3. AAttttaacchhmmeenntt –– WWhhaatt iiss iitt??
• 1. An affectional tie between two people or
animals
• 2. A two-way process that endures over time
• 3. Leads to certain behaviours such as:
Clinging – Proximity seeking – Crying -
Smiling
• 4.Serves the function of protecting the infant
or young animal
(Mary Ainsworth 1970)
4. What do we mean by these
Behaviours?
• And how are they essential to the
development of a healthy creature?
• They are all features of a Secure Attachment
• PPrrooxxiimmiittyy SSeeeekkiinngg
• SSeeccuurree BBaassee BBeehhaavviioouurr
• SSeeppaarraattiioonn AAnnxxiieettyy
• SSttrraannggeerr AAnnxxiieettyy
5. Key Terms
• PPrrooxxiimmiittyy SSeeeekkiinngg – Staying close to the
attachment figure
• SSeeccuurree BBaassee BBeehhaavviioouurr – Regularly returning
to an attachment figure when exploring
• SSeeppaarraattiioonn AAnnxxiieettyy – Anxiety at being apart
from an attachment figure
• SSttrraannggeerr AAnnxxiieettyy – Anxiety in the presence
of strangers
• They are all essential for survival!
7. Why are Psychologists so
interested in Attachment?
• Because ALL psychologist believe that the
attachment we form with our primary carer
(usually our mother) forms a TEMPLATE for
all future relationships - with friends, with
teachers, and, in the future, with husbands and
wives and in turn, OUR FUTURE CHILDREN.
If our attachment with our mother is not good,
psychologists believe our whole life could be put
at a disadvantage.
9. Explanations of Attachments N0. 1
• LEARNING THEORY
• All behaviour is learnt rather than inborn
• Children are born blank slates and everything
they become is dependent on what they
experience
• Learning theory is put forward by
BEHAVIOURIST psychologists who say that
all behaviour, including attachment is learnt
by:
• Classical and Operant Conditioning.
10. Classical Conditioning – Learning by Association
Operant Conditioning – learning by Reward
(Reinforcement) and Punishment
• Classical Conditioning – food produces
pleasure. “Feeder” (mother) becomes associated
with food/pleasure so baby becomes attached to
her.
• Operant Conditioning – food is the primary
reinforcer, “feeder” becomes the secondary
reinforcer – both food and mother reduce
discomfort, and therefore reward the infant and
so the baby becomes attached to the mother.
11. Evaluating the Learning Theory
(Sometimes called the “Cupboard Love” Theory!)
• Strengths
• Learning theory suggests that the attachment develops
between infant and carer because the carer provides food.
And it’s true – we do learn through association and
reinforcement.
• Weaknesses
We do learn through association and reinforcement but
it may not be the food that is the reinforcer, it may be the
responsiveness and attention of other carer.
If the learning theory is true:
• How come babies often develop strong attachments to
people who don’t feed them?
• The Harlow Monkey Experiment.
12. Name, date and describe Two
research studies which cast
doubt on the
Learning Theory
13. The Harlow Monkey Experiment
• Harry Harlow, 1959 conducted research in to learning
using young rhesus monkeys, kept alone.
• He created two “mothers”, one with made of wire but a
full feeding bottle of milk, and the other wrapped in a
soft cloth but without food.
• According to the learning theory the young monkeys
should have become attached to the wire mother.
• In fact the monkeys spent most of their time with the
cloth-covered mother and would cling to it, especially
when frightened.(a proximity-seeking behaviour,
characteristic of attachment)
14. Schaffer and Emerson 1964
• Whilst the Harlow Monkey experiment used animals,
the above study used human infants.
• 60 babies (from mainly working-class Glasgow homes)
were observed for a year.
• Schaffer & Emerson found that infants were not most
attached to the person who fed them but became
attached to the person who was most responsive to them
and who interacted most with them.
• This reinforces the Harlow Monkey experiment and
suggests that “cupboard love” is not likely to be the best
explanation for attachment, although association and
reinforcement may be part of the story.
16. Explain Bowlby’s theory of
Attachment using the following
terms
• Survival Value Reproductive Value
• Innate Drive Imprinting
• Pre-programmed Social Releasers
• Adaptive Sensitive Period
• Monotropy Template
• Internal Working Model
• Continuity Hypothesis Responsive Mother
17. Bowlby’s Theory of Attachment
• Bowlby’s theory is an Evolutionary theory
• In his view attachment is a behaviour that has evolved
because of its survival value and, ultimately, its
reproductive value.
