This demonstrates quite clearly how the learning theory suggests that an infant's responses would be based purely on physiological need; an emotional bond does form but the learning theory argues that only as a result of the need to be fed and survive. This idea is countered by an experiment that Harlow performed with monkeys. When faced with a distressing situation, the baby monkeys would seek comfort with the soft, 'cuddly' but non food providing mother model as opposed to the wire model with food. Harlow showed that from an infant's point of view at least, food does not appear to be
Outline and evaluate the explanation of the Learning Theory The learning theory is model that suggests that attachment is learnt as a result of classical conditioning and operant conditioning. Food (Unconditioned stimulus) naturally produces a sense of pleasure (Unconditioned response) in the infant. As the mother continually provides the baby with food, she becomes the feeder and as the association between the two occurs. Classical conditioning occurs when food (conditioned stimulus) becomes associated with the mother which causes pleasure now becomes a conditioned response. The association between the mother and a sense of pleasure is the attachment bond.
According to the learning theory, the monkey should have spent more time with the wire monkey as it has food therefore a way the baby can become attached to its mother. However this didn’t happen as the baby spent more time with the cloth monkey that gave him comfort. The findings of Harlow’s study decreases the validity of the learning theory as it went with the opposite option. However Harlow’s monkey experiment was only tested on animals so this doesn’t suggest humans will have the same results. This is because humans are a lot more complex, and have many different emotions
Attachment is a strong, emotional, reciprocal bond between two people, especially child and carer. Attachment serves three main purposes these are that it is essential for; a child’s survival, a child’s emotional stability throughout his/her life and the stability of a child’s future relationships One explanation of attachment is the learning theory. This theory explains that an attachment is something that is learnt (nurture). Behaviourists came up with the theory that attachment is either learnt through classical conditioning or operant conditioning. Classical conditioning is learning through association; food is an unconditioned stimulus and provides pleasure, which is an unconditioned response.
It is said this develops as behaviour is motivated by trying to balance the needs of the id (pleasure, comfort and food.) (First steps in counselling. pg. 21.) According to Freud, the person suffering neuroses were led by their super-ego.
The last time he pulled a trick in class he got kicked out and sent back to the cave where all the monkeys were; but anyway it’s good to have a brave leader. Another reason is that he is very generous. Usually his risky actions are for his monkey people to be safe. Like he went to Master Subhodi to learn how to be immortal, but he also did it for his monkeys to also live forever. Because if you could live forever you would want some friends with you, right?
The mother chimpanzees were the ones that were always with the babies holding them and cradling them. When I made my observations at McDonalds I noticed that most of the people that were with their children were the mothers. At the zoo, I noticed that the only ones interacting with the baby chimpanzees were the mothers. One great example of this was when the babies were hungry; I noticed how similar females are in the sense that both the chimp and the human had to nurse the baby in order to feed them. The only difference I noticed with this, was that the lady I observed nursed her baby with a blanket over her for privacy.
A flaw in this theory however is that it removes personal responsibility from overeating and could be used as an excuse for obesity. Also if this theory were true it would mean that everyone would have the same preference for high calorie foods, when evidently this is not true and we each have individual food preferences. Another evolutionary explanation of food preference is how we have learnt taste aversion and how to avoid eating poisonous foods. Our ancestors lived in an Environment of Evolutionary Adaption era and it was a case of survival of the fittest, and so in order to survive they had to learn what was good and bad for them to eat. Sweet taste is often associated with ripeness and therefore good foods to eat, whereas bitter tastes aren’t as enjoyable and therefore are associated with bad (poisonous) foods.
The learning theory stipulates that attachment isn’t innate but is learnt; with the basis for learning being the provision of food. The infant will form attachment with whoever feeds it as they learn to associate the comfort of being fed with the presence of their mother. Through the process of classical conditioning they come to find the contact with their mother alone comforting. Over time through the process of operant conditioning they find that certain behaviours (e.g. smiling) bring desirable responses from others and learn to repeat these behaviours to provoke the desired response.
Behaviourists believe that all behaviour is gained through conditioning. Firstly, classical conditioning claims that infants become attached to the person who feeds them or gives them pleasure, as food (the unconditioned stimulus) produces a sense of pleasure (unconditioned response). The food then becomes associated with the ‘feeder’ that then becomes a conditioned stimulus also producing a sense of pleasure. Secondly, operant conditioning (Dollard and Miller 1950) is used to integrate the perception of mental states. When an infant is hungry, this is uncomfortable and this creates a drive to reduce the discomfort.