During the second half of the first year of life (after about eight months of
age), infants begin to show very clear attempts at exploration when their
mothers are present. In fact, research reported by Mary Ainsworth in the
mid-1970’s suggests that once an infant is able to crawl, he or she does not al
ways remain close to the mother. Instead, the child begins to move away
from the mother, more carefully exploring objects and people. From time to
time he or she returns to her, as if to check her whereabouts or to check in
with her. If the mother moves away, however, or if the infant is frightened by
some event, he or she will either approach the mother or will signal to bring
the mother in closer proximity. For example, the infant often fusses, cries,
and clings to the caregiver at the first sign of the caregiver’s possible departure,
a response known as separation protest. At about the same time, infants
begin to express stranger anxiety or stranger wariness by fussing and
crying when an unfamiliar person enters the room or approaches.
Ainsworth designed a special laboratory technique, known as the “strange
situation,” that allows direct observation of the interactions between the
behaviors associated with exploration, attachment, separation protest, and
stranger anxiety. This situation places an infant in an unfamiliar setting with
a stranger, both in the presence and in the absence of the mother. The procedure
consists of a series of three-minute episodes (the process lasts a total
of about twenty minutes) in which the child is exposed to an unfamiliar playroom
containing a set of age-appropriate toys. During the initial episodes,
the mother remains in the playroom with the infant. Mother and infant are
then joined in the playroom by a female stranger, who first talks to the
mother, then approaches the baby. Next, the mother leaves the room, and
the baby and stranger are left alone together. Mother then returns and the
stranger leaves, so that the baby is reunited with the mother. Following this
episode, the baby is left alone in the room, then joined by the stranger; finally,
the mother again returns and the stranger leaves.
This strange situation, therefore, exposes a child to three potentially upsetting
experiences: separation from the caregiver, contact with a stranger,
and unfamiliar surroundings. The episodes are arranged in such a way that
they present a series of stressful experiences to the infant and thus present
an opportunity to observe not only the infant’s immediate response to a
stranger and to separation from the mother but also his or her ability to derive
comfort from the mother and to use her as a secure base for exploration.
Ainsworth has reported that, while there are many similarities in infant
responses to this strange situation, there are also important individual differences.
In her initial study of twelve-month-old infants and their mothers,
Ainsworth reported three distinct patterns of responding to the events of
the strange situation, and the validity of these behavior patterns has been
demonstrated by much additional research.
A majority of the infants exhibited active exploration of the new environment
and the available toys when their mothers were present. Some of these
infants showed distress during the first separation from mother, and by the
second separation, the majority of these infants expressed distress. Upon reunion
with their mother, they actively sought contact with her and were easily
comforted by her, showing considerable signs of positive emotion but
very little, if any, signs of negative emotion. Furthermore, these infants frequently
returned to play and exploration after a period of contact with their
mother. In general, then, these infants used their mothers as a secure base
from which to explore the novel environment, exhibited appropriate attachment
behaviors following her departure, and were easily comforted by
the mother upon her return. Ainsworth suggested that this pattern of behavior
reflects a secure attachment relationship.
A second group of infants showed a very different pattern of behavior.
This minority group showed no evidence of distress during separation. They
did sometimes show distress when left alone in the playroom but were easily
comforted by the returning stranger. Furthermore, this group actually
avoided or ignored their mothers when they returned. In essence, the mothers
were treated very much as were the strangers. These infants showed virtually
no signs of separation protest or stranger anxiety and exhibited very
few attachment behaviors. Ainsworth suggested that this pattern of behavior
reflects an insecure, avoidant attachment relationship.
Finally, a third group of children were extremely distressed upon separation
yet, despite their obvious separation and stranger anxiety, resisted comfort
from their mothers. Their behavior suggested an angry ambivalence—
they objected to being left alone, but they refused to be consoled when reunited
with their mothers. This group of infants often exhibited distress
upon first entering the unfamiliar room with their mothers, and they rarely
left her side to explore the toys or the environment, either before or after
separation, suggesting a lack of a sense of security. Ainsworth suggested that
this behavior pattern reflects an insecure, resistant, or ambivalent attachment
relationship.
