bowlbys deprivation hypothesis
Evaluate Bowlby's Deprivation HypothesisIn his hypothesis, Bowlby believed that an infant's failure to attach to a primary caregiver would have long term effects. This essay will attempt to evaluate Bowlby's deprivation hypothesis. Firstly, the terms 'attachment' and 'deprivation' will be defined. Following that, a full definition of the hypothesis will be made, and then an attempt will be made to describe and understand the studies and period of history that lead to Bowlby's ideas and the influence they generated. A full evaluation will be made of his deprivation hypothesis, including detailed criticisms of his theory. Finally, conclusions will be drawn to show if Bowlby's deprivation hypothesis can still retain any credibility.The first task is to define the terms attachment and deprivation. In 1973 the leading attachment psychologist, Mary Ainsworth, pointed out that "Attachment is an affectional tie that one person forms to another person, binding them together in space, and enduring over time". Deprivation can occur when there is insufficient opportunity for interaction with a mother figure (privation), when there is insufficient interaction with mother (masked deprivation), or when there are repeated breach
Rutter (1981) felt that the main problem with the concept of maternal deprivation was that it muddled together a range of essentially different experiences. In 1946, Bowlby looked at the life histories of eighty-eight children who had been referred to his psychiatric clinic, half of whom had a criminal record for theft. They also found the strength of attachment was not related to the length of time spent with the child, or to basic caretaking functions of feeding etc. Contrary to behaviourists and Freudians, who thought that physical comfort was a caregiver's primary concern, Bowlby (1951) suggested that emotional care was at least equally important. In this study, Lorenz became 'mother'' to a brood of goslings. In practice, this meant that, at least before the age of two, these children had continually or repeatedly been in foster homes or hospitals, often not visited by their families. They found attachment to a specific person started to occur at around 7 months, but multiple attachments were the norm. It was the quality and intensity of interaction that was important. Therefore, these studies do not support the behaviourists of Freud as both theories state feeding is important for attachment to occur. This was one of Rutter's criticisms, which will be discussed later, in further detail. Bowlby concluded that a warm intimate and continuing relationship with a mother figure is an essential precondition for mental health. Finally, Bowlby (1951) felt that there was a critical period in the formation of attachments. It was already known that many birds attach themselves to the first figure they see upon hatching and persist in this attachment, and Lorenz's work confirmed this. The phenomenon is called imprinting, an ethological concept taken from embryology. This appears to be strong evidence in support of Bowlby'' hypothesis, but the data was retrospective and, more importantly, correlational.
Common topics in this essay:
Finally Bowlby,
Studies Kibbutzs,
Health Organisation,
Deprivation Hypothesis,
Schaffer Emerson,
Freudians Gleitman,
Ainsworth Attachment,
REF Behaviourists,
REF Harlow's,
deprivation hypothesis,
bowlby's deprivation,
bowlby's deprivation hypothesis,
bowlby 1951,
maternal deprivation,
evaluate bowlby's deprivation,
multiple attachments,
interaction mother,
family discord,
cloth mother,
emotional disturbance,
children experience,
|
Acceptance Essays
