Bowlby: 44 Thieves
Aim: To establish a cause-and-effect relationship between maternal deprivation and emotional maladjustment based on his observations of patients at his child guidance clinic. To see if there is a link between delinquency and maternal deprivation
Procedure: Opportunity sample - 88 children from the London Child guidance clinic. 44 were juvenile thieves, and had been referred because of their stealing; 44 “controls” had been referred because of emotional problems. They were of a similar age and intelligence to the thieves.
At the clinic children were assessed on arrival using interviews, case histories and psychological testing. Mental tests were conducted on intelligence, as well as assessment of emotional attitudes towards the tests.
These initial reports were given to Bowlby who then interviewed the child and the mother. From this a diagnosis was formed after a case conference was held.
Further interviews occurred after so that more in-depth detail could be obtained.
Findings: 2 of the 44 thieves were diagnosed as normal
14 (32% of thieves) were diagnosed as affectionless – these children lacked affection, warmth and feelings towards others. They lied, stole, had no sense of loyalty or friendship.
In the control group there were no affectionless characters but more depressed children
17 of the 44 thieves group had suffered periods of prolonged separation of more than 6 months before the age of six, whereas only 2 in the control group had experience this
Out of the 17, 12 were also categorised as affectionless – therefore 12 out of the 14 (86%) affectionless thieves had experienced deprivation
Conclusion: Maternal separation/deprivation in the child's early life caused permanent emotional damage. Deprivation leads to an affectionless character and potential for criminal behaviour
Evaluation
Generalisability: Case studies of individual children, this may not be generalised to other groups of children
Reliability: A control group was used and show that out of the thieves 14 were affectionless characters whereas none of the control group were. Without the control group conclusions would have been difficult to make. However the control group Bowlby used were also attending the clinic and had problems; Bowlby himself said he would have liked a control group of normal children.
Validity: range of methods were used to collect the data. However the data was retrospective – it may be that during the interviews the children (and mothers) were inaccurate when discussing past experiences
The research was correlational and non-experimental: Separation/deprivation cannot be manipulated as an independent variable, and so cause and effect cannot be identified.
Other factors may have led to these outcomes (e.g., conflict within the family). Bowlby did not look at relationship with the father and school experiences.
Researcher bias - Bowlby conducted the case studies and made the diagnosis of affectionless psychopathy. Lowers the validity and reliability.
Bowlby emphasised the notion of “affectionless psychopathy”. However, it is rather vague and hard to assess, and has not been used by other researchers
Aim: To establish a cause-and-effect relationship between maternal deprivation and emotional maladjustment based on his observations of patients at his child guidance clinic. To see if there is a link between delinquency and maternal deprivation
Procedure: Opportunity sample - 88 children from the London Child guidance clinic. 44 were juvenile thieves, and had been referred because of their stealing; 44 “controls” had been referred because of emotional problems. They were of a similar age and intelligence to the thieves.
At the clinic children were assessed on arrival using interviews, case histories and psychological testing. Mental tests were conducted on intelligence, as well as assessment of emotional attitudes towards the tests.
These initial reports were given to Bowlby who then interviewed the child and the mother. From this a diagnosis was formed after a case conference was held.
Further interviews occurred after so that more in-depth detail could be obtained.
Findings: 2 of the 44 thieves were diagnosed as normal
14 (32% of thieves) were diagnosed as affectionless – these children lacked affection, warmth and feelings towards others. They lied, stole, had no sense of loyalty or friendship.
In the control group there were no affectionless characters but more depressed children
17 of the 44 thieves group had suffered periods of prolonged separation of more than 6 months before the age of six, whereas only 2 in the control group had experience this
Out of the 17, 12 were also categorised as affectionless – therefore 12 out of the 14 (86%) affectionless thieves had experienced deprivation
Conclusion: Maternal separation/deprivation in the child's early life caused permanent emotional damage. Deprivation leads to an affectionless character and potential for criminal behaviour
Evaluation
Generalisability: Case studies of individual children, this may not be generalised to other groups of children
Reliability: A control group was used and show that out of the thieves 14 were affectionless characters whereas none of the control group were. Without the control group conclusions would have been difficult to make. However the control group Bowlby used were also attending the clinic and had problems; Bowlby himself said he would have liked a control group of normal children.
Validity: range of methods were used to collect the data. However the data was retrospective – it may be that during the interviews the children (and mothers) were inaccurate when discussing past experiences
The research was correlational and non-experimental: Separation/deprivation cannot be manipulated as an independent variable, and so cause and effect cannot be identified.
Other factors may have led to these outcomes (e.g., conflict within the family). Bowlby did not look at relationship with the father and school experiences.
Researcher bias - Bowlby conducted the case studies and made the diagnosis of affectionless psychopathy. Lowers the validity and reliability.
Bowlby emphasised the notion of “affectionless psychopathy”. However, it is rather vague and hard to assess, and has not been used by other researchers