Learning theory as an explanation of attachment | AQA A-Level Psychology Revision
Updated: Sep 9
For 7182 specification, first teach in September 2025
AQA A-Level Psychology | Free Revision Notes
Estimated study time: 40 minutes
These Learning theory as an explanation of attachment A-Level Psychology revision notes examine how infants may learn to become attached to caregivers. Classical conditioning explains attachment through associations between a caregiver and food. Operant conditioning explains how rewarding consequences strengthen attachment-related behaviour. Together, these processes form a feeding-based account sometimes called cupboard love. You will also evaluate whether food and reinforcement can adequately explain the emotional security seen in attachments.
This lesson focuses on classical conditioning, operant conditioning and evaluation of learning theory, as set out in the course plan.
Learning Objectives 🎯
By the end of this revision page, you should be able to:
Explain attachment using classical conditioning.
Explain attachment using operant conditioning.
Explain the roles of primary and secondary drives.
Explain how a caregiver may become a secondary reinforcer.
Apply learning theory to unfamiliar caregiver-infant scenarios.
Evaluate learning theory using research evidence and alternative explanations.
Revision Notes đź“š
What is learning theory?
Learning theory proposes that attachment develops through processes of conditioning.
It is based on the behaviourist assumption that behaviour is learned through interactions with the environment.
Applied to attachment, the theory suggests that an infant learns to become attached to a caregiver because the caregiver becomes associated with rewarding experiences, particularly feeding.
The explanation includes:
Classical conditioning
Operant conditioning
Drive reduction
Learning theory is sometimes described as a cupboard love explanation because it places food at the centre of attachment formation.
Attachment as learned behaviour
Learning theory does not assume that an infant is born attached to one particular caregiver.
Instead, the caregiver gradually becomes important because they are repeatedly associated with:
Food.
Hunger reduction.
Pleasure.
Comfort following distress.
Other rewarding experiences.
The infant therefore learns to seek proximity to the caregiver.
The basic claim is:
The caregiver provides or becomes associated with reinforcement, so attachment behaviour develops.
The cupboard love explanation
Cupboard love is the idea that an infant loves or becomes attached to the caregiver because the caregiver supplies food.
The phrase suggests that the emotional bond is based on the satisfaction of biological needs.
According to this explanation:
Hunger creates discomfort.
Food removes that discomfort.
The caregiver is associated with feeding.
The caregiver becomes rewarding.
The infant seeks closeness to the caregiver.
Food is therefore treated as the foundation of the attachment.
Classical conditioning and attachment
What is classical conditioning?
Classical conditioning is learning through association.
A stimulus that initially produces no particular response becomes associated with a stimulus that naturally produces a response.
After repeated pairings, the previously neutral stimulus produces a similar response by itself.
In attachment:
Food naturally produces pleasure.
The caregiver is repeatedly present when food is supplied.
The infant associates the caregiver with food.
The caregiver eventually produces pleasure without food being present.
Key classical conditioning terms
Term | Meaning | Attachment example |
Unconditioned stimulus | A stimulus that naturally produces a response | Food |
Unconditioned response | The natural response to the unconditioned stimulus | Pleasure or relief from hunger |
Neutral stimulus | A stimulus that initially does not produce the target response | The caregiver before conditioning |
Conditioned stimulus | A previously neutral stimulus that produces the learned response | The caregiver after repeated pairings with food |
Conditioned response | The response learned through association | Pleasure or attachment response towards the caregiver |
Before conditioning
Before learning occurs:
Food → pleasure
Food is the unconditioned stimulus, or UCS, because it naturally produces pleasure or relief.
Pleasure is the unconditioned response, or UCR, because it occurs without needing to be learned.
At this stage, the caregiver is a neutral stimulus, or NS, because the infant has not yet formed the relevant association.
The sequence is:
Food, UCS → pleasure, UCR Caregiver, NS → no conditioned attachment response
During conditioning
The caregiver is repeatedly present when the infant receives food.
