Study Notes
Caregiver-Infant Interactions in Humans: Reciprocity and Interactional Synchrony
- Level:
- AS, A-Level
- Board:
- AQA, Edexcel, OCR, IB
Last updated 22 Mar 2021
Reciprocity refers to the process in which a behaviour is matched during an interaction e.g. smiling back when someone smiles at us. Reciprocity develops, in its simplest form, at a very early age. According to Feldman (2007), reciprocity can be seen in interactions from 3 months of age. This conclusion was supported by Meltzoff & Moore (1997) who demonstrated that babies as young as 12-27 days would attempt to imitate facial and physical gestures.
Interactional synchrony refers to how a parent’s speech and infant’s behaviour become finely synchronised so that they are in direct response to one another. It was defined by Feldman (2007) as a “temporal coordination of micro-level social behaviour” and as “symbolic exchanges between parent and child”. Feldman suggests that interactional synchrony serves a critical role in developmental outcomes in terms of self-regulation, symbol use, and the capacity for empathy.
Brazelton et al. (1975) identified trends in mother-baby interactional synchrony. Videotapes of 12 mother-baby pairs’ play behaviour was examined up to 5 months of age, which revealed three phases of play:
- Attention and build-up
- Recovery
- Turning away
These three phases were repeated at regular intervals over the 7 minute footage. It was concluded that the three phases of play demonstrate the early signs of organised behaviour.
Isabella and Belsky (1991) hypothesised that caregiver-baby pairs that developed secure attachment relationships would display more synchronous behaviour than babies with insecure relationships. Babies were observed at 3 and 9 months and the secure group interacted in a well-timed, reciprocal, and mutually rewarding manner.
In contrast caregiver-baby pairs classed as insecure were characterized by interactions that were minimally involved, unresponsive and intrusive. Avoidant pairs displayed maternal intrusiveness and overstimulation, while resistant pairs were poorly coordinated, under-involved and inconsistent. Isabella and Belsky concluded that different interactional behaviours predicted attachment quality.
You might also like
Stages of Attachment Identified by Schaffer
Study Notes
Multiple Attachments and the Role of the Father
Study Notes
Animal Studies of Attachment: Lorenz and Harlow
Study Notes
Explanations for Attachment
Quizzes & Activities
Cultural Variations in Attachment
Quizzes & Activities
Attachment - "Connection Wall" activity
Quizzes & Activities