The Evolutionary Theory of Attachment

The evolutionary theory suggests that the tendency to form attachments is innate - we are born with it - and the behaviours we have now are ones that we've adapted in order to increase our chance of survival.

Konrad Lorenz - Imprinting

He was interested in how young animals gain an attachment with their mother, and how this helps them with their chance of survival. He carried an experiment out on grey lag geese, setting two conditions:

1. He was the first moving object seen by the goose chicks after hatching.
2. The mother goose was the first moving object seen by the goose chicks after hatching.

He found that the goose chicks that saw him first followed him as he were their mother and in adulthood they performed mating rituals on him, ignoring any other geese. Whereas the chicks who saw their mother first, followed her and in adulthood would perform mating rituals on other geese.

He also found that the goose chicks had a critical period - a time period in which they had to form an attachment with a caregiver or they never would.

Key features of Bowlby's evolutionary theory of attachment

John Bowlby came up with the evolutionary theory of attachment and within this theory there are a number of different theories.

A = Adaptive

John Bowlby said that attachments are adaptive as they're pre-programmed and aid us in our chances of survival. When an infant has an attachment to a caregiver they are more likely to be kept warm, fed and safe.

C = Critical Period

Bowlby said that a strong attachment must form with one caregiver within the first two years of an infants life, these two years are called the critical period. He also said that if disruption to this attachment occurred then the infant will suffer developmental consequences. 

S = Social Releasers

Babies have social releasers, they unlock the innate tendencies of a caregiver, which lead them to look after the infant. These social releasers can be both:

• Physical - The typical 'baby face' features
• Behavioural - Sound the baby will make and the way it will behave e.g. crying, cooing 

Attachments will form with the adults that respond to these social releasers.

M = Monotropy

This is a special, intense attachment that will form between the mother and her baby. If the mother isn't available then this bond will form with a mother-substitute caregiver.

I = Internal Working Model

Through the monotropic attachment, the infant will form an internal working model. This is a bit like a blueprint or moral compass, as it's based on the decisions the monotropic figure would make, it will guide the infant in the future. if the child suffers deprivation then the child will develop an internal working model of themselves as unworthy.

Continuity Hypothesis

Depending on how the caregiver is towards the infants, the infant will develop a different internal working model of themselves. Bowlby came up with a theory of how this worked:

Evaluation of The Evolutionary Theory of Attachments

• The evolutionary theory of attachments is an entirely plausible theory backed up with plenty of animal comparisons, e.g. Lorenz (1935)

• Rutter et al. Orphans from east Europe were adopted and were found to be able to form an attachment with their new parents. However after this, the later the adoption was, the slowed it was for an attachment to form. Despite this, they could still form an attachment after the supposed 'critical period', suggesting more of a 'sensitive period'.

• Schafer & Emerson - Bowlby claimed that you could only form a special attachment with one caregiver figure, however this was criticised by psychologist Schafer & Emerson as they found that infants could form attachments with multiple care givers, and that quality of interaction is more important than quantity of interaction.
• Minnesota Study - Children who were rated as securely attached at 12 months proved to have better social skills later on in life.
• Hazan & Shavers 'Love Quiz' - This showed that couples who rated themselves as securely attached had long lasting relationships whereas insecure couples were found to be more likely to get a divorce.

The Learning Theory of Attachment

The Learning Theory of Attachment is the name given to a group of explanations which explain behaviour in terms of learning rather than any other inborn tendencies or higher-order thinking.

Classical Conditioning

Classical conditioning involves learning through association. It proposes that attachments are learnt via stimulus-response.

The process of of classical conditioning is as follows:

An unconditioned response (food) causes an unconditioned response (feeling of pleasure). When the neutral stimulus (mother/caregiver) is introduced during this process, the infant will soon associate the neutral stimulus with the unconditioned response. With repetition. the neutral stimulus (mother/caregiver) will become the conditioned response, and the unconditioned response (feeling of pleasure) will become the conditioned response.

Pavlov's Dogs

Ivan Pavlov looked at classical conditioning in dogs. He noticed that food (unconditioned stimulus) caused the dogs to salivate (unconditioned response). The he began to ring a bell (neutral stimulus) whenever he bought the food out to the dogs, he did this every time he bought the food out. Soon enough he found that even if he only rang the bell, the dogs would still salivate - this was because the dogs had associated the food with the sound of the bell and so they salivate. This means the bell has become the conditioned response and the dogs salivating had become the conditioned response. 

Operant Conditioning

Operant conditioning is where an attachment is learnt via reinforcements or punishments.

The process of operant conditioning is as follows:

Each time you do something and it results in a pleasant consequence, it means that you're more likely to repeat this behaviour in the future, this is a reinforcement. However if you do something and it results in a negative consequence, you're less likely to do this in the future, this means it's a punishment. When an infant is hungry, it has an unpleasant feeling and wants to reduce the discomfort. When the infant is fed, the infant experiences a feeling of pleasure and so the food becomes the primary reinforcer because it reduces the discomfort (rewarding). The caregiver providing the food becomes associated with the feeling of pleasure and so becomes the secondary reinforcer and is soon a reward on its own. An attachment occurs as the infant seeks out the secondary reinforcer in order to get food.

Skinner's box

B.F. Skinner looked at operant conditioning in mice. He placed mice in a box and on one side of the box there was and empty food bowl with a lever next to it. As the mice explored the box, they found that if they pressed the lever then food would drop into the food bowl and they would feed, providing comfort for the mice. This meant the food was the primary reinforcer as it provided the direct pleasure, and the lever became the secondary reinforcer as it was required in order to supply the food.

Evaluation of The Learning Theory of Attachment

• Experiments support this theory: Palov's dogs, Skinner's box, etc...
• Harlow & Harlow's monkey's - An experiment was conducted on monkeys to see whether they would become more attached to a metal pole with cloth attached to it or a metal pole that provided them with food. It was found that the monkeys spent more time with the 'cloth mother' than the 'food mother'. This doesn't support the learning theory of attachments as the monkeys preferred the cloth mother, whereas the learning theory would suggest that they would prefer the food mother as food provides the comfort.
• Schaffer and Emerson - Two psychologists observed 60 infants in mainly working-class homes in Glasgow for over a year. They found that the infants because more attached to the person who was more emotionally responsive towards it, rather that the person who fed them. This doesn't support the learning theory as it shows that the infant prefers attention over food.