The sequence becomes:
Caregiver, NS + food, UCS → pleasure, UCR
Through repeated pairing, the infant begins to associate the caregiver with the pleasurable effects of feeding.
After conditioning
Eventually, the caregiver produces pleasure without food being immediately present.
The caregiver has become a conditioned stimulus, or CS.
The pleasure or attachment response towards the caregiver is the conditioned response, or CR.
The sequence is:
Caregiver, CS → pleasure or attachment response, CR
Complete classical conditioning sequence
Stage | Stimulus and response |
Before conditioning | Food, UCS → pleasure, UCR |
Before conditioning | Caregiver, NS → no conditioned response |
During conditioning | Caregiver, NS + food, UCS → pleasure, UCR |
After conditioning | Caregiver, CS → pleasure or attachment response, CR |
How classical conditioning produces attachment
The caregiver becomes associated with the positive feelings produced by food.
As a result, the infant may:
Smile when the caregiver appears.
Seek proximity to the caregiver.
Become distressed when the caregiver leaves.
Settle when the caregiver returns.
Prefer the caregiver to unfamiliar people.
Learning theory interprets these behaviours as conditioned responses.
Applying classical conditioning
A baby is regularly fed by their father.
At first, food naturally produces pleasure and the father is a neutral stimulus.
After the father has been repeatedly associated with feeding:
The father becomes a conditioned stimulus.
The baby experiences pleasure when the father appears.
The baby seeks proximity to him.
An attachment develops through association.
A strong application answer
A weak answer might state:
The baby becomes attached because the father feeds them.
A stronger answer explains the conditioning process:
Food is an unconditioned stimulus that naturally produces pleasure. The father initially acts as a neutral stimulus but is repeatedly paired with food. He becomes a conditioned stimulus and produces a conditioned response of pleasure and attachment behaviour.
Conditioning does not require conscious understanding
The infant does not need to think:
“This person gives me food, so I should become attached to them.”
The association develops through repeated experience.
Classical conditioning therefore explains attachment without referring to conscious decisions or complex thought.
Operant conditioning and attachment
What is operant conditioning?
Operant conditioning is learning through the consequences of behaviour.
A behaviour becomes more likely when it is followed by reinforcement.
In attachment, behaviours by both the infant and caregiver may be reinforced.
For example:
The infant cries.
The caregiver provides food or comfort.
The infant’s distress is reduced.
The infant is more likely to seek that caregiver again.
The caregiver’s behaviour may also be reinforced:
The infant cries.
The caregiver responds.
The infant stops crying.
The caregiver is more likely to respond similarly in the future.
Reinforcement
Reinforcement is a consequence that increases the likelihood that a behaviour will be repeated.
There are two main forms:
Positive reinforcement
Negative reinforcement
Both increase behaviour. The words positive and negative refer to adding or removing a consequence, not to whether the consequence is good or bad.
Positive reinforcement
Positive reinforcement occurs when a rewarding consequence is added after a behaviour.
For the infant:
The infant cries or seeks proximity.
The caregiver provides food, warmth or attention.
The rewarding consequence strengthens the infant’s behaviour.
The infant becomes more likely to seek that caregiver again.
For example:
Crying → caregiver appears and provides food → crying and proximity-seeking become more likely
Negative reinforcement
Negative reinforcement occurs when an unpleasant condition is removed, increasing the likelihood of the behaviour that removed it.
For the infant:
Hunger creates discomfort.
The infant cries.
The caregiver feeds the infant.
Hunger and distress are removed.
Crying and proximity-seeking are reinforced.
For the caregiver:
The infant’s crying is unpleasant.
The caregiver provides food or comfort.
The crying stops.
The caregiver’s responding behaviour is negatively reinforced.
This creates a mutually reinforcing interaction.
Mutual reinforcement
Both the infant and caregiver receive consequences that may strengthen their behaviour.