• According to Bowlby, children have an innate drive to
become attached to a caregiver because attachment has
long-term benefits. He proposed that normal psychological
development requires the development of a secure
attachment between a baby and its main carer.
• He also proposed the concept of imprinting – an innate
readiness to develop a strong bond with a mother figure.
18. Pre-programming!!
• John Bowlby said that babies are pre-programmed
to behave in ways that encourage
adult attention
• He called these behaviours social releasers
• These include “cute” behaviours such as
smiling and cooing and are the child’s
contribution towards an attachment. The
mother’s contribution is that she must respond
and react to these behaviours
• He suggests these instinctive behaviours
enhance survival and and are protective for the
infant. He called these behaviours
ADAPTIVE.
19. Sensitive Period
• Bowlby said there is sensitive period from when
the baby is born to around the age of 2, when the
baby is programmed to form a special
attachment. He called this monotropy. If
something happens to damage or break this
attachment, the child may develop and insecure
attachment its development may well be
damaged.
• For a secure attachment to take place, the child’s
main carer (usually the mother) needs to be
attentive, SENSITIVE and responsive to the
child’s needs, during this sensitive period.
20. More about Bowlby’s theory
• Bowlby said the child develops a model or
template from the attachment with its mother
which influences all future relationships and
future parenting style. It is a prototype of all
future relationships. He called this the internal
working model.
• The internal working model indicates a big link
between early emotional experiences and later
relationships. He called this the continuity
hypothesis – the idea that early experiences
continue to influence throughout life.
21. Give some Strengths of
Bowlby’s theory of Attachment
22. Evaluating Bowlby’s theory of
Attachment - Strengths
• It is considered the dominant explanation of how
and why attachment develops.
Imprinting is supported by Lorenz’s ducks
Bowlby suggests that attachment evolved to as
an aid to survival. If this is true then attachment
and caregiving behaviours should be universal, in
all cultures, despite differences in child-rearing
practices. There is evidence to support this.
(Tronick et al 1992)
24. Research Evidence for Bowlby’s Theory
Schaffer and Emerson, 1964, observed that
strongly attached infants had mothers who
responded quickly to their demands and who
offered the child the most interaction whereas
weakly attached infants had mothers who failed
to interact with them.
The Minnesota longitudinal study (Sroufe et
al 2005) followed children from infancy to
adolescence and found continuity between their
early attachment styles and their later emotional
and social behaviour. This supports the
continuity hypothesis.
25. And the Harlow Monkey
Experiment
Supports Bowlby’s theory that a
responsive mother is needed for good,
lifelong psychological health. The
monkeys were not only psychologically
damaged, but proved incapable of
becoming effective and loving parents,
themselves.
27. More Evaluation of Bowlby’s theory
Weaknesses
The idea that attachment behaviours have
evolved to promote child development has good
face validity. But evolutionary ideas are very
difficult to test and so difficult to prove or
disprove.
Bowlby’s theory focuses on the role of the
mother. There is evidence that in two-parent
families, the quality of attachment of the father
can also have a big effect on the child’s
development. (Grossmann and Grossmann,
1991)
29. An Alternative Explanation
• A key feature of Bowlby’s theory is the continuity
hypothesis – the idea that there are continuities between
early attachment and later social/emotional
development. However Kagan, 1984 put forward
• The Temperament Hypothesis, in which he proposed
that we are all born with our distinct, innate
temperament, and it is this that is the big factor in
determining our attachment style and our subsequent
emotional and social development. In other words, to
some extent, our development is pre-determined by our
genetic makeup. And there is evidence to support
this------
30. Belsky and Rovine 1987
• Assessed babies aged one to three days
old and found a link between certain
psychological behaviours and later
attachment types. They found that
infants who were calmer and less anxious
were more likely to be securely attached.
31. Name and date the procedure
which aimed to test the nature
of attachment systematically.
32. The Strange Situation – Which is
Ainsworth and Wittig 1969
• Laboratory Procedure using
• Observation Techniques
• Designed to measure the security of
attachment a child displays towards its main
care giver
• What is being assessed?
• Secure base behaviour, proximity seeking,
separation anxiety, stranger anxiety, response
on being reunited with care giver.
