Attachment in Infancy - Research Paper Example

? Attachment in Infancy Attachment in Infancy Among the most empirically grounded and popular theories associated to parenting, one is the Attachment theory. Several roles are played by parents in their children’s lives, admitting in their roles as playmate, teacher, caregiver, disciplinarian and attachment figure. Amongst all these mentioned roles, the most essential and vital role is of an attachment figure as it helps in forecasting the child’s later emotional and social development. Attachment is one circumscribed and particular facet of the association between a caregiver and a child where the caregiver is involved in keeping the child protected, secure and safe. (Bowlby, 1982). The main intend and objective of attachment is not entertaining or playing with the child as this may be involved in the role played as playmate, feeding of child as being their primary caregiver, set the boundaries for the child being a disciplinarian or teaching the child novel skills being a teacher. Essentially, attachment is the utilization of primary caregiver by the child as a secure base for exploring things and, when needed, as a comfort source and haven of protection (Waters & Cummings, 2000). Attachment is distinct from ‘bonding’. Since, it was a concept developed by Kennell and Klaus who entailed that child-parent bonding depended upon the skin-to-skin contact of the child and primary caregiver during an initial critical period (Kennell & Klaus, 1976). This perception of ‘bonding’ was established to be flawed and to have no linkage with atachment. But unluckily, many non-professionals as well as professional still employ the term interchangeably. As a description of secure attachment, professionals often portray the example of an infant being breast fed by his or her mother thus erroneously implying that breastfeeding intrinsically encourages secure attachment. While others portray a secure attachment as a child playing with his or her parents playing as a secure attachment, though these examples portray the parents’ roles as caregiver and playmate and not as a secure base. It might be considered that the need of distinction between bonding and attachment is essential since bonding does not lead to the behavioral development of a child while attachment is an influential predictor of the later emotional and social behavior of the child (Kennel & Klaus, 1976). Now since the distinction has been made between the different roles of a caregiver, the types of attachment are now to be explored. Attachment Types and their background The parent-infant attachment can be divided into four types listed below. 1. Secure attachment 2. Insecure-resistant 1. Insecure-avoidant 2. Insecure-disorganized. Amongst these, the first three are organized types while the last one is disorganized type. The worth of attachment developed by an infant with a particular caregiver is mainly determined by the way the caregiver responds to an infant when his her attachment system is activated (such as when the feelings of security and safety of an infant are threatened, for instance, when an infant is physically hurt, ill or emotionally distressed specially frightened. Starting at around the age of six months, infants start to anticipate the particular caregivers responses to their suffering therefore they start shaping their own behavior such as forming strategies to cope with their distress in front of that particular caregiver on the basis of their interactions with that particular caregivers in daily basis (Ainsworth et al., 1978) Three main forms of reactions to distress have been discovered in infants, which are considered to be the cause of three particular patterns of organized attachment. The caregivers who are consistent in responding towards distress in a loving or sensitive ways, like picking up the baby instantly and comforting the infant, their infants feel safe and consider that they can freely show negative emotions which will evoke the reassuring from their caregiver (9). So they particularly organize their strategy for managing distress and therefore is categorized as secure and organized. They look for proximity to and maintain contact with their primary caregiver till they consider secure. This strategy is known as organized as the infant actually knows exactly the course of action to be adopted with an extensively sensitive caregiver, i.e. move towards their caregiver instantly in a distressing situation. Besides, the caregivers who incessantly respond to distressing situations in rejecting or insensitive manners such as ridiculing, ignoring or becoming annoyed, their infants frame a strategy to deal with distress in an organized way. It is organized in that manner that the infants attempt to keep away from their caregiver on facing distressing situations and minimizes showing negative emotions in front of their caregiver (9). This strategy is called as organized because the infant here also knows accurately what needs to be done with an avoiding caregiver i.e., to stay away from them in case of distress and need. This strategy of avoidance is insecure as it enhances the threat of developing adjustment issues. The caregiver who respond in an unpredictable, inconsistent and/or involving manners, like anticipating the infant to be concerned about the needs of the caregiver or by exaggerating the distress of infant and being inundated, their infants also develop an organized way to cope with their distress. Since they experience an inconsistent attention of their caregiver, they show extreme negative emotions to seek the attention of their primary caregiver. This strategy is also considered as an organized because in this case, the infant again knows what exactly is needed to be done by exaggerating the demonstration of anger and distress, resistant responses, ‘desiring’ that the noted distress response will make their inconsistent caregiver alarmed. Besides, this particular resistant and organized strategy is insecure as it is linked with the danger of developing emotional and social maladjustment. Around fifteen percent of infants in lower Approximately 15% of infants in low risks pertaining to social and psychological aspects of behavior and approximately eight two percent of infants facing high-rick scenarios do not incorporate these organized strategies for managing negative emotion and stress. (9). Such infants acquire disorganized manner of attachment. A recently noted pathway to disorganized attachment of infants entails the exposure of children to particular types of unusual behaviors (atypical) of their primary caregiver and distorted parenting (Lyons-Ruth et al., 1999). These atypical behaviors of the caregiver, also known as frightened, sexualized, frightening, dissociated or atypical in other way, are unnatural behaviors exhibited by caregivers in all sorts of their interactions with their infants and are not restricted to the situations of distress. It has been evidenced that such atypically behaving parents usually have a past of unresolved physical, sexual or emotional trauma or an unresolved mourning or are, in other ways or respect traumatized (for instance shocked prey of domestic violence) (Lyons-Ruth et al., 1999). In dealing with an abrupt and inconsistent caregiver, the infants fail to develop a particular organized way to deal with their distressing situation and thus it is said to be unorganized. Moreover dealing with since such a hostile caregiver who is suffering from his or her own personal stress ensures insecurity throughout the parenting. Now that the types and their history have been done, the attachment stages must be explored. Attachment Stages In 1964, a sample of 60 infants was studied by Peggy Emerson and Rudolph for initial eighteen months on monthly basis. Since the study was conducted in the vicinity of the home of the infants, a distinguished normal pattern was noted in the progression of attachment. These infants were visited for a period of one year and the observations were done on the way they interacted with their primary caregiver. The caregivers were also interviewed. Substantiation for the progression of an attachment was that the infant started exhibiting anxiety upon separation from their primary caregiver. A series of attachment development in infants was discovered. An indiscriminate attachment is observed amongst infants till they are three months old. The neonate is inclined to attach to any individual and therefore respond in an equal way to any carer. However after the initial four months, the infants start preferring certain individuals. Infants at this stage learn to discern primary as well as secondary caregivers but do not reject care from anyone else (Schaffer & Emerson, 1964). However special preference for a particular attachment figure is sought by infant after seven months of age. At this stage, the infant looks to specific individuals for protection, security and comfort. They exhibit dread of strangers (stranger fear) and sadness when set-apart from their particular caregiver (separation anxiety). This demonstration of separation anxiety and stranger fear is much more recurrent and intense in some infants than others, but all the same they are considered as manifest that the infant has constituted an attachment. This typically is acquired by the age of one year. Multiple attachments are sought by the age of none months as the infant gets more and more independent and constitutes various attachments. The outcomes of the study mentioned that attachments were most probable to constitute with those individuals who respond exactly to the stimuli of baby and not the one with which they spend their most time. This responsiveness has been called as sensitive responsiveness (Schaffer & Emerson, 1964). By the age of ten months, majority of the attachments acquire various attachments, admitting attachments to fathers, mothers, grandparents, neighbors and siblings. At the age of eighteen months, the mother was found to be the major attachment person for around half of the infants. The most significant fact in making attachments is that the infants do not attach more with the person feeding and changing their diapers but are more attached to the one who communicates and plays with them (Schaffer & Emerson, 1964). Attachment Theory Discussing the theoretical background of attachment, there are two theories that have been proposed by psychologists as essential in the institution of attachments. Behaviorist /Learning theory of attachment According to this theory attachment is a set of acquired behaviors. In this case, the foundation for the acquiring of attachments is the supply of food. Therefore, an infant will at the earlier stage form an attachment to the one who feeds them. At this stage, infants learn to connect the feeder (typically the mother) with the ease of being fed and by the method of classical conditioning, arrive to discover contact with the person (mostly the mother) comforting. Infants also discover that some specific behaviors such as smiling or crying impart suitable replies from others (such as comfort, attention), and all the way through the method of operant conditioning find out to reiterate such behaviors to acquire what they desire (Dollard & Miller, 1950). Evolutionary Attachment Theory It has been suggested by this theory that children enter this world with a biological pre-programming to frame attachments with other individuals, so that they may help them in their survival (e.g. Bowlby, Harlow, Lorenz). Many researchers have worked on these grounds among these include the work of Lorenz, Bowlby and Harlow. The infant develops inborn ‘social releaser’ conducts such as smiling and crying that arouses natural care-giving reactions from adults. Therefore, this theory suggests that the causal factor of attachment is responsive and care instead of food that has been considered as causal factor by the learning theories. It has been suggested by Bowlby that an infant at the beginning would constitute a single attachment (monotropy) and that attachment individual would provide the secure base for further exploration of the world. Therefore the primary attachment association works as a prototype for all further social associations and thus disrupting this primary attachment may lead to severe outcomes. It has also been suggested by this theory that a critical period exists for constituting this early attachment that is between the birth and five years of age. In this critical period, if an infant fails to develop an attachment, then the child may undergo severe irreversible development outcomes like increased aggression and reduced intelligence. One of the most significant studies was done by Harlow in 1958. This theory contradicts the basic instinct of behavioral model which considers the food as the primary concern of an infant. This theory suggests that the infant will constitute initial attachment with the caregiver not because of being provider of the food instead comfort is their main imperative. Harlow experimented on the rhesus monkeys to discover the attachment pattern. It was noticed that monkeys also constitute attachment during the early critical period. Through his experiments, it was found that the infant monkeys showed more adherence towards comforting attachment figure instead of the one providing the food and thus validated the evolutionary attachment theory (Harlow & Zimmermann, 1958).