It is important to note that Ainsworth’s research was done in the United
States in the 1970’s. Follow-up work has demonstrated that various sociocultural
factors can influence the patterns of attachment behavior seen in the
“strange situation.” For instance, studies done in North Germany in the
1980’s revealed that as many as 60 percent of babies in that culture were classified
as insecure-avoidant because of their lack of distress at separation
from their mothers in the strange situation test. In contrast, studies of attachment
carried out in Japan in the 1980’s and 1990’s indicate that up to 40
percent of Japanese infants are classified as insecure-ambivalent in the
strange situation due to their tendency to cling to their mothers throughout
the procedure. These differing cross-cultural patterns imply that the wider
sociocultural context influences how mothers and infants interact: North
German mothers expect their infants to be relatively self-sufficient and confident,
even during short separations such as those characteristic of the
“strange situation” procedure. Japanese mothers, on the other hand, expect
their infants to be upset when they are out of close proximity, and in daily
practice are unlikely to leave their infants alone even for short periods.
These cross-cultural variations in patterns of attachment highlight the importance
of considering mother-infant attachment in context.
The development of these distinct patterns of attachment is believed to
be the result of the history of interaction between the caregiver and infant.
Specifically, attachment theory suggests that responsive and consistent caregiving
results in a secure mother-infant attachment, unresponsive caregiving
results in an avoidant attachment, and inconsistent caregiving results in a -
resistant/ambivalent attachment. The “avoidant” mother has been described
as cold and disliking physical contact with the infant, who responds by acting
aloof and avoiding social interaction. The “resistant” mother, on the other
hand, has been described as unpredictable, sometimes responding but
sometimes not, and the infant often responds with anger and ambivalence.
As the infant matures, the specific behaviors that indicate the existence of
the attachment relationship may change. The research evidence strongly suggests,
however, that such individual differences in the quality of the motherinfant
attachment relationship are predictive of later behavior. For example,
infants who exhibit secure attachment patterns at one year of age have been
found to be more cooperative with adults, to show greater enthusiasm for
learning, to be more independent, and to be more popular with their peers
during the preschool years. Thus, the quality of the mother-infant attachment
relationship may have long-range effects. This does not mean that the child’s
future is determined solely by the quality of the attachment relationship. The
evidence indicates that certain negative consequences of an insecure attachment
relationship may be overcome by changes in the nature of the child’s
important relationships. 104
learning, to be more independent, and to be more popular with their peers
during the preschool years. Thus, the quality of the mother-infant attachment
relationship may have long-range effects. This does not mean that the child’s
future is determined solely by the quality of the attachment relationship. The
evidence indicates that certain negative consequences of an insecure attachment
relationship may be overcome by changes in the nature of the child’s
important relationships. 104
very little, if any, signs of negative emotion. Furthermore, these infants frequently
returned to play and exploration after a period of contact with their
mother. In general, then, these infants used their mothers as a secure base
from which to explore the novel environment, exhibited appropriate attachment
behaviors following her departure, and were easily comforted by
the mother upon her return. Ainsworth suggested that this pattern of behavior
reflects a secure attachment relationship.
A second group of infants showed a very different pattern of behavior.
This minority group showed no evidence of distress during separation. They
did sometimes show distress when left alone in the playroom but were easily
comforted by the returning stranger. Furthermore, this group actually
avoided or ignored their mothers when they returned. In essence, the mothers
were treated very much as were the strangers. These infants showed virtually
no signs of separation protest or stranger anxiety and exhibited very
few attachment behaviors. Ainsworth suggested that this pattern of behavior
reflects an insecure, avoidant attachment relationship.
Finally, a third group of children were extremely distressed upon separation
yet, despite their obvious separation and stranger anxiety, resisted comfort
from their mothers. Their behavior suggested an angry ambivalence—
they objected to being left alone, but they refused to be consoled when reunited
with their mothers. This group of infants often exhibited distress
upon first entering the unfamiliar room with their mothers, and they rarely
left her side to explore the toys or the environment, either before or after
separation, suggesting a lack of a sense of security. Ainsworth suggested that
this behavior pattern reflects an insecure, resistant, or ambivalent attachment
relationship.
