AP Psychology – Attachment Theories (Harlow, Ainsworth Strange Situation)

AP Psychology – Attachment Theories (Harlow, Ainsworth Strange Situation)

AP Psychology Study Guide: Attachment Theories (Harlow, Ainsworth Strange Situation)

What This Is

Attachment theories explain how early emotional bonds between infants and caregivers shape social and emotional development. These theories are high-yield on the AP exam because they connect to developmental psychology, social behavior, and real-world applications (e.g., parenting, childcare, therapy). A famous example is Harry Harlow’s monkey experiments, where baby monkeys preferred a cloth "mother" over a wire "mother" that provided food—proving that comfort, not just nourishment, drives attachment.

Key Terms & Concepts

• Attachment: A deep, enduring emotional bond between an infant and caregiver, forming the foundation for future relationships.
• John Bowlby’s Attachment Theory: Infants are biologically predisposed to form attachments for survival; key components include proximity maintenance (staying near caregiver), safe haven (seeking comfort when distressed), and secure base (exploring while using caregiver as support).
• Harry Harlow’s Contact Comfort: Monkeys preferred soft, cloth "mothers" over wire "mothers" with food, showing that physical comfort is more important than nourishment for attachment.
• Mary Ainsworth’s Strange Situation: A lab procedure to assess infant attachment styles by observing reactions to separation/reunion with caregivers.
• Secure Attachment (60% of infants): Infant explores freely when caregiver is present, is upset when they leave, and is easily comforted upon return. Linked to responsive, consistent caregiving.
• Insecure-Avoidant Attachment (20%): Infant ignores caregiver, shows little distress when they leave, and avoids contact upon return. Linked to distant or rejecting caregiving.
• Insecure-Anxious/Ambivalent Attachment (15%): Infant is clingy, extremely distressed when caregiver leaves, and both seeks and resists comfort upon return. Linked to inconsistent caregiving.
• Insecure-Disorganized Attachment (5%): Infant shows contradictory behaviors (e.g., freezing, rocking) and confusion during reunion. Linked to abuse or trauma.
• Internal Working Model: A mental framework for relationships, shaped by early attachment, that influences expectations in future relationships (e.g., "People will abandon me").
• Critical Period (Bowlby): A sensitive window (first 2 years) where attachment must form; if missed, long-term social/emotional deficits may occur.
• Temperament: An infant’s innate emotional reactivity (e.g., easy, difficult, slow-to-warm-up), which interacts with caregiving to shape attachment.

Step-by-Step: Analyzing Attachment in the Strange Situation

Use this process to predict attachment style from a scenario or explain behavior in an FRQ:

1. Identify the caregiver’s behavior:
2. Responsive/consistent?-Likely secure.
3. Distant/rejecting?-Likely avoidant.
4. Inconsistent (sometimes loving, sometimes ignoring)?-Likely anxious/ambivalent.

5. Abusive/frightening?-Likely disorganized.

6. Observe the infant’s reaction to separation:

7. Mild distress?-Secure.
8. No reaction?-Avoidant.
9. Extreme distress?-Anxious/ambivalent.

10. Confused/frozen?-Disorganized.

11. Observe the infant’s reaction to reunion:

12. Easily comforted?-Secure.
13. Ignores caregiver?-Avoidant.
14. Clings but resists comfort?-Anxious/ambivalent.

15. Contradictory behaviors (e.g., approaching but then freezing)?-Disorganized.

16. Connect to long-term outcomes:

17. Secure-Healthy relationships, emotional regulation.
18. Insecure-Difficulty trusting, anxiety, or social withdrawal.

Example: A child cries when their parent leaves but is quickly soothed upon return. This suggests secure attachment due to consistent caregiving.

Common Mistakes

• Mistake: Confusing Harlow’s contact comfort with Ainsworth’s attachment styles.

• Correction: Harlow proved comfort > food for attachment, while Ainsworth classified attachment styles based on caregiver interactions.

• Mistake: Assuming temperament alone determines attachment.

• Correction: Attachment is a two-way interaction between infant temperament and caregiver responsiveness.

• Mistake: Thinking avoidant infants don’t care about their caregiver.

• Correction: Avoidant infants do care but have learned to suppress their distress due to unresponsive caregiving.

• Mistake: Overlooking disorganized attachment as a distinct category.

• Correction: Disorganized attachment is not just extreme anxiety—it involves contradictory behaviors (e.g., approaching but then freezing).

• Mistake: Believing attachment styles are fixed for life.

• Correction: Attachment can change with new relationships or therapy (e.g., an insecurely attached child may develop secure attachment with a nurturing teacher).

AP Exam Insights

1. FRQ Hot Topic: Expect a scenario-based FRQ asking you to:
2. Identify an infant’s attachment style from a Strange Situation description.
3. Explain how caregiver behavior shaped that attachment.

4. Predict long-term outcomes (e.g., "How might this child’s relationships be affected?").

5. Multiple-Choice Traps:

6. Harlow vs. Ainsworth: Know that Harlow’s work was experimental (monkeys), while Ainsworth’s was observational (humans).
7. Secure vs. Insecure: Secure = comfortable with intimacy and independence; insecure = either clingy or avoidant.

8. Critical Period: Bowlby’s idea, but not absolute—later experiences can still shape attachment.

9. Tricky Distinction:

10. Temperament vs. Attachment:

    • Temperament = inborn emotional reactivity (e.g., "easy" or "difficult" baby).
    • Attachment = relationship quality shaped by caregiver response to temperament.

11. Real-World Application: Be ready to connect attachment to:

12. Parenting styles (e.g., authoritative parenting-secure attachment).
13. Therapy (e.g., how insecure attachment might lead to relationship issues in adulthood).

Quick Check Questions

1. Multiple Choice: In Harlow’s experiments, baby monkeys spent more time with the cloth "mother" than the wire "mother" because: a) The cloth mother provided food. b) The cloth mother provided contact comfort. c) The wire mother was frightening. d) The monkeys were genetically predisposed to soft textures.

Answer: b) The cloth mother provided contact comfort. Explanation: Harlow’s work showed that physical comfort, not nourishment, drives attachment.

1. Short FRQ (1–2 sentences): A 1-year-old child in the Strange Situation clings to their parent, screams when they leave, and both hits and hugs them upon return. Identify the attachment style and explain one possible cause.

Answer: This is insecure-anxious/ambivalent attachment, likely caused by inconsistent caregiving (e.g., sometimes responsive, sometimes neglectful).

1. Multiple Choice: Which of the following is a long-term outcome of secure attachment in infancy? a) Difficulty forming close relationships in adulthood. b) Higher likelihood of anxiety disorders. c) Better emotional regulation and social skills. d) Preference for isolation.

Answer: c) Better emotional regulation and social skills. Explanation: Secure attachment provides a foundation for healthy relationships and emotional resilience.

Last-Minute Cram Sheet

1. Harlow’s monkeys: Contact comfort > food for attachment.
2. Ainsworth’s Strange Situation: Lab test for attachment styles.
3. Secure attachment (60%): Explores, upset when left, comforted upon return.
4. Insecure-avoidant (20%): Ignores caregiver, little distress when left.
5. Insecure-anxious/ambivalent (15%): Clingy, extreme distress, resists comfort.
6. Insecure-disorganized (5%): Contradictory behaviors (e.g., freezing).
7. Bowlby’s critical period: First 2 years are key for attachment.
8. Internal working model: Mental framework for future relationships.
9. Temperament + caregiving = attachment (not just one factor).
10. Avoidant-doesn’t care—they’ve learned to suppress distress.