Bowlby’s Monotropic Thoery

Developed his theory based on decades of research into children’s development. He studied his own children and the mental health of homeless children following WW2. He drew heavily from animal studies which led him to reject traditional learning theory explanations of attachment and that emotional bonds evolved through natural selection and humans faced constant threats from predators making attachment behaviours crucial for infant survival

Refers to the innate drive to become attached to a primary attachment figure. Whilst Bowlby acknowledge infants could form multiple attachments, he viewed attachment as hierarchical, with the primary bond being unique in its integrity and importance.

It is the foundation for the child’s emotional and social development, providing the template for all future relationships throughout life.

Automatically trigger caregiver responses from adults which are evolved mechanisms that increase infant survival chances by maintaining proximity to protective caregivers.
E.g. Crying, looking and smiling and following and clinging.

Occurs from birth to approximately two-and-a-half-years, with attachment formation being most crucial within the first twelve months. If attachment is not formed during this time, the capacity for forming secure relationships become impossible.

A cognitive framework that children develop based on their primary attachment experience. Influences how individuals understand themselves, others and relationships.
Children who experience a secure attachment experience a positive internal working model, whereas insecure attachments may lead to difficulties forming healthy relationships in life.

Supporting evidence for the importance of the internal working model. Bailey et al. (1999) studied 99 mothers and their children, assessing the children’s attachment type and asking mothers about their own attachment experiences.

Mothers who reported poorer relationships with their own parents were more likely to have children with insecure attachments. Supports Bowlby’s idea that the first attachment forms an internal working model, which influences future relationships.

May be socially sensitive. Bowlby did not state the primary caregiver has to be the mother, in prac5ice this attachment is often formed the moon. This may place pressure on working mothers to delay working due to fear of harm on development. The theory may contribute to the stigmatisation of mothers by implying that attachment difficulties are caused by inadequate maternal care.

Therefore, Bowlby’s theory may have negative social implications, placing too much responsibility on mothers.

May be culturally biased as monotropy is not evident across all societies. Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg (1988) found monotropy is less common in collectivist cultures where children are cared for by multiple figures.

Suggests that multiple attachments may be equally important for child development, challenging the Monotropic theory. Therefore, may provide a limited explanation of attachment formation across cultures.