Person | Behaviour | Consequence | Likely effect |
Infant | Cries or seeks caregiver | Receives food or comfort | Proximity-seeking becomes more likely |
Caregiver | Responds to crying | Crying stops | Caregiving response becomes more likely |
Repeated interactions help maintain closeness between the infant and caregiver.
Important distinction
Learning theory does not claim that crying itself is attachment.
Crying is a behaviour that brings the caregiver into contact with the infant.
Through reinforcement, the infant learns that seeking this person leads to rewarding consequences.
The caregiver therefore becomes a preferred figure.
Drive reduction theory
What is a drive?
A drive is an internal state of tension produced by a biological need.
For example:
Lack of food produces hunger.
Hunger creates an uncomfortable drive.
Eating reduces the drive.
Learning theory proposes that reducing a drive is rewarding.
Primary drives
A primary drive is an innate biological need.
Examples include:
Hunger.
Thirst.
The need for warmth.
These needs do not have to be learned.
In the learning explanation of attachment, hunger is the most important primary drive.
Primary reinforcers
A primary reinforcer directly satisfies a biological need.
Food is a primary reinforcer because it reduces hunger.
The infant does not have to learn that food is rewarding.
Secondary reinforcers
A secondary reinforcer becomes rewarding through association with a primary reinforcer.
The caregiver initially has no learned reinforcing value.
However:
Food reduces hunger.
The caregiver repeatedly supplies food.
The caregiver becomes associated with hunger reduction.
The caregiver becomes a secondary reinforcer.
The infant seeks closeness to the caregiver.
Attachment as a secondary drive
Learning theory proposes that attachment is a secondary drive.
The need to seek the caregiver is learned because the caregiver is associated with satisfying the primary drive of hunger.
The sequence is:
Hunger, primary drive → food, primary reinforcer → drive reductionCaregiver associated with food → caregiver becomes secondary reinforcerSeeking the caregiver becomes a learned secondary drive
Complete operant conditioning explanation
The operant explanation can be summarised in six stages:
The infant feels hungry.
Hunger produces an unpleasant drive.
The infant cries.
The caregiver feeds the infant.
Food reduces hunger and reinforces proximity-seeking.
The caregiver becomes a secondary reinforcer and attachment develops.
Applying drive reduction
A baby becomes distressed when hungry.
Their mother regularly feeds them, reducing the unpleasant hunger drive.
Over time:
Food acts as a primary reinforcer.
The mother becomes associated with drive reduction.
The mother becomes a secondary reinforcer.
The baby seeks proximity to the mother.
The attachment is maintained through reinforcement.
Cupboard love in one sentence
A concise summary is:
Learning theory proposes that infants attach to caregivers because caregivers become associated with food and the reduction of hunger.
This is useful as an opening sentence, but a developed answer must explain the conditioning processes.
Classical and operant conditioning compared
Classical conditioning | Operant conditioning |
Learning through association | Learning through consequences |
Food naturally produces pleasure | Food reduces the unpleasant hunger drive |
Caregiver is paired with food | Proximity-seeking is reinforced by feeding |
Caregiver becomes a conditioned stimulus | Caregiver becomes a secondary reinforcer |
Pleasure becomes a conditioned response | Attachment becomes a learned secondary drive |
Focuses on associations between stimuli | Focuses on consequences that strengthen behaviour |
Both explanations give food a central role.
How the processes may work together
Classical and operant conditioning are not necessarily separate alternatives.
They may operate together:
The infant associates the caregiver with food through classical conditioning.
The rewarding consequences of caregiver contact strengthen proximity-seeking through operant conditioning.
The caregiver becomes both a conditioned stimulus and a secondary reinforcer.
The combined explanation is still based on learning from the environment.
Applying both forms of conditioning
Consider the following scenario:
Theo is regularly fed by his grandmother. He begins smiling when she enters the room and cries when she moves away. When Theo cries, his grandmother picks him up and feeds him. He stops crying, so she responds in the same way the next time.
Classical conditioning
Food is the unconditioned stimulus.
Pleasure is the unconditioned response.