It is important to note that Ainsworth’s research was done in the United
States in the 1970’s. Follow-up work has demonstrated that various sociocultural
factors can influence the patterns of attachment behavior seen in the
“strange situation.” For instance, studies done in North Germany in the
1980’s revealed that as many as 60 percent of babies in that culture were classified
as insecure-avoidant because of their lack of distress at separation
from their mothers in the strange situation test. In contrast, studies of attachment
carried out in Japan in the 1980’s and 1990’s indicate that up to 40
percent of Japanese infants are classified as insecure-ambivalent in the
strange situation due to their tendency to cling to their mothers throughout
the procedure. These differing cross-cultural patterns imply that the wider
sociocultural context influences how mothers and infants interact: North
German mothers expect their infants to be relatively self-sufficient and confident,
even during short separations such as those characteristic of the
“strange situation” procedure. Japanese mothers, on the other hand, expect
their infants to be upset when they are out of close proximity, and in daily
practice are unlikely to leave their infants alone even for short periods.
These cross-cultural variations in patterns of attachment highlight the importance
of considering mother-infant attachment in context.
The development of these distinct patterns of attachment is believed to
be the result of the history of interaction between the caregiver and infant.
Specifically, attachment theory suggests that responsive and consistent caregiving
results in a secure mother-infant attachment, unresponsive caregiving
results in an avoidant attachment, and inconsistent caregiving results in a -
resistant/ambivalent attachment. The “avoidant” mother has been described
as cold and disliking physical contact with the infant, who responds by acting
aloof and avoiding social interaction. The “resistant” mother, on the other
hand, has been described as unpredictable, sometimes responding but
sometimes not, and the infant often responds with anger and ambivalence.
As the infant matures, the specific behaviors that indicate the existence of
the attachment relationship may change. The research evidence strongly suggests,
however, that such individual differences in the quality of the motherinfant
attachment relationship are predictive of later behavior. For example,
infants who exhibit secure attachment patterns at one year of age have been
found to be more cooperative with adults, to show greater enthusiasm for
learning, to be more independent, and to be more popular with their peers
during the preschool years. Thus, the quality of the mother-infant attachment
relationship may have long-range effects. This does not mean that the child’s
future is determined solely by the quality of the attachment relationship. The
evidence indicates that certain negative consequences of an insecure attachment
relationship may be overcome by changes in the nature of the child’s
important relationships. 104
learning, to be more independent, and to be more popular with their peers
during the preschool years. Thus, the quality of the mother-infant attachment
relationship may have long-range effects. This does not mean that the child’s
future is determined solely by the quality of the attachment relationship. The
evidence indicates that certain negative consequences of an insecure attachment
relationship may be overcome by changes in the nature of the child’s
important relationships. 104
ways remain close to the mother. Instead, the child begins to move away
from the mother, more carefully exploring objects and people. From time to
time he or she returns to her, as if to check her whereabouts or to check in
with her. If the mother moves away, however, or if the infant is frightened by
some event, he or she will either approach the mother or will signal to bring
the mother in closer proximity. For example, the infant often fusses, cries,
and clings to the caregiver at the first sign of the caregiver’s possible departure,
a response known as separation protest. At about the same time, infants
begin to express stranger anxiety or stranger wariness by fussing and
crying when an unfamiliar person enters the room or approaches.
Ainsworth designed a special laboratory technique, known as the “strange
situation,” that allows direct observation of the interactions between the
behaviors associated with exploration, attachment, separation protest, and
stranger anxiety. This situation places an infant in an unfamiliar setting with
a stranger, both in the presence and in the absence of the mother. The procedure
consists of a series of three-minute episodes (the process lasts a total
of about twenty minutes) in which the child is exposed to an unfamiliar playroom
containing a set of age-appropriate toys. During the initial episodes,
the mother remains in the playroom with the infant. Mother and infant are
then joined in the playroom by a female stranger, who first talks to the
mother, then approaches the baby. Next, the mother leaves the room, and
the baby and stranger are left alone together. Mother then returns and the
stranger leaves, so that the baby is reunited with the mother. Following this
episode, the baby is left alone in the room, then joined by the stranger; finally,
the mother again returns and the stranger leaves.
This strange situation, therefore, exposes a child to three potentially upsetting
experiences: separation from the caregiver, contact with a stranger,
and unfamiliar surroundings. The episodes are arranged in such a way that
they present a series of stressful experiences to the infant and thus present
an opportunity to observe not only the infant’s immediate response to a
stranger and to separation from the mother but also his or her ability to derive
comfort from the mother and to use her as a secure base for exploration.
Ainsworth has reported that, while there are many similarities in infant
responses to this strange situation, there are also important individual differences.
In her initial study of twelve-month-old infants and their mothers,
Ainsworth reported three distinct patterns of responding to the events of
the strange situation, and the validity of these behavior patterns has been
demonstrated by much additional research.