33. What is the Procedure of the
Strange Situation
34. The Strange Situation –it gets its name from the fact
that the baby is placed in an unfamiliar – that is, a
strange room
Stage Situation Designed to measure
1. The child and carer are placed in an empty room.
2. The child is free to explore-encouraged if necessary Proximity-seeking and
secure base behaviour
3. A stranger enters, greets the carer and attempts to
play with the child
Stranger Anxiety
4. The carer leaves the child with the stranger Stranger anxiety +
Separation distress
5. The carer re-enters and the stranger leaves Reuniting response
6. The carer leaves the child alone Separation distress
7. The stranger re-enters Stranger Anxiety
8. The stranger leaves and carer re-enters Reuniting response
36. Behaviours displayed by infants in The
Strange Situation (Ainsworth et al 1978)
Secure
attachment
(Type B)
Insecure
Avoidant
(Type A)
Insecure
Resistant(Ambivalent)
(Type C)
Insecure Avoidant/
Resistant.
“Disorganised”
(Type D)
Willingness to
explore
HIGH HIGH LOW Alternate
between A & C
Stranger
Anxiety
HIGH LOW HIGH Often prefer
strangers’ company
Separation
Anxiety
Reasonably
easy to soothe
INDIFFERENT DISTRESSED Alternate
Between A & C
Behaviour at re-
Union with carer
ENTHUSIASTIC AVOIDS
CONTACT
SEEKS AND
REJECTS
Often afraid of
carer
% of infants in
this category
66% 22% 12% Minority of
Infants display
this disorganised
behaviour
37. How did Mary Ainsworth
account for the
Variations in attachment
types?
38. Explaining Attachment Types
• Mary Ainsworth believed variation in
attachment types is a result of the main
carer’s behaviour towards the child.
Maternal Sensitivity Hypothesis
• High levels of maternal sensitive responsiveness =
Secure attachment
• Mothers who “pick up” signals and respond =
Secure attachment
39. What is Secure Attachment?
What did Ainsworth believe caused
it?
40. Secure Attachment
• This is a strong and contented attachment
of an infant to its caregiver, which
develops as a result of sensitive
responding by the caregiver to the
infant’s needs. Securely attached infants
are comfortable with social interaction
and intimacy. Secure attachment is
related to healthy subsequent cognitive
and emotional development.
41. What is Insecure Attachment?
What causes it? What can it lead
to?
What is the difference in the various
insecure attachment types?
42. What is Insecure Attachment?
• Insecure attachment – This is a form of attachment
between infant and caregiver that develops as a result of
the caregiver’s lack of sensitive responding to the infant’s
needs. It may be associated with poor subsequent
cognitive and emotional development.
• Insecure Avoidant Type A– children who avoid social
interaction and intimacy with others.
• Insecure Resistant Type C – Children who both seek and
reject intimacy and social interaction.
• Insecure Disorganised Type D– Children whose
behaviour patterns are inconsistent and a mix of types A &
C.
44. Research Methods used
• The research room was a novel environment
• A 9 X 9 foot square marked off in to 16 squares to help
the recording of the infant’s movements
• Research methods used were Laboratory procedure
using covert and controlled observation
• Using covert observation (One-way mirrors were used to
prevent participants being aware they were being
observed). Knowing your behaviour is being observed is
likely to alter it.
• It used Controlled observation because it involved structuring the
behaviour of the participants as well as the observers –the
participants had to follow 8 episodes and the observers had a
checklist of 5 behaviours that they had to rate every 15 seconds.
46. 1. Is it Valid?
• Validity – means are we measuring what we meant to
measure. This lab procedure intended to measure the
attachment types of children. Did it? A criticism is that
it only measured the strength of one particular
relationship, and this wasn’t necessarily with the main
carer.
• Others say this doesn’t matter, since Bowlby said the
relationship with the main carer becomes internalised
and is reflected in all other relationships-so if the child
appeared insecurely attached, even if the main carer
wasn’t present during the Strange Situation, the
attachment type given to the child is a reflection of what
is happening at home with the main carer.
47. 2. Is it Ethical?
• The intention of the Strange Situation was
to cause mild distress. Is this acceptable?
Ainsworth claimed that the whole
procedure was not intended to be any more
disturbing than ordinary life experiences,
yet in episode 6 (The carer leaves the child
alone) 20% of infants reportedly “cried
desperately”.
48. And what did Hazen and Shaver
1987 find about Adult Romantic
Relationships in their
Newspaper Love Quiz?
