Bowlbys theory has is the major theory of attachment and is useful because it greatly helps the understanding of why we form attachments as the theory is relatively easy concept to understand. Bowlbys theory is stimulating and has generated a great deal of research which is an positive feature of any theory. Bowlbys theory has also had an immense impact on the emotional care of young people. The continuity hypothesis is supported by the Minnesota research by Sroufe. The longitudinal study observed a group of people from the age of 12 to adolescence and found that the children classifies as securely attachment grew up to be more self-confident and socially competent. These results suggest that we continue to exhibit the behaviours formed form initially in later life. Sroufes research also supported the internal working model because it showed that the securely attached individuals from a template from the sensitive caregivers behaviour. Hazan and Shavers love quiz also provided evidence that validated Bowlby proposed idea of continuity as they found securely attached infant were more likely to form happy long lasting relationships However Kagans temperament hypothesis suggests that the temperament (personality) of the child determined the future development as opposed to the sensitivity of the caregiver as the internal working model would suggest. Kagans theory is further backed up by Belsky and Rovine who found that infant who shake at birth develop insecure attachment and display low self-confidence regardless of the sensitivity of the caregiver which suggest that the internal working model is not the only way an infant gets a template for future relationships as Bowlby would suggest but rather the natural temperament of the child would determine the future relationships formed. Bowlbys proposed idea of the critical period is supported by research form Lorenz who invested imprinting within ducks and found that the duck has to imprint within a set period of time or else they couldnt, which is related to humans in Bowlbys theory that humans have to form primary attachment during a set period of time. However this is criticised because Lorenzs study with birds cannot be generalised to humans. Similarly Rutler et al study with abandoned and orphaned infant found that attachment could still be formed outside the critical period set by Bowlby. However they also found that infant who formed attachment outside the critical period has lower progress than those who didnt which suggest the period is sensitive rather than critical because it is best to form attachment within that period however not vital. Quinton also found that lack of primary attachment formed in the critical period was not critical as Bowlby would suggest, Quinton believed a poor start could be overcome by good experience with friends and school. Schaffer and Emerson found that some of the infant hadnt formed a primary attachment but formed multiple attachments which disputes the idea of monotropy suggested by Bowlbys theory of attachment. Similarly Lamb believed that infants didnt form a primary attachment as Bowlbys theory suggest but formed multiple attachment which suited different purposes which suggests are not formed in a hierarchy but are all of equal strength and importance.
Does Mothers' Expressed Emotion, Assessed by The Three Minute Speech Sample During Pregnancy, Predict Resistant Behavior at 14 Months of Age? A Pilot Study Within The Generation R Study