A majority of the infants exhibited active exploration of the new environment
and the available toys when their mothers were present. Some of these
infants showed distress during the first separation from mother, and by the
second separation, the majority of these infants expressed distress. Upon reunion
with their mother, they actively sought contact with her and were easily
comforted by her, showing considerable signs of positive emotion but
very little, if any, signs of negative emotion. Furthermore, these infants frequently
returned to play and exploration after a period of contact with their
mother. In general, then, these infants used their mothers as a secure base
from which to explore the novel environment, exhibited appropriate attachment
behaviors following her departure, and were easily comforted by
the mother upon her return. Ainsworth suggested that this pattern of behavior
reflects a secure attachment relationship.
A second group of infants showed a very different pattern of behavior.
This minority group showed no evidence of distress during separation. They
did sometimes show distress when left alone in the playroom but were easily
comforted by the returning stranger. Furthermore, this group actually
avoided or ignored their mothers when they returned. In essence, the mothers
were treated very much as were the strangers. These infants showed virtually
no signs of separation protest or stranger anxiety and exhibited very
few attachment behaviors. Ainsworth suggested that this pattern of behavior
reflects an insecure, avoidant attachment relationship.
Finally, a third group of children were extremely distressed upon separation
yet, despite their obvious separation and stranger anxiety, resisted comfort
from their mothers. Their behavior suggested an angry ambivalence—
they objected to being left alone, but they refused to be consoled when reunited
with their mothers. This group of infants often exhibited distress
upon first entering the unfamiliar room with their mothers, and they rarely
left her side to explore the toys or the environment, either before or after
separation, suggesting a lack of a sense of security. Ainsworth suggested that
this behavior pattern reflects an insecure, resistant, or ambivalent attachment
relationship.
It is important to note that Ainsworth’s research was done in the United
States in the 1970’s. Follow-up work has demonstrated that various sociocultural
factors can influence the patterns of attachment behavior seen in the
“strange situation.” For instance, studies done in North Germany in the
1980’s revealed that as many as 60 percent of babies in that culture were classified
as insecure-avoidant because of their lack of distress at separation
from their mothers in the strange situation test. In contrast, studies of attachment
carried out in Japan in the 1980’s and 1990’s indicate that up to 40
percent of Japanese infants are classified as insecure-ambivalent in the
strange situation due to their tendency to cling to their mothers throughout
the procedure. These differing cross-cultural patterns imply that the wider
sociocultural context influences how mothers and infants interact: North
German mothers expect their infants to be relatively self-sufficient and confident,
even during short separations such as those characteristic of the
“strange situation” procedure. Japanese mothers, on the other hand, expect
their infants to be upset when they are out of close proximity, and in daily
practice are unlikely to leave their infants alone even for short periods.
These cross-cultural variations in patterns of attachment highlight the importance
of considering mother-infant attachment in context.
The development of these distinct patterns of attachment is believed to
be the result of the history of interaction between the caregiver and infant.
Specifically, attachment theory suggests that responsive and consistent caregiving
results in a secure mother-infant attachment, unresponsive caregiving
results in an avoidant attachment, and inconsistent caregiving results in a -
resistant/ambivalent attachment. The “avoidant” mother has been described
as cold and disliking physical contact with the infant, who responds by acting
aloof and avoiding social interaction. The “resistant” mother, on the other
hand, has been described as unpredictable, sometimes responding but
sometimes not, and the infant often responds with anger and ambivalence.
As the infant matures, the specific behaviors that indicate the existence of
the attachment relationship may change. The research evidence strongly suggests,
however, that such individual differences in the quality of the motherinfant
attachment relationship are predictive of later behavior. For example,
infants who exhibit secure attachment patterns at one year of age have been
found to be more cooperative with adults, to show greater enthusiasm for
learning, to be more independent, and to be more popular with their peers
during the preschool years. Thus, the quality of the mother-infant attachment
relationship may have long-range effects. This does not mean that the child’s
future is determined solely by the quality of the attachment relationship. The
evidence indicates that certain negative consequences of an insecure attachment
relationship may be overcome by changes in the nature of the child’s
important relationships. 104
learning, to be more independent, and to be more popular with their peers
during the preschool years. Thus, the quality of the mother-infant attachment
relationship may have long-range effects. This does not mean that the child’s
future is determined solely by the quality of the attachment relationship. The
evidence indicates that certain negative consequences of an insecure attachment
relationship may be overcome by changes in the nature of the child’s
important relationships. 104
very little, if any, signs of negative emotion. Furthermore, these infants frequently
returned to play and exploration after a period of contact with their
mother. In general, then, these infants used their mothers as a secure base
from which to explore the novel environment, exhibited appropriate attachment
behaviors following her departure, and were easily comforted by
the mother upon her return. Ainsworth suggested that this pattern of behavior
reflects a secure attachment relationship.
