# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
20 Minute Silent Countdown Timer with Alarm!

# data[].attributes.body
In the case of attachment, food serves as an unconditioned stimulus and thus gives the baby pleasure this being the unconditioned response. The mother is the neutral stimulus and doesn’t produce any response, however because the mother provides food for the baby, they soon become associated with each other, i.e. mother means that food is coming. This means that the neutral stimulus has become a conditioned stimulus and the pleasure that comes from the mothers is the conditioned response.  Operant conditioning in attachment occurs when a baby is crying, this response can be reinforced if the primary caregiver chooses the correct response. In this case the baby must always get what they want (pleasant consequence) so it is reinforced. This stimulus of crying will then be directed to that care giver. It also works in a different way for the caregiver. The caregiver is receiving negative reinforcement at the same time as the baby is receiving positive reinforcement. They want to stop the crying (negative consequence). These mutual exchanges of reinforcement strengthen the attachment between the two.

# data[].attributes.body
One strength is that some elements of conditioning could still be involved. It seems unlikely that association with food is central to attachment. However, conditioning may still play some role attachment eg a baby's choice of primary attachment figure may still be determined by the fact that a caregiver becomes associated with warmth and comfort. This means that conditioning could still be important in choice of attachment formation than feeding.
However, this point of view ignores the fact that babies take a very active role in the interactions that form attachment eg they initiate reactions (Feldman and Eidelman). This suggests that learning theory may be inappropriate in explaining any aspect of attachment.

# data[].attributes.body
One weakness is that Harlow and Lorenz both contradicted each other with their studies. The learning theory states that attachment will occur in any infant to a person who feeds them. However, Lorenz imprinted his geese before they were fed and Harlow’s rhesus monkeys attached to the cloth mother regardless of whether of not she provided food. Both of these studies suggest that attachment does not develop as a result of feeding therefore they do not support the learning theory of attachment.

# data[].attributes.body
the learning theory of attachment is also referred to as 'the cupboard love' approach where the attachment figure is as a provider of food. it says that classical conditioning involves learning to associate two stimuli, in this case the UCS (food) leads to UCR (a feeling of pleasure). this response is not learned so it is an unconditioned response (unlearned). then a mother (caregiver) acts as the neural stimulus however when the caregiver provides food over time, he/she becomes associated with food so the neutral stimulus becomes the cs. once conditioning has taken place the signs of the caregiver produces a CR of pleasure and according to a learning theorist, the conditioned pleasure response is the basis of love. ow a attachment has formed and the caregiver becomes an attachment figure. ones this attachment is formed, operant conditioning explains why babies cry for comfort as to leads to a response from the caregiver. as long as the caregiver provides the correct response, crying is reinforced because it produces a pleasurable conserquence.

# data[].attributes.body
dollard and Miller proposed the idea that attachment can be explained by learning theory: classical and operant conditioning.
classical conditioning involved an association being formed between two stimuli. in this case the unconditioned stimulus is food, with pleasure being the unconditioned response. the caregiver begins as a neutral stimulus however become associated with food. therefore the caregiver becomes a conditioned stimulus as the infant believes the presence of the caregiver is a sign of food coming.
the conditioned pleasure response of love presents the fact an attachment has been formed with the caregiver becoming an attachment figure.
operant conditioning relates to learning through consequences as behaviour is reinforced. this explanation can be used to explain why babies cry for comfort. crying results in a response from a caregiver, eg feeding. as this correct response is continuously given, crying is reinforced. therefore crying becomes directed toward caregiver

# data[].attributes.body
Learning theory of attachment sates that an infant learns to form and an attachment to a caregiver through classical and operant conditioning.

Classical conditioning states that human behaviour is learned through association, and attachment can be used as an example for classical conditioning. In accordance to this food (unconditioned stimulus) produces pleasure (unconditioned response). Through classical conditioning we can make it so that a neutral stimulus (mother) can produce pleasure by associating the unconditioned stimulus (food) with the neutral stimulus. However, the food and mother have to be present in order for the association to take place.

