We use cookies to enhance your experience on our website. By continuing to use our website, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. You can change your cookie settings at any time. Find out more

Posts archived in Attachment


You will have heard of the nature-nurture debate. In the last decade researchers have come to a deeper understanding of how the two interact. The field is called epigenetics and there is an interesting example of this in the link between stress and attachment.

rat-grroming-babyResearch has shown that rats who have been raised by mothers who groom and lick them are later better able to cope with stress than pups who were infrequently licked and groomed. What appears to happen is that the brains of well-licked baby rats have been changed. There are receptors in the brain that mop up the stress hormone cortisol, reducing the effect of stress on the brain. The gene that codes for these receptors is modified by the mothers’ behaviour so that ‘unlicked’ pups ultimately have fewer cortisol receptors in their brain.

The bottom line is that the attachment behaviours of the mother appears to alter the young rats’ brains so they cope less well with stressful experience. And this also affects the way the young rats subsequently treat their own babies. Nurture modifies nature. Poor attachment experiences have negative effects.

Back in the 1970s 111 infants from disadvantaged backgrounds were recruited into quite an intensive daycare programme, the Abecedarian Project. Thirty years later, 101 of them were still being monitored by researchers (Frances et al., 2012). This was a scientific, controlled investigation into the benefits of high quality daycare for children who were at risk of developmental delays or academic failure linked to their low-income backgrounds. The children attended full-time, all year, from infancy up to kindergarten. All sorts of educational activities were provided to support their language, cognitive, social and emotional development. The follow-up studies have supported other findings which have consistently shown that children who receive early educational intervention really do perform better at school, resulting in their having greater chance of adult educational success and a better life.

This longitudinal study challenges the idea that such programmes only provide short-term gain for the children.

In the last month a report appeared in the Daily Mail entitled ‘Putting baby in nursery could raise its risk of heart disease because it sends levels of stress soaring‘. This conclusion is based on a report by Aric Sigman, a psychologist who has previously been attacked by Ben Goldacre for his bad science (see here). Sigman’s day care claims have come in for a blistering attack by Bishopblog ‘How to become a celebrity scientific expert’. It’s a great example of why we need to understand science – because it means we are less gullible.

In brief Sigman bases his conclusions on accepted research that has shown that children in day care have raised levels of the stress hormone cortisol. But he then assumes that such increased levels later have negative consequences. In fact some research suggests that increased cortisol levels may lead to reduced fearfulness, a positive consequence. And further, the link between cortisol and heart disease is based on studies of people over 65 so it is mistaken to assume that children with raised levels of cortisol are more at risk of heart disease. However, it’s a very appealing newspaper title and has led to lots of comments from parents on the ill effects of day care.

The moral of the story? Don’t believe all your read. Always ask questions.

Over the last few years the BBC has broadcast an excellent series on research studies that have changed our understanding of the human mind, presented by Claudia Hammond (some of you may have heard her speak at a recent student conference in London). The BBC has now decided to make them all available for download here. Topics covered include Bandura’s Bobo doll study, Rosenhan’s Pseudo-patient study, Kohlberg’s Heinz dilemma, The Hawthorne effect, Mary Ainsworth’s research. In total there are 15 programmes each 28 minutes in length. On Sunday 17 April there is a new series starting with a programme on Elizabeth Loftus and Eyewitness Testimony.

An analysis of USA people who subscribed to a major online dating service between 2009 and 2010 showed that there were racial preferences. White people tended to state a preference for a white partner, but black people especially younger black men were less likely to state a same race preference. These stated preferences were followed up by checking who these subscribers actually contacted via the website, and the researchers found that whites more than blacks, women more than men,and older more than younger people showed a preference for a same race partner. These preferences also showed in the responses to online contact.

Does this show that racial prejudice is still powerful? Or that a preference for similarity is strong? These questions and others are up for discussion.

A recent study by Brooks-Gunn et al. (2010) has concluded that the benefits related to going out to work may balance out any harm to children in such situations. The study analysed data from the American NICHD study, calculating the total effect of maternal employment – taking into account all factors related to being a working mother like income, qualities as a parent, and high quality child care. Taking the advantages and disadvantages into account, they found that the net effect is neutral. They looked specifically at maternal employment during a child’s first year and found that the more important factors are those related to the quality of parenting and children’s experiences of child care, rather than the absence or presence of a mother.

Is it good for a baby to have a very young mother? And what about having a much older mother? We hear quite a lot about young girls getting pregnant, but there is also a small but increasing number of women giving birth aged 60+. For example, Rajo Devi had a baby at the age of 70. What are the psychological implications for attachment between a baby and much older parents, would the age difference matter? Might there be benefits to the attachment? And what are the psychological implications as the child grows up?

Rajo Devi and her baby

0 comments

Mind Changers

Many of you will be familiar with the excellent BBC radio series called Mind Changers which has included programmes on Milgram, Piaget, Ainsworth, Bartlett, Kohlberg, Zimbardo, Harlow, Asch. Some of these are currently available as podcasts here or you can go to PsychBLOG where Jamie has downloaded some and there are also some available on Spokenword (free subscription for teachers).

If anyone finds copies elsehwere, let us know!

dad_dancin_a_thumb5.jpg

“given our rapidly evolving conceptions of “father” and “family,” fatherhood in the 1990s is probably tougher, psychologically, than at any other time in recent history”.

Hah…. I knew I needed some kip…

cute1.jpg

“We are inherently attracted to a specific set of characteristics, including large, symmetrical heads, large eyes, small mouths and small noses,” according to Jeffrey Kurland, associate professor of biological anthropology and human development. But why do almost all humans find this particular set of features so appealing?”

Suggested answer here

Disturbingly non-cute babies here