Bowlby's Theory of Attachment (DP IB Psychology): Revision Note

Bowlby's theory of attachment

• John Bowlby was a British psychologist, psychiatrist, and psychoanalyst (1907-1990) who argued that attachment is an innate system shaped by evolution to promote survival

• Infants must attach to caregivers for protection, food, and nurture, while caregivers must attach to infants to ensure survival

Principles of monotropy

• Bowlby's theory of attachment is described as monotropic, as he suggests that the child forms an attachment to one (mono) key caregiver

  • This can be a mother or other person in the child's life, such as the father or even a grandparent

  • The more time a child spends with this carer – the primary attachment figure – the better the quality of attachment

• Bowlby proposed two principles of monotropy:

  • The law of continuity: the more constant and predictable a child's care the better the quality of attachment

  • The law of accumulated separation: every separation from the primary attachment figure affects the child

Social releasers

• Bowlby suggested that babies are born with innate behaviours ('social releasers') that help a caregiver form an attachment to the infant, such as:

  • smiling

  • cooing

  • gripping a finger

  • having a 'cute' baby face (large eyes, button nose, rounded appearance, rosy cheeks)

• The more responsive the caregiver, the stronger the attachment will be

Critical period

• Bowlby suggested that there is a critical period from around three to six months in a baby's development

  • It is during this 'window' that attachment must take place between caregiver and child

• If attachments are not made during this critical period, then the child will find making attachments later on difficult

Internal working model

• Bowlby suggested that a child forms a model for relationships based on their attachment and relationship to their primary attachment figure

• He called this the internal working model

  • A child who experiences a loving and secure relationship with a consistent and safe caregiver will grow up to expect this from later relationships

  • A child who experiences a negative relationship with their primary attachment figure will tend to form poor relationships in the future and expect negative treatment or treat others in such a way

Research which supports Bowlby's theory of attachment

Ainsworth (1970)

Aim: 

• To investigate attachment style in infants using the Strange Situation, drawing from Bowlby's theory of attachment

Participants:

• 56 white, middle-class infants from the USA, aged 49-51 weeks. 

Procedure:

• A controlled observation lasting 20 minutes, conducted as follows:

  1. The mother enters the room with her baby and sits down. The room contains interesting toys but is unfamiliar to the baby (i.e., it is a strange situation)

  2. A stranger enters, talks to the mother and then approaches the baby with a toy

  3. The mother leaves quietly and the stranger attempts to interact with the infant. If the baby shows distress the stranger attempts to comfort them

  4. The mother returns and greets the infant and the stranger leaves. The mother then tries to engage the baby in play and then she leaves, saying goodbye to the baby

  5. The baby is left alone

  6. The stranger enters and tries to play with and speak to the baby. If the baby is upset, the stranger will offer comfort

  7. The mother returns, greets the baby and picks them up. The stranger leaves quietly

Results:

• Ainsworth categorised the attachment styles she observed as follows:

• Type A: Insecure-avoidant (10–15%)

  • Little interest in mother, little distress when she leaves, and unconcerned about a stranger being in the room

  • Later relationships: detached, low intimacy, low empathy

  Type B: Secure (≈70%)

  • Uses mother as a secure base when exploring the room, distressed when she leaves, comforted by her return, and avoids the stranger

  • Later relationships: trust, openness, autonomy, healthy intimacy

  Type C: Insecure-resistant/ambivalent (10–15%)

  • Clingy, distressed even with mother present, extreme distress when she leaves, not easily comforted on return, mixed anger/anxiety.

  • Later relationships: insecure, jealous, needy, emotional volatility, possible mental health issues, such as depression/anxiety

Conclusion:

• Attachment can be measured via observation

• Most children show secure attachment, but insecure patterns have long-term effects

Evaluation of Bowlby's theory of attachment

Strengths

• Bowlby's theory is supported by animal studies

  • Lorenz (1935) found that goslings imprint on the first moving object, suggesting that attachment is an innate process

    • This supports Bowlby's idea that attachment has developed as an evolutionary process to aid survival

• There is evidence to support the idea of social releasers

  • Caregivers were instructed to ignore their baby crying or smiling, whereby the babies then became increasingly distressed

    • This suggests that babies use social releasers as a way to elicit attention and attachment to their caregiver

Limitations

• Research suggests that babies form multiple attachments rather than just one

  • Research shows that children form attachments to a variety of caregivers from the age of 10-11 months

  • This suggests that Bowlby's idea of monotropy may not be completely valid

• Research has found that some children have formed attachments after the critical period of three to six months

Link to concepts

Measurement

• The variables involved in attachment research are very difficult to operationalise and measure

  • Ainsworth's study uses a controlled observation, with clearly defined behavioural categories but attachment is complex and may not be captured in one 20-minute observation

  • Moreover, this is a snapshot study, which means the data was collected once, on the day of testing so it lacks temporal validity

  • A longitudinal study could test whether attachment classifications remain stable over time, improving reliability.

Responsibility

• Researching attachment styles – particularly when real parent-child participants are used – is fraught with potential ethical issues

  • Both parent and child should be protected throughout, but the child must suffer some form of mild distress (e.g., separating them from their parent) if the results are to be valid

  • Additionally, the researcher cannot ask the child if they would like to withdraw from the procedure as the child is not able to understand such a question

• If, during the procedure the researcher picks up on potential abuse they should report their concerns to the relevant authorities

  • The researcher may, however, have misinterpreted what they have observed, which could result in a parent being wrongfully accused of mistreating their child