No tags yet.
What the spec says: Explanations of attachment: Bowlby's monotropic theory
OUTLINE AND EVALUATE BOWLBY'S MONOTROPIC THEORY
AO1
Bowlby argued that attachments occur due to innate biological programming as they serve as an evolutionary purpose which helps us survive and has reproductive value. Staying in close proximity to a primary caregiver (PCG) gives greater chance of survival, particularly given the helpless nature of young humans. He challenged the view put forward by learning theorists who suggested that attachments are based on learning associations, arguing instead that they form due to instinctive behaviour patterns.
Bowlby noticed that babies possessed certain instincts described as social releasers (e.g crying, smiling) which encourage caregiving behaviours in parents and that parents, especially mothers, possess corresponding instincts designed to protect their baby and nurture them to ensure survival into maturity. He argued that babies and mothers who possess these social releasers and nurturing instincts were more likely to survive, reach maturity and produce offspring. He used the work of Harlow with monkeys which showed the importance of a mother figure who offered contact comfort to develop his ideas of infants using their mothers as a safe base to explore.
The first attachment between and child and their PCG provides the child with a template or an internal working model which gives them an insight into their CG's behaviour. This helps them build a model of themselves as loveable or not and also a model for future relationships. This IWM begins in early childhood and influences later relationships in adulthood, which is referred to as the continuity hypothesis. Bowlby believed that for every infant, one attachment was more significant and was at the top of the hierarcy (idea of monotropy). He also believed that attachments must take place within the critical period of the first 2 years of a child's life. If attachments didn't form during this development period, then they may not form at all or there may be severe consequences in later relationships.
AO3
There is wide acceptance of Bowlby's theory today as it has improved our understanding of the importance of mother-infant relationships in early life. This is why many adoptive agencies will try and place children with families at as young as age as possible in order to ensure that attachments form during the critical period, as suggested by Bowlby.
Support for the continuity hypothesis was provided by Sroufe et al in their Minnesota parent-child study which followed pps from infancy to adolescence. They found that those who had formed early attachments were able to do so later as adults, providing support for the hypothesis as it shows a link between early and later attachments.
However, Bowlby's theory of monotropy has been criticised by Schaffer and Emerson. They conducted a longitudinal study of 60 infants from mainly working class backgrounds in Glasgow and found that by 6 months almost a third had formed multiple attachments and this had increased to two thirds by 18 months. This evidence implies that multiple attachments were the norm for most infants and one didn't have a higher value than others. Therefore, the monotropy theory may not be as valid.
Rutter et al challenged the concept of the critical period. Having studied Romanian orphans, they found that although the orphans failed to form attachments within the critical period, they were still able to form attachments later on when adopted. This suggests that the critical period as well as the overall theory may lack validity.
Furthermore, Kagan proposed that infant's attachments may be explained by their temperament. The temperament hypothesis states that those with easy temperaments are more likely to be securely attached as it's easier to interact with them than those with difficult temperaments who show unstable behaviour. This hypothesis challenges Bowlby's theory as his research suggests that attachments are due to a mother's sensitivity as opposed to a child's innate emotional personality. Therefore, it can be argued that Bowlby's theory has reduced validity in terms of explaining early attachments as it only takes into consideration one factor influencing attachment, when there may be several.
This essay in its current form is 12/12 marks therefore, an additional paragraph on Issues and Debates e.g socially sensitive research would be needed to bring it up to 16 marks.
I will provide the general structure of the paragraph but it is up to you to write it and expand/elaborate. You don't have to follow this and can write something entirely different or include another point to get the remaining 4 marks.
Point: The monotropic theory is an example of socially sensitive research as it has many implications for working mothers and their infant attachments...
Evidence: For example, working mothers may be unable to spend as much time nurturing their infants and thus suggests that infants may not be securely attached/ the mother-infant attachment may not be as significant.
Explain: This suggests... However, this may not be the case....
Link: Therefore, Bowlby's theory may not be as valid today...
Useful links
The ASCMI mnemonic (in the link below 3:34) is VERY useful for remembering the AO1 points
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sQH4Taus0K4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZi4S-ag8Ts
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SLdumo14_CA
https://www.tutor2u.net/psychology/reference/bowlbys-theory-of-attachment
https://www.mytutor.co.uk/answers/16833/A-Level/Psychology/What-are-the-key-points-of-Bowlby-s-theory-of-Monotropy