweentheeffectsonchildhoodandtheeffectsonadulthood.Anappropriatelimitationtobegintheevaluationcommentary.Researchfindingsusedwelltounderlinetheissueofusingcorrelationalresearchfindingsindrawingconclusionsabouttheeffectsonattachmentinlaterlife.Evaluationisdirectlyrelevanttothecontentofthe



byHazan&Shaverrelyuponself‐reportfromadultparticipantsabouttheirmemoriesfrominfancyandchildhood.Recollectionsfromyearsgonebyarelikelytobeimpairedandanyanswersprovidedmaylackaccuracyduetodeteriorationwhichlowerstheinternalvalidityoffindings.Thisproblemisfurthercompoundedbythepossibilitythatindividualsmaynotreporthonestlyorevenhaveaninsightintotheirowntemplateofexpectationssincetheinternalworkingmodelisanunconsciousframework.Researchintotheimpactofattachmentonchildhoodandadultrelationshipshaveverysetviewsontheoutcomesforfuturebehaviour.Consequently,thispresentsadeterministicviewofbehaviourwhichsuggeststhataninfant’searlyattachmentexperienceswillhavesevereconsequencesonchildhoodandadulthoodbehavioursincludingmentalhealth.However,notallpsychologists(e.g.humanisticpsychologists)prescribetodeterministicviewsandmanywouldarguethathumanshavefreewillandtheabilityofovercomenegativechildhoodexperiencesandgoontoformhappyandhealthyadultrelationships.[~500words]

descriptionandtiedcloselytothequestion.Impressiveuseofissuesanddebatestocompletethediscussion.

Examinerstylecomments: Markband4Thisisaverycomprehensiveandpreciseessayexaminingtheeffectsofattachmentonchildhoodandadultrelationships.Theuseofspecialistterminologyincludingreferencetodeterminismisimpressive.Theevaluationelementisfocused,thoroughandeffective.Overall,aninspiringaccountoftheeffectsofattachmentinlaterlife.

More Psychology revision and support at:

www.tutor2u.net/psychology

@tutor2uPsych ALevelPsychStudentGroup tutor2uPsych


AQA A LEVEL Psychology topic ESSAYS: ATTACHMENT

ATTACHMENT ESSAYS

1. With reference to reciprocity and interactional synchrony, discuss infant-caregiver interactions. (16 marks)

2. Outline and evaluate the role of the father in the development of attachment. (16 marks)

3. Discuss animal studies of attachment. (16 marks)

4. Outline and evaluate Bowlby’s explanation of attachment. (16 marks)

5. Outline and evaluate learning theory as an explanation of attachment. (16 marks)

6. Discuss the Strange Situation as a way of assessing type of attachment. (16 marks)

7. Outline and evaluate research into cultural variations in attachment. (16 marks)

8. Jo was taken away from his alcoholic parents at six months old and placed in institutional care. He was adopted when he was seven years old, but has a problematic relationship with his adoptive parents. He is violent towards his younger brothers and is often in trouble at school. His last school report said, ‘Jo struggles with classwork and seems to have little regard for the feelings of others.’

Discuss Bowlby’s maternal deprivation theory. Refer to the experience of Jo as part of your discussion. (16 marks)

9. Psychologists have studied children who have lived in institutions such as orphanages. Outline and evaluate research into the effects of institutionalisation. (16 marks)

10. Outline and evaluate research into the influence of early attachment on childhood and adult relationships. (16 marks)

Documents

AQA A Level Psychology Topic ESSAYS...Page 4 AQA A LEVEL Psychology topic ESSAYS: ATTACHMENT opyright tutor2u imited / School etwork icense Photocopying Permitted Outline and evaluate