49. Love Quiz Findings
Attachment
type
Secure adults Insecure-avoidant
adults
Insecure-resistant
adults
Current love
experiences
Relationships
Are
Positive
Fearful of
closeness
Preoccupied
by love
Attitudes
towards love
Trust others
and believe in
enduring love
Love is not
lasting nor
necessary for
happiness
Fall in love
easily but
have trouble
finding true
love
50. Name and date the Research that
aimed to study
Cross-Cultural Attachments
What were the Aims and
Procedure?
51. Cross-cultural patterns of attachment –
Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg,
1988
• Aim – To investigate global attachment
patterns
• Procedure - This was a meta-analysis (the
data from 32 Strange Situation studies from
eight countries was collated and analysed)
53. Findings
In all countries, secure attachment was the most common –but…….!!!!!!!!!!!
Secure Attachment (Type B) -MMoosstt ccoommmmoonn iinn aallll ccuullttuurreess. The
The Lowest proportion was in China (50%)
The Highest (approx 75%) –GB & Sweden.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Avoidant Attachment (Type A) More common in W. Germany
than other western countries.
Very rare in Israel and Japan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Resistant Attachment (Type C) - Common in Israel, China &
Japan.
Lowest proportion was in Scandinavian countries such as Sweden
55. Conclusions
• Globally, secure attachment was the most common
and we could conclude, the “best” for healthy
social and emotional development.
• The variation in percentages, particularly between
types A and C suggest that child-rearing practices
in different countries may affect the attachment of
babies -------and/or
• It may be that the Strange Situation does not work
well in all cultures.
57. Big Criticism: Is the Strange
Situation Culturally Biased?
• The Strange Situation was developed in the
U.S, an individualist country.
• But in Japan for example, which is a collectivist
country, the cultural norm is for mothers and
babies to rarely be separated, which means we
might expect to see high levels of separation
anxiety and might explain the high % of Type C
in the SS. Many of the differences in the cross-cultural
SS concern collectivist countries.
58. More on Culture Bias
• Rothbaum et al 2000 said that attachment theory and
research is not relevant to other cultures because it
is so rooted in American culture. Why did they say
this? Here are two examples.
• 1. The Continuity Hypothesis (Ainsworth said that
those infants who are securely attached grow up to
be socially and emotionally competent adults)-
people who are independent and able to express
their emotions. BUT!! ….. In Japan being a
socially and emotionally competent adult means
being group orientated and someone who is able to
inhibit (not show) their feelings.
59. We must be so careful when
interpreting data!!
• What we call “avoidant” behaviour in the
UK and USA, might well be called
“independent” in Germany, an
individualist country, but where
independence is very highly valued. And
just look at the graph and you will see that
there are a higher proportion of type “As”
in Germany.
60. Methodological Issues (can also be used
for evaluation)
• 1. Meta-analysis (the results of 32 S.S studies were
analysed)
• 2. Substantial study and large sample size (over
2000 babies)
• 3. But half of the 32 studies studied were carried
out in the US, reflecting the dominance of US in
psychology studies.
• 27 were carried out in individualistic cultures
• Only 5 in collectivist cultures, implying that the
sample was not truly representative.
61. More Methodological Issues
• 4. Ainsworth’s Strange Situation was
developed in the US so we can only
make valid interpretations in cross-cultural
studies if we really understand
the attitudes to child-rearing in that
culture.
62. What does all this mean?
• When looking at attachment behaviours cross-culturally,
some might question Bowlby and
Ainsworth’s view, that attachment is a universal
factor in human development. However, whilst
there are differences, and to some extent,
attachment theory is culture-bound, the
impressive fact is that in in all 8 countries
involved in the meta-analysis of the Strange
Situation, secure attachment was the most
common, by far, and we could conclude, the
“best” for healthy social and emotional
development.
• Certainly research has shown that secure
attachment is associated with good psychiatric
health in adulthood.
64. Disruption of the Attachment
Bond
• Deprivation - temporary or
permanent disruption of the attachment
bond.
• This means there was an attachment to
start with but it’s been broken in some
way, perhaps due to hospitalisation or
death of the mother.
65. Identify some effects that
disruption of attachment has on
A child’s social and emotional
development
Provide Research support
66. Effects of Disruption.
• Robertson and Robertson observed John and Laura
sufferering when they experienced physical disruption
with no substitute emotional care. But Jane, Thomas,
Lucy and Kate coped well when given substitute
emotional care at the Robertson’s home .