` Attachment Patterns Significance Extensive research demonstrates that a substantial linkage exists between attachment organization and the functioning of a child in various domains. However, an initial insecure attachment not necessarily may predict hardships, but it may form a burden for the child especially if such parental or care-giving behavior is prolonged throughout the period of childhood. In comparison to those securely attached, the insecurely attached children may found difficulty in adjusting in various spheres of life due to their foundational insecurity and thus placing their potential associations into danger. Though this linkage is not fully established through research and there exist a number of other factors influencing the increased social competency of securely attached kids than those insecurely. Associations formed with equals determine the acquirement of social skills, the development of intellect as well as the social identity formation. Categorization of peer status (rejected, neglected or popular) of children has been observed to forecast the consequent adjustment . The children who are insecurely attached, specially, the avoidant kids, are more prone to family risk. The problems faced by them in social and behavioral grounds tend to decrease or increase with the changes in parenting. Besides, an initial secure attachment seems to have an enduring protective function (Harlow & Zimmermann, 1958). The most worrisome pattern of attachment is the disorganized attachment. Around eighty percent of the maltreated infants are most probable to be categorized as disorganized, in contrast to around twelve percent discovered in non-maltreated samples. Around fifteen percent of the maltreated have chances to be classified as securely attached. Kids who have a disorganized pattern of attachment during their infancy tend to exhibit a notably disturbed pattern of associations. Consequently their associations with peers can frequently be qualified by a "flight or fight" pattern of interchanging withdrawal and aggression. Impacted maltreated kids are also more probably turn into maltreating parents. However, only a minority of those treated undesirably may achieve and acquire secure attachments, non-abusive styles of parenting and good associations with peers. The connection between insecure attachment, specifically the disorganized one and the incidence of psychopathology during childhood has been well-grounded, though, it is a non-particular aspect for future issues, not a direct source of pathology or pathology itself. It has been observed that within the classroom, the insecure children are at a high danger for internalizing disorders while disorganized and avoidant are more prone towards externalizing disorders (Skuse, 1984). Attachment Biology It has been proposed by the attachment theory that the care-giving quality from the main caregiver is essential to the insecurity or security of attachment. Along with the studies on psychophysiology of the attachment, research has been initiated to involve temperament concepts and behavior genetics. In general, attachment and temperament make distinguish developmental domains, but facets of both impart to a range of intrapersonal and interpersonal developmental consequences, since it has been evidenced that certain temperament may increase the chances of an individual to experience stress of hostile or unpredictable associations with the carers in the initial years. In case the kids are not provided responsive caregivers, they may become specifically susceptible to acquiring attachment disorders.The psychophysiology research suggests that the care-giving quality impacts the development of part of nervous system that is associated with the regulation of stress. Conclusion Attachment theory depicts the kinetics of long-term associations amongst humans. It’s most significant dogma is that an infant is required to frame an association with at least one initial primary carer for emotional and social to happen naturally. This explains the extent to which the association of parents with their children impacts the development of their children. This theory is an interdisciplinary study involving the fields of evolutionary, psychology and ethological theory. It establishes that infants start attaching to people who are responsive and sensitive in social exchanges with them and those who sustain this association for few months during the period usually referred as critical between six months to early two years. As the infant’s movement increases, this attachment figure is being utilized by the infant as either an insecure or secure base to increase its interaction within the environment. The responses of the initial caregivers cause the development of attachment patterns which in turn impact the internal models of functioning responsible for guiding the emotions, perceptions, thoughts and expectations of kids in their potential associations. Thus attachment plays a significant role in the development of a child. References Ainsworth, M. D.S., Blehar, M. D., Waters, E. & Wall, S. (1978). Patterns of Attachment. Hillsdale: Erlbaum. Bowlby, J. (1982). Attachment and Loss. Volume 1: Attachment. 2nd ed. New York: Basic Books. Dollard, J. & Miller, N.E. (1950). Personality and psychotherapy. New York: McGraw-Hill Harlow, H. F. & Zimmermann, R. R. (1958). The development of affective responsiveness in infant monkeys. Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 102, 501 -509. Kennell, J. H. & Klaus, M. H. (1976). Maternal-Infant Bonding: The Impact of Early Separation or Loss on Family Development. St Louis: Mosby. Lyons-Ruth, K., Bronfman, E. & Atwood, G. (1999). ‘A relational diathesis model of hostile-helpless states of mind: Expressions in mother-infant interactions.’ In: Solomon J, George C, editors. Attachment Disorganization. New York: Guilford Press; pp. 33–70. Schaffer, H. R. & Emerson, P. E. (1964). ‘The Development of Social Attachments in Infancy’. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 29, 94. Waters, E., & Cummings, E. M. (2000). A secure base from which to explore close relationships. Child Dev. 71:164–72. Skuse, D. (1984). "Extreme deprivation in early childhood—II. Theoretical issues and a comparative review". Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 25 (4): 543–72. Read More