HARLOW AND LORENZ: ANIMAL STUDIES OF ATTACHMENT

This section addresses the study of Harlow and Lorenz, which are explicitly mentioned in the AQA Psychology specification for animal studies of attachment.

Konrad Lorenz

Key Study: Lorenz 1935

Konrad Lorenz's research in 1935 focused on attachment, specifically imprinting in goslings, shedding light on how attachment functions in animals.

LORENZ’S STUDY 1935

Lorenz conducted a study demonstrating imprinting in animals. He divided a group of gosling eggs into two batches. One batch stayed with their biological mother, while the other was incubated and hatched with Lorenz as their first living encounter. The goslings hatched with Lorenz imprinted on him and followed him wherever he went.

Interestingly, this imprinting persisted even when Lorenz marked and mixed his hatched goslings with those of the natural mother. These goslings continued to follow Lorenz, showing no recognition of their biological mother and a strong preference for Lorenz. Imprinting occurred only if the animal was exposed to a moving object during a critical period within the first two days and became irreversible once established. Furthermore, birds that imprinted on humans in their early days later, as adults, exhibited a preference for mating with humans, demonstrating the influence of imprinting on mate preferences, known as sexual imprinting.

This process of imprinting in animals bears similarities to attachment in humans and supports the idea that attachment has a biological basis. Imprinting highlights how animals are biologically programmed to form special relationships, mirroring attachment in humans, which typically occurs with a primary caregiver. It's important to note that imprinting was found to occur only in nidifugous birds and not across all bird species.

Evaluation of Lorenz’s Animal Study

Numerous studies have replicated Lorenz's work, consistently showing similar findings, which indicates that this animal study on attachment is reliable. For instance, Guiton (1966) demonstrated how leghorn chicks could become attached to yellow rubber gloves when used to feed them, emphasizing that imprinting can occur with any moving object during the critical period of two days. These chicks would also attempt to mate with the gloves later in life, supporting Lorenz's discovery of its impact on sexual behavior in adulthood.

However, there is evidence suggesting that imprinting may not be entirely irreversible or exclusively biological; it might involve learned responses. Guiton (1966) later found that chicks imprinting on yellow rubber gloves would later mate with other chickens if they spent sufficient time with them. This suggests a learned component to imprinting. Nonetheless, other research has found that imprinting is indeed irreversible, indicating a strong biological element to this behavior. The fact that imprinting occurs only within a specific critical time window supports the idea of biological programming, much like attachment in humans. While we cannot fully generalize bird studies to humans due to differences in biology, there are similarities that suggest a biological basis for attachment in both.

The concept of a critical period in imprinting aligns with Bowlby's idea of a critical period in human infants, offering external validity and the potential to better understand human attachment. Additionally, the impact of imprinting on later sexual behavior supports Bowlby's internal working model theory, which suggests that early attachment influences later relationships, including sexual behavior. Therefore, imprinting provides strong evidence that attachment in humans is shaped by early childhood experiences and serves as a template for future relationships.

Furthermore, understanding imprinting in birds has practical real-world applications, such as imprinting migratory birds to microlight aircraft to teach them migratory flight paths, aiding in the reintroduction of birds to areas where they have become extinct.

Harry Harlow

Key Study: Harlow 1959 - The Origins of Love

Harry Harlow's 1959 research with rhesus monkeys aimed to challenge the idea that attachment is solely based on feeding bonds (conditioning) as proposed by learning theory. Instead, Harlow emphasized the significance of contact comfort in attachment.

HARLOW’S STUDY 1959 – ‘THE ORIGINS OF LOVE’

Harry Harlow conducted research to show attachment is not necessarily a learned process due to feeding bonds. Rhesus monkeys were separated from their mothers and raised in isolation cages, exposed to two mother figures: one made of wire and the other covered in cloth for comfort. Four monkeys were exposed to the cloth mother with a milk bottle, while another four were exposed to the wire mother with the milk bottle. Observations were made regarding the time monkeys spent with each mother and their responses when frightened.

The findings showed that, regardless of who provided milk, all monkeys spent the majority of their time with the cloth mother. When frightened, the monkeys clung to the cloth mother for reassurance and remained in contact with her when exploring new objects. This demonstrated that infant monkeys form attachments not solely based on who feeds them but on the individual offering contact comfort.

Other variations of the study included placing monkeys in a large room with toys. In the presence of the wire mother, monkeys displayed fear and remained inactive. However, when the cloth mother was introduced, they explored the room, using her as a safe base for exploration, akin to Bowlby's attachment theory in humans.

Harlow's study also revealed that motherless monkeys developed abnormal behaviors, including social abnormalities, fear of other monkeys, and abnormal sexual behavior. They also struggled with parenting when they had their own babies. Importantly, Harlow found a critical period, as suggested by Bowlby and Lorenz, where monkeys exposed to peers could recover, but only if this occurred before the age of 3 months. Monkeys that spent over six months with a wire mother did not seem to recover, highlighting the lasting effects of early experiences on behavior.

Evaluation of Harry Harlow’s Study 1959

One major criticism of Harlow's study is that it focused on monkeys and their attachment behavior, which may not directly represent human behavior due to species differences and humans' higher cognitive awareness of their thought processes. Consequently, the findings might lack external validity and generalizability to the human population. There are also concerns about internal validity, as some argue that it primarily demonstrates attachment behavior in monkeys. However, it's worth noting that monkeys share approximately 94% of their genetics with humans, suggesting some degree of validity in applying these findings to humans.

Support for Harlow's findings can be found in Schaffer and Emerson's study on the stages of attachment in humans, which revealed that infants are not necessarily attached to those who feed them but rather to individuals who are more sensitive to their needs. This aligns with the concept of the cloth mother providing contact comfort and responding to the monkey's distress.

Harlow's research raises ethical concerns regarding the treatment of rhesus monkeys and the inhumane conditions they endured, which resulted in many deaths. The monkeys experienced significant distress from separation and were intentionally subjected to emotional harm for observational purposes. Furthermore, the long-lasting negative effects on the monkeys' ability to form later relationships and their social behavior raise ethical questions about the study's cost in terms of animal welfare.

On the other hand, some argue that this research has paved the way for a better understanding of attachment behavior in humans, using a setup that would be ethically unthinkable with human subjects. The observation of monkeys provides a simpler model for interpreting behavior compared to humans. Additionally, the study's benefits include improving child care practices and animal care, as it has provided insights into the severe consequences of poor attachments. Therefore, many believe that the benefits of the study outweigh the ethical costs, as it has real-world applications for enhancing care for both humans and animals.

Possible exam questions on animal studies of attachment include:

1. Outline one animal study into attachment, including the researchers' methods and findings (6 marks).

2. Describe Lorenz's research into attachment (4 marks).

3. Describe what animal studies into attachment have revealed (4 marks).

4. Outline and evaluate animal studies of attachment (12 marks for AS, 16 marks for A-level).