Infant and Child test 3 attachment

indiscriminant social responsiveness

-0-6/8 weeks -"preattachment" baby cannot discriminate between caregivers/people because their abilities are so rudimentary

reciprocal relationship

-18/24 months-.... -your relationship stays important with parents, but its a different relationship -no longer afraid of strangers -physical proximity is not that important -give and take relationship, know they will be there

waters study

-50 individuals assessed with strange situation at 12 months, then with Adult attachment interview at 21 years -also measured occurrence of negative life events (divorce, abuse, serious illness) -there was relative consistency--secure infant, secure adult

focused attachment

-6/8 months-18/24 months -"clear cut" -STRANGER DANGER -scared of strangers, obsessed with parents -WHY: 6/8 months is also crawling/locomotor experience, which enables fear because this is no longer the goal and they begin to perceive more of the outside world

parental contributions to disorganized kids

-abusive (conflicted movements, not sure whether to love, hate, or fear)

how to measure attachment styles in adults

-adult attachment interview -asked them questions of their impressions of childhood, tell me about moms etc -this was used to see if secure as kid lead to secure adult, or if security in ones own parents predict security in ones own children

attachment after toddlerhood

-at this point, it is the AVAILABILITY of the attachment figure, not the physical proximity that becomes the set goal of the attachment system -not physical proximity, but the possibility of physical proximity that is important

4 ways they classified adults through the adult interview

-autonomous -dismissing -preoccupied -unresolved

style or environment stability explanations

-autonomous and preoccupied are largely explained through parenting style -dismissing can be explained through environment of absence (working jobs, etc) rather than just style

-main findings

-autonomous grandmas, 96% had children who were autonomous, which led to a high proportion of secure infants -13 dismissing grandmas (not much relationship with mom, sometimes there sometimes not), 7 autonomous children and 5 dismissing -why autonomous: grandmas reflect and want to have relationship with their kid and be there for them, then that leads to secure infants -why dismissing: maybe dismissive is the norm, working--carry on to their kids who continues this tradition, leading to avoidant and resistant infants -preoccupied grandmas (lack of boundaries, intense concern about relationship with their mothers), they acted in a way that passes along to their own kids, then resistant infants

behaviors assessed during strange situation

-baby's exploration when around mom -baby's reaction to mom's departure -baby's behavior towards the stranger *baby's response upon reunion with mom* (dependent, can they function after stranger leaves and their person is back)

important cognitive processes that support the desire for availability

-belief that lines of communication with the attachment figure remain open -belief that physical accessibility IS POSSIBLE -attachment figure will respond if called upon for help -communication, accessibility, responsive to help

unresolved

-confusing and conflictual accounts of childhood, especially around issues of loss or trauma -missing a lot of details

dismissing adults

-forget or dismiss attachment experiences as unimportant (eh, childhood was whatever) -kindaa avoidant

autonomous adults

-independent, thoughtful, can examine effects of all childhood experiences -not only good, but honest and balanced

phases of attachment: THAT WE ARE PREDISPOSED TO DEVELOPING

-indiscriminant social responsiveness -discriminate social responsiveness -focused attachment -reciprocal relationship

disorganized kids...

-internalizing and externalizing -I'll check out as a way of coping for a challenging past -externalizing that anguish too -risk for dissociation--break from reality; amnesia, stepping away strategy

results of van den boom 1994

-intervention moms were more responsive than control moms at 9 months -intervention babies at 9 months were: more exploratory, cried less, more cognitively sophisticated -invention dyads were much more likely to be SECURE at 12 mos

parental contributions to resistant kids

-intrusive (put their agenda above the kids--are YOU okay, are YOU SURE you're okay?!); makes baby question/fear -inconsistant: the parents care about this only when THEY wanna care, not when their kid necessarily needs it

secure infants (B) become...

-less dependent on adults--even less than avoidant kids because they are effectively independent -able to respond flexibly to stress, can ask for help -more enthusiastic, compliant, persistant -socially competent with both same/opposite sex -lower incidence of behavior problems -didnt bully or get bullied

Why are parenting effects are more than gene-environment correlations (socialization)? Instead, parenting REALLY does cause differences in kids

-magnitude of some effects (significant) -measurement difficulties -organismic specificity effects--different parentings affect different kids in different ways -longitudinal studies of change (how people change over time due to parenting styles) -experimental studies of interventions--see how parenting interventions affects different people

benoit and parker: does security regarding ones own parents predict security in one's children?

-measured attachment in three generations -grandmas and moms measured with AAI, babies with strange situation

avoidant (A) kids are later...