A second group of infants showed a very different pattern of behavior.
This minority group showed no evidence of distress during separation. They
did sometimes show distress when left alone in the playroom but were easily
comforted by the returning stranger. Furthermore, this group actually
avoided or ignored their mothers when they returned. In essence, the mothers
were treated very much as were the strangers. These infants showed virtually
no signs of separation protest or stranger anxiety and exhibited very
few attachment behaviors. Ainsworth suggested that this pattern of behavior
reflects an insecure, avoidant attachment relationship.
Finally, a third group of children were extremely distressed upon separation
yet, despite their obvious separation and stranger anxiety, resisted comfort
from their mothers. Their behavior suggested an angry ambivalence—
they objected to being left alone, but they refused to be consoled when reunited
with their mothers. This group of infants often exhibited distress
upon first entering the unfamiliar room with their mothers, and they rarely
left her side to explore the toys or the environment, either before or after
separation, suggesting a lack of a sense of security. Ainsworth suggested that
this behavior pattern reflects an insecure, resistant, or ambivalent attachment
relationship.
It is important to note that Ainsworth’s research was done in the United
States in the 1970’s. Follow-up work has demonstrated that various sociocultural
factors can influence the patterns of attachment behavior seen in the
“strange situation.” For instance, studies done in North Germany in the
1980’s revealed that as many as 60 percent of babies in that culture were classified
as insecure-avoidant because of their lack of distress at separation
from their mothers in the strange situation test. In contrast, studies of attachment
carried out in Japan in the 1980’s and 1990’s indicate that up to 40
percent of Japanese infants are classified as insecure-ambivalent in the
strange situation due to their tendency to cling to their mothers throughout
the procedure. These differing cross-cultural patterns imply that the wider
sociocultural context influences how mothers and infants interact: North
German mothers expect their infants to be relatively self-sufficient and confident,
even during short separations such as those characteristic of the
“strange situation” procedure. Japanese mothers, on the other hand, expect
their infants to be upset when they are out of close proximity, and in daily
practice are unlikely to leave their infants alone even for short periods.
These cross-cultural variations in patterns of attachment highlight the importance
of considering mother-infant attachment in context.
The development of these distinct patterns of attachment is believed to
be the result of the history of interaction between the caregiver and infant.
Specifically, attachment theory suggests that responsive and consistent caregiving
results in a secure mother-infant attachment, unresponsive caregiving
results in an avoidant attachment, and inconsistent caregiving results in a -
resistant/ambivalent attachment. The “avoidant” mother has been described
as cold and disliking physical contact with the infant, who responds by acting
aloof and avoiding social interaction. The “resistant” mother, on the other
hand, has been described as unpredictable, sometimes responding but
sometimes not, and the infant often responds with anger and ambivalence.
As the infant matures, the specific behaviors that indicate the existence of
the attachment relationship may change. The research evidence strongly suggests,
however, that such individual differences in the quality of the motherinfant
attachment relationship are predictive of later behavior. For example,
infants who exhibit secure attachment patterns at one year of age have been
found to be more cooperative with adults, to show greater enthusiasm for
learning, to be more independent, and to be more popular with their peers
during the preschool years. Thus, the quality of the mother-infant attachment
relationship may have long-range effects. This does not mean that the child’s
future is determined solely by the quality of the attachment relationship. The
evidence indicates that certain negative consequences of an insecure attachment
relationship may be overcome by changes in the nature of the child’s
important relationships. 104
learning, to be more independent, and to be more popular with their peers
during the preschool years. Thus, the quality of the mother-infant attachment
relationship may have long-range effects. This does not mean that the child’s
future is determined solely by the quality of the attachment relationship. The
evidence indicates that certain negative consequences of an insecure attachment
relationship may be overcome by changes in the nature of the child’s
important relationships. 104
Sections
Newsletter
Comments (0 posted)
Syndication