• Spitz and Wolf 1946, observed that 100 “normal”
children placed in an institution became severely
depressed within a few months.
• Skeels and Dye 1939, found that the intellectual deficits
of the institutionalised children recovered when they
were transferred to a home for mentally retarded adults
and given lots of T.L.C.
68. Evaluation of the Robertson
Research
• 1. High validity – films were made of
John and Laura. These were naturalistic
observations in a realistic setting.
• 2. Low validity – The conclusions were
based on case studies of only a few
children, who may not have been typical of
the majority of children.
69. So what factors effects whether
A child will recover from
Disruption?
70. Bowlby concluded..
• Children cope better and recover better
from disruption if they were securely
attached to start with.
• Bowlby 1956 –: 60 children under the age
of 4 who had TB
• They were put in a hospital, no substitute
emotional care was given.
• When assessed in adolescence. 63% were
maladjusted, leaving 37% who were not.
72. Privation
• Privation – when there was
never any attachment bond to
begin with.
• This can be due to extreme abuse
or Institutional care, or in rare
cases, children kept in total
isolation.
73. Can you describe some real-life
cases?
• Genie and the Czech twins, handout N0. 8
• AlSO it is essential to revise The Affects
of Privation, Hodges and Tizard, 1989
also Handout No. 8
75. The Findings suggest..
• The findings suggest that early privation
had a negative effect on the ability to form
relationships even when children were
given good subsequent care.
• This supports Bowlby’s view that the
failure to form attachments during the
sensitive period has an irreversible effect on
emotional development.
76. What are some of the effects of
Privation and
Institutionalisation?
77. The Effects are….
• Attachment Disorder – There are two types:
• Reactive or inhibited – when the child is unable to
cope in most social situations
• Disinhibited - Over-friendly and attention seeking to
people the child hardly knows.
• Deprivation Dwarfism – Gardner 1972, suggests
emotional disturbance may effect the production of
growth hormones which may explain why children in
institutional care tend to be physically small.
78. The research suggests that some
Children are able to
recover from privation.
How come?
79. Evaluation
• Some research suggests that children who do
not form an attachment within the sensitive
period are unable to recover.
• But this is not true of all children. How come?
• One reason is because we really don’t know
enough about the children in the studies. For
example in the Hodges and Tizard study -Why
were some adopted and others not? Could it be
that some were easier children to start with –
that’s why they were chosen for adoption, so of
course, their outcomes were better!
80. 1.Why are we interested in day
care?
2. What is Day care?
81. Day Care is -
• A form of temporary care (not all day and not
all night) that is not provided by family
members and takes place outside of the home.
• Why are we interested in day care?
• Because day care involves the very thing
psychologists are interested in – disruption of
the attachment bond with the primary carer
which may affect the child’s social and
emotional development.
83. Social Development
• The development of sociability,
learning to relate to others and
acquiring appropriate
knowledge & skills of how to
integrate socially.
84. You may be asked for research
evidence on social development
and aggression in children
In Day Care.
Here it is.
85. Research oonn tthhee iimmppaacctt ooff DDaayy CCaarree
• Negative effects on social development
• Bowlby said prolonged separation from mother figure could cause
long-term maladjustment. Many studies of day care have
supported this.
• VViioollaattaa && RRuusssseellll,, 11999944 did a meta-analysis of the findings of 88
studies of day care and concluded that regular day care of more
than 20 hours p/w had a negative effect on the social and emotional
development of young children.
• Increased Aggressiveness ((NNIICCHHDD 22000033)
• The NICHD in America started a longitudinal study in 1991, using
1000 children from mixed backgrounds and locations. Assessed
aged 5, the data found that, irrespective of quality, the more time
spent in day care, the more aggressive and disobedient they were
deemed to be by adults. Belsky, 2007 looked at the same children
at the end of primary school education, and still found these
children more aggressive than children who hadn’t been in day
care.
86. OOnn tthhee ootthheerr hhaanndd…
• This same NICHD study found that a mother’s
sensitivity to her child is a better indicator of
whether a child had behavioural problems, than
was time in child care. Sensitive mothering was
linked to fewer problem behaviours. Higher
maternal education and family income also
predicted lower levels of problem behaviours.
