Outline and Evaluate the Learning Theory Explanation of Attachment PDF

Preview

Summary

Essay on explanation of attachment with theorists...

Description

Outline and Evaluate the Learning Theory Explanation of Attachment Learning theory claims that attachments can be formed through conditioning. One way is classical conditioning. This is learning through association. The baby would learn to associate food with the primary caregiver this way. It would begin with the unconditioned stimulus, which is food, giving an unconditioned response of a satisfied baby. Then during conditioning, the unconditioned stimulus is paired with a neutral stimulus, which is the caregiver. This leads to the baby associating the now conditioned stimulus (caregiver) with food and care, giving a conditioned response. The baby will now feel satisfied and content when they see this primary caregiver, whether they are being fed or not. Another way attachments can be formed is through operant conditioning. This would be the child crying because they are hungry, and the caregiver responds by giving them food and cuddles. This is positive reinforcement. They are also negatively reinforced, as the parent is taking away the feeling of discomfort. Thus, the child associates the mother with those rewards, with food as the primary reinforcer and the mother as the secondary reinforcer. A strength of the theory is its ability to explain how attachments form. In real life it seems we learn a number of ways, including associating situations with danger when phobias develop, despite the association being irrational. The case of Little Alberts shows how classical conditioning is a process involved in leaning behaviour; when a loud noise (UCS) is provided with a neutral stimulus (rat), after repetition, it creates a conditioned response (fear of the rat). Thus, suggesting the real life application of conditioning, consequently providing evidence of learning theory playing a role in attachments. Learning theory over emphasis the need for food in the formation of attachments. There is evidence to suggest feeding does not play a key role. Harlow’s study on monkeys showed they were more attached to the ‘mother’ that provided comfort, especially when presented with a feared stimulus. They only preferred the other ‘mother’ when they were hungry. Thus, suggesting contact comfort is more important than food. Learning theory is limited by its reliance on animal research studies. Behaviourists say that humans are no different in the way they learn; our behaviour patterns mean some aspects can be explained by conditioning but not all. Some behaviour is complex, such as attachment. It is argued that it involves innate predispositions and mental activity that is impossible to be explained by conditioning. For example, Lorenz’s study of imprinting with geese, showed attachments can be innate as the gooselings attached to the first thing they saw and were too young to have learnt anything at this stage. Thus, behaviourist theories may lack validity, presenting an oversimplified version of behaviour which focuses on nurture and ignores the impact of nature. This means it is often rejected as a theory, as there are more developed ones. Bowlby’s monotropic theory explains why attachments form, whereas learning theory only explains how, and offers no explanation on the advantages of attachment. Bowlby, however, says advantages include protection from harm and thus attachment evolved as a behaviour which enhances survival. Thus, learning theory is often ignored, as it is seen as underdeveloped, and lacking in explanation....