Differently, operant conditioning states that we learn through consequences. Two psychologists by the name Dollard and Miller (1950) explained how attachment could be used as a viable example to explain operant conditioning. With this in mind operant conditioning states that hunger creates discomfort in the infant and that when they are fed this feeling is reduced and replaced with pleasure. This makes food the primary reinforcer, and the infant recognises the person who gives the food to them as teh secondary reinforcer. If the infant stays close to this secondary reinforcer then the feeling of hunger (negative reinforcement) will be avoided. Children will therefore repeat the behaviour of remaining in close proximity to the person who provides the pleasure so will form an attachment to them.

# data[].attributes.body
John Dollard and Neal Miller suggested that infants learn to form attachment to a caregiver through classical and operant conditioning. Classical conditioning is learning through association: When the baby is with just the mother (neutral stimulus) there is no response but when the baby is given milk (unconditioned stimulus) it causes the baby pleasure (unconditioned response). When the baby is given milk by the mother, it again produces pleasure for the baby. After repeating this process the baby associates the mother with milk so eventually the mother (conditioned stimulus) produces pleasure (conditioned response) for the baby. Operant conditioning is learning through consequences: If a baby is crying and the mother e.g rocks or feeds it, the baby has a pleasant consequence which reinforces the crying and the baby will direct it to the caregiver- this is positive reinforcement. The caregiver giving the baby the pleasant consequence to stop the crying is also negative reinforcement and these mutual exchanges of reinforcement strengthen the attachment between the two.

# data[].attributes.body
The learning theory of attachment was proposed by Dolard and Miller (1950) and states that caregiver - infant attachment Is driven by food , this is referred to as the cupboard of love approach and can be explained through conditioning. Classical conditioning explains this as the baby seeing the milk (unconditioned stimulus) and have a naturally positive response (unconditioned response). Initially the baby seems the mother as a neutral stimulus so has no response. The baby learns to associate the mother with the milk as they are always presented together and this becomes the conditioned stimulus. The baby is now conditioned and attached to the mother (conditioned response). Operant conditioning explains the cupboard of love theory through reinforcement. The baby cries for comfort and this will lead to a response of food from the caregiver. This reinforces the crying and this behaviour will now be directed to the caregiver.

# data[].attributes.body
one limitation of the learning theory is the counter-evidence from animal studies. Lorenz's geese imprinted on the first moving object that they saw, the control group following their mother and the incubator group following Lorenz. With Harlow's monkeys he found that they attached ti a soft surrogate in preferance to a wire one with milk. In both these animal studies, imprinting/attachement did not develop as a result of feeding. this therefore shows that external factors other that important in attachment formation therefore decreasing the ecological validity and limiting the generalisability of the theory.

# data[].attributes.body
Learning theory doesn’t always factor in everything when being associated with attachment. The theory ignores the importance of the caregiver - infant interactions and the synchrony. Isabella et al. (1989), concluded that high levels of interactional synchrony could be linked to high quality attachment bonds. These findings do not fit with the learning theory of attachment, stating that attachment develops only as a result of feeding and that learning theory of attachment suggests there would be no purpose for these complex interactions.

# data[].attributes.body
One weakness of the social learning theory of attachment is the counter evidence from animal research. Research on animal studies, particularly those done by Lorenz provide evidence that attachments can be maintained regardless of food. The geese in Lorenz's study gained an attachment before they were fed. Similarly, this is supported by Harlow's research where monkeys became attached to a soft surrogate as opposed to a wire one which dispersed milk. This evidence contradicts the beliefs of the learning theory of attachment, as attachment is not always a result of feeding, therefore limiting this explanation.

# data[].attributes.body
One limitation of the learning theory as an explanation for attachment is the existence of refuting evidence such as Harlow's monkey's (1958). In Harlow's experiment, the monkeys in both conditions became more attached to (spent more time with) the cloth mother who provided comfort, even if it was the bare wire mother who provided food for them. This therefore suggests that food is not the most important factor in caregiver-infant attachment, Harlow's research showed that contact-comfort was more important.

# data[].attributes.body
a weakness of this explanation is that animal studies do not support the learning theory.
lorenz’s geese imprinted prior to being fed, similarly harlow’s monkeys attached to the cloth mother presented regardless of whether they were being fed or not.
this suggests that attachment is not related to the process