So this same data suggests that children’s
development is more strongly affected by factors
at home, than by day care.
87. Peer Relationships
• Bowlby’s theory of attachment and his
Continuity Hypothesis predicts better peer
relationships for securely attached children.
There is evidence that children in day care are
less securely attached. BBeellsskkyy && RRoovviinnee,, 11998888,
assessed infants in day care for more than 20
hours p/w using the Strange Situation. They
found these children were more likely to be
insecurely attached than children at home. We
could hypothesise that their peer relationships
would also suffer too.
88. OOnn tthhee ootthheerr hhaanndd…
• Day care allows children to develop social strategies,
such as the ability to negotiate and make friends. FFiieelldd,,
11999911, found the amount of time in full-time day care
was positively correlated to the number of friends the
children had once they were at school.
• However we can’t assume that experiences in day care
ccaauussee later sociability - there is a lliinnkk;; it could be that
shy and unsociable children have mothers who are like
that too (temperament is inherited) and these mothers
prefer to stay at home to care for their children. The
outgoing mothers send their outgoing children to day
care, which explains why they’re more sociable.
89. MMeeddiiaattiinngg FFaaccttoorrss
• A mediating factor is something that connects two other
things, in this case it is intervening between the effects
of day care and social development.
• QQuuaalliittyy ooff ccaarree -- A NICHD study (1997) reported that
low-quality day care was associated with poor social
development.
• IInnddiivviidduuaall DDiiffffeerreenncceess –– The above NICHD study
found that insecurely attached children did less well in
day care. On the other hand, Egeland & Hiester, 1995,
found that insecurely attached children did best in day
care and it was the securely attached ones who became
aggressive. This might be due to the fact that the
insecurely attached children needed the care and
attention that they weren’t getting at home.
90. MMoorree MMeeddiiaattiinngg FFaaccttoorrss
• CChhiilldd’’ss aaggee aanndd nnuummbbeerr ooff hhoouurrss
• Gregg et al, 2005, found that the negative effects
of day care were more likely to be found in
children placed in day care before they were 18
months old. On the other hand, Clarke-Stewart
et al, 1994, found no difference in attachment
between spending a lot of time in day care (30
hours or more a week from 3 months of age).
91. Implications of research into
attachment and day care
• Now we must look at how research translates into the
practical issues of childcare provision in the UK. What
advice can be given to governments and to parents?
• Attachment Research
• In previous handouts we discovered that James and Joyce
Robertson (remember little John and Laura in hospital?) found
that the negative effects of emotional disruption could be avoided
if substitute eemmoottiioonnaall care was provided. This entailed specific
adults spending time with the children and responding to their
needs in a sensitive way in the same way that a primary care
giver would. TThhee cchhaarraacctteerriissttiiccss ooff qquuaalliittyy ddaayy ccaarree do just
that and psychologists have identified the following key
characteristics needed for high-quality day care.
92. Characteristics of high-quality day care
• 1. Low child-to-staff ratio – NICHD study 1999,
identified this was absolutely necessary for high-quality
care.
• 2. Minimal staff turnover – Schaffer, 1998, identified
consistency of care as one of the most important factors in
high-quality care.
• 3. Sensitive emotional care – The NICHD study found
that 23% of infant-care providers give highly sensitive
care, 50% give moderately sensitive care and 20% are
emotionally detached from the infants in their care.
• 4. Qualified Staff – Sylva et al 2003, reported that the
higher the qualifications of the staff, the better the
outcome for the children in terms of their social
development.
93. What are the most important
factors to consider
When looking at Day Care?
94. The most important factors in day care with regard to the
welfare of children are:
• 1. QUALITY of the day care Research indicates positive effects for good
quality day care but negative effects for poor quality care. Quality
encompasses having sufficient stimulation, such as toys, sufficient and verbal
interactions between staff and children and sensitive emotional care to
provide a substitute for the break in the mother-child relationship. A rapid
turnover of staff can have a profound effect
• 2. CHILD-TO-STAFF RATIO This affects results tremendously as it
determines how much attention each child gets.
• 3. AGE of the children in care. Research indicates day care can be
detrimental to very young babies.
• 4. NUMBER OF HOURS the child is in care This has a big effect on
whether the bond with the primary care giver is disrupted.
• 5. The strength of the bond between each child and its primary care giver is
very important. Securely attached children are less likely to be affected by
the separation that day care entails. (The Strange Situation study)