-prone to anger and aggression (because a lack of empathy) -less empathetic -bullies -they are externalizing their problems/neglect and having to rely on their own pushes them to externalize this

resistant kids (C) kids are later...

-prone to fear and anxiety -less confident (not sure if I'm okay) -more withdrawn -victims of bullying -internalizing problems

disorganized attachment (LESS THAN 5% IN US; USED IN CONJUNCTION WITH PRIMARY CLASSIFICATION)

-rare -disorganized patterns -child shows conflicted, often odd behaviors (stilling, repetitive movement, clear apprehension)--not a coherent strategy -associated with abusive caregiver -conflicted patterns translates, because the person caring for you is also the person hurting you

main findings of waters study

-relative consistency--secure as infant, secure as adult (especially when no stressful life events were reported); insecure as infant, insecure as adult -with one of more life event reported, only 33% of secure infants retained security as adult, 66% changed -with one or more life event reported, 89% of insecure infants in strange situation retained insecurity in the AAI (insecure even more likely to maintain stability in both stressful and non stressful) -secure maintain stability in non-stressful, lose stability in stressful -when there is a stressful event, affects child as individual as well as the entire system -especially with those secure as an infant then life trauma

preoccupied

-still dependent or "wrapped up" in relationship with parent -need to go and fix something -lack of healthy boundary

van den boom 1989

-studied whether temperament (biology) lead to attachment (relationships) -compared temperamentally "difficult" (harder to soothe, cried) and "easy" kids -mothers of difficult kids grew increasingly unresponsive (especially to POSITIVE signals of kids) -difficult kids caused parents to check out, to the point where they don't even notice the positive -difficult kids are more likely to be insecure temp--> change in parenting--> attachment (dynamic circle)

-secure infants (ABOUT 65-70% IN US)

-uses caregiver as a secure base (may explore toys when mom is present) -MAY be distressed upon separation -MAY be soothed by a stranger, but clearly prefers caregiver -will be HAPPY to see caregiver return, will allow self to be soothed by caregiver if upset -these kids eventually become comfortable when separated because of the security they have in the relationship with their parent

insecure-avoidant (ABOUT 20% IN US)

-will explore toys when mom is present -may not be distressed by separation with mom -treats caregiver the same as mom -ignores or avoids mom upon return -could translate to a spouse--I can take care of myself, not dependent on another person or primary caregiver

insecure-resistant (ABOUT 10-15%)

-will not explore, even when caregiver is present -very distressed by separation -not calmed by stranger -seeks contact with mom upon return, but does not soothe when contact is achieved -translates to freaking out with spouse

products of attachment: from attachment relationship, children...

1. develop strategies for emotion regulation 2. learn how to behave in relationships 3. develop a representation (INTERNAL WORKING MODEL) of what other people and their self are like (others as caring or not, self as deserving or not)--in comparison to their values of attachment

discriminate social responsiveness

6/8 weeks-6/8 months -"attachment in the making" -babies know their parents and can distinguish -they respond in different ways towards the parent, but nothing dramatic

attachment

close emotional bond between two individuals, characterized by mutual affection and desire to maintain proximity -innate for both the caregiver and the child -ALL of us develop attachment and are internally driven to develop attachment--even with abused caregiver or with other children

within what age is there no attachment

first year of life

van den boom 1995

follow up of study at 18, 24, and 42 months -intervention moms: accepting, cooperative, sensitive, responsive, assisting -kids: secure attachment, cooperative with mom, cooperative with peer, -others: dads behavior--responsive; peers behavior: sought contact

why is attachment innate for us?

for survival for kids -parents want to pass their genes on, attach themselves to kids in order to rightfully do so

van den boom 1994

only studied difficult children -intervention study--some groups received intervention training which involved personalized education about temperament and how to soothe/play with irritable infants (this isn't your fault)

parental contributions to attachment style (ex: what do parents do to contribute to their kids attachment styles)--SECURE

parents are... -responsive (take care of baby when cry) -sensitive (understands when baby is upset) -affectionate (provides love and support)

parental contributions to avoidant kids

parents are... -unresponsive (when baby upset, doesn't help--so baby learns that they just need to take care of themselves) -unaffectionate -express negative feelings about the child -baby knows that they are likely to achieve care/suitable interest from the parent so they need to take care of themselves

what do strange situation episodes entail of?

studying the babies reaction to being with their mom, being with a random stranger, and being on their own--and how they respond after being alone with stranger comes in and then mom -with stranger, they will either freak out or accommodate bc they're just looking for a relationship -likely that a secure baby would cry when mom leaves, but then get over it and move on