how do children form attachment with their mothers is it one of those Mysteries of the universe that is beyond our understanding or is it just about what's in your cupboard hey everyone welcome back to buried in mind there are two explanations for how attachments form we're going to explore the first of these called learning theory which is based on behaviorist principles the learning theory explanation of attachment is based on behaviorism with the key idea being something called cupboard love covered love emphasizes the importance of the caregiver as the provider of food in other words the child forms an attachment with the mother because they love her milk as a brief recap of behaviorism they take the view that we're born's blank slates and our experiences write our behaviors our behavior is shaped by environmental factors in other words behavior is learned and they suggest two ways in which behavior is learned firstly classical conditioning this is the idea that behaviors learn through Association the association of stimulus and response you may remember this diagram and these these key terms from the video on Ivan Pavlov and the behaviorist approach linked below for you if you need a reminder according to this Theory infants learn to associate the caregiver with the satisfaction of their basic needs if we apply this to attachment the food in this case milk is an unconditioned stimulus which produces an unconditioned response from the infant the mother in this case is the neutral stimulus which produces no response according to behaviorists their idea is that when you pair the food with the mother the mother then becomes a conditioned stimulus a learned stimulus the baby wants food and forms an attachment with the mother because she provides the food in addition to classical conditioning is operant conditioning this is the idea that behaviors learn through consequences which include rewards and punishments positive reinforcement is when something is added that strengthens the behavior and makes it more likely that it'll be repeated negative reinforcement is when something is taken away that strengthens a behavior and makes it more likely that it'll be repeated remember that only punishment weakens a behavior and makes it less likely a behavior will be repeated both positive and negative reinforcement strengthen our Behavior pause the video now and see if you can work out what the positive and negative reinforcement might look like for both the infant and the mother foreign this to attachment we can see that for a positive reinforcement the infant is rewarded for attaching to the caregiver they receive Food Food brings a feeling of pleasure food is the primary reinforcer but food doesn't come without the mother bringing it so the mother becomes the secondary reinforcer the baby will then repeat any action that brings the mother close positive reinforcement for their mother is seen the rewarding experience of the happiness smiles and affection of your baby there is a delight in the baby being happy and content in your arms as a result of feeding them in terms of negative reinforcement for the baby this comes in the taking away of their hunger and discomfort when an infant feels hungry they cry and when the caregiver feeds them they experience relief from their hunger over time the infant learns that the caregiver can bring the relief of hunger and begins to form an attachment to them negative reinforcement for the caregiver is experienced in a different way often a mother knows that a baby is hungry because they're crying which is not a pleasant and enjoyable sound a mother can take away the negative experience of crying by feeding the baby the removal of the uncomfortable sound through feeding reinforces this behavior and according to learning theory strengthens the attachment now let's discuss the learning theory explanation of how attachments fall one of the strengths of the learning theory explanation is that it's based on an established Theory this is because behaviorism is very well researched and based on scientific principles the work of BS Skinner on operant conditioning was conducted in highly controlled settings so that cause and effect could be established and so applying this to attachment behavior is seen as a plausible explanation it provides a clear and straightforward explanation of how attachments are formed through its emphasis on the role of environmental factors in shaping Behavior Additionally the focus of sim stimulus and response associations allows it to be easily investigated and observed however there is evidence that challenges the learning theory explanation firstly there is a research of Schaefer and Emerson in 1964 who you may remember from their study into working-class models in Glasgow and the stages of attachment that they proposed one of the key findings from their study was that the person the child formed an attachment with wasn't necessarily the person who spent the most amount of time with them instead it was the caregiver who was most interactive and sensitive to the infant's behaviors and facial expressions therefore this undermines the learning theory of attachment because it shows that the primary attachment figure is not a result of who feeds the child but more about the quality of the interaction secondly there is the animal study research by Harlow which we've looked at previously linked up here for you if needed in Harlow's research they measured the amount of time rhesus monkeys spent with either a surrogate mother Who provided food but no contact company it or a surrogate mother Who provided contact Comfort put no food the monkey's overwhelmingly spent more time with the contact Comfort mother demonstrating that what is more important for the formation of attachment is not food or cupboard love as learning theory would call it but actually contact Comfort another limitation with the learning theory is its old emphasis on the role of nurture in other words learning theory ignores how biological factors might be involved in forming attachments for example bolby's monotropic Theory which we're going to look at in the next video outlines how attachments are formed due to innate factors that include features like adaptation such as the rooting reflex and social releases such as crying cooing and smiling neither of which are taught or learned therefore this suggests that learning theory is limited in its ability to explain the formation of attachment because it ignores biological inborn factors that are involved finally the learning theory explanation of attachment can be criticized for being environmentally reductionist this is because it breaks down the behavior of an attachment to the basic process of stimulus and response associations it could be argued that this is too simplistic a theory to explain complex attachment behaviors for example research by Isabella rambelski in 1991 has shown the importance of interactional synchrony in the formation of attachment in contrast to reductionism studying and valuing Human Experience as a whole can provide arguably a better explanation this is particularly the case for social behaviors that involve high levels of interaction such as with attachment where taking into account the meaning and the context of the behavior is crucial to understanding it this suggests then that learning theories reductionist approach limits its ability to understand attachment so this now brings us to John Balby and he did not like learning theory at all instead with an eye to the animal studies of Lorenz and Hollow he proposed a more biological view of attachments if you are ready to watch that video you can click it on the screen now I hope you found this video helpful and we'll see you in the next one