The grandmother begins as a neutral stimulus.
She is repeatedly paired with food.
She becomes a conditioned stimulus.
Theo’s pleasure and attachment behaviour become conditioned responses.
Operant conditioning
Theo’s crying brings food and contact.
These rewarding consequences reinforce crying and proximity-seeking.
Feeding removes Theo’s hunger.
Theo’s grandmother is reinforced when her response stops the crying.
She becomes a secondary reinforcer.
Exam application
A developed answer should identify details from the scenario rather than simply describing conditioning in general.
For example:
Theo’s grandmother becomes a conditioned stimulus because she is repeatedly paired with food. His smiling when she enters is a conditioned response. His crying also brings food and contact, so proximity-seeking is reinforced through operant conditioning.
What learning theory predicts
If learning theory is correct, the infant should become most strongly attached to the person who:
Regularly provides food.
Reduces hunger.
Rewards crying or proximity-seeking.
Is associated with satisfying biological needs.
The theory also predicts that attachment should develop gradually through repeated pairings and reinforcement.
These predictions can be tested against animal and human observations.
Evaluating learning theory
Strength: it offers a scientific explanation
Learning theory uses concepts that can be clearly defined and investigated.
These include:
Stimuli.
Responses.
Reinforcement.
Behavioural consequences.
Frequency of proximity-seeking.
This allows psychologists to make testable predictions.
For example:
Infants should prefer the caregiver who provides food.
An explanation that produces testable predictions can be supported or challenged by evidence.
Strength: it explains some caregiver-infant interactions
Caregiver and infant behaviour can reinforce one another.
For example:
Crying brings caregiver attention.
Caregiver contact reduces distress.
The infant becomes more likely to seek the caregiver.
The caregiver becomes more likely to respond.
Learning principles may therefore help explain how particular attachment behaviours are maintained.
This does not mean that feeding is the entire basis of attachment.
It suggests that reinforcement may contribute to repeated interaction.
Strength: learning must play some role
Attachment behaviour is affected by experience.
Infants learn:
Which caregiver responds to distress.
Who provides comfort.
What signals attract attention.
What happens when they seek proximity.
A complete explanation of attachment is therefore likely to include some learning.
The criticism of learning theory is not that infants learn nothing. It is that food-based conditioning may provide an incomplete explanation.
Evidence against the feeding explanation
Harlow’s rhesus monkeys
The strongest challenge comes from the preference for contact comfort over food.
Harlow gave infant rhesus monkeys access to:
A wire surrogate mother.
A soft cloth surrogate mother.
In some conditions, the wire mother provided milk.
Despite this, the monkeys:
Spent most of their time with the cloth mother.
Sought the cloth mother when frightened.
Used the cloth mother as a secure base.
Why Harlow challenges learning theory
Learning theory predicts that the feeding mother should become the preferred attachment figure because she is associated with drive reduction.
However, the monkeys preferred the cloth mother even when the wire mother supplied food.
This suggests that:
Food is not the main basis of attachment.
Contact comfort is more important than learning theory proposes.
A caregiver provides emotional security as well as drive reduction.
The findings directly challenge the cupboard love explanation.
Limitation of using Harlow as evidence
Harlow studied rhesus monkeys rather than human infants.
Although monkeys are social mammals, human attachment involves:
Language.
Culture.
More complex communication.
Longer developmental periods.
Several social relationships.
The findings therefore suggest that feeding is insufficient, but they do not prove that human attachment develops in exactly the same way as monkey attachment.
Learning theory overlooks innate attachment behaviour
Biological preparedness
Learning theory presents the infant as becoming attached entirely through experience.
However, attachment may also involve innate behaviours that have evolved because they promote survival.
Infants display behaviours such as:
Crying.
Clinging.
Following.
Seeking proximity.
These behaviours bring caregivers close and may increase protection.
Evidence of imprinting and early biological preparedness also suggests that some attachment-like behaviour develops too rapidly to be explained only through slow conditioning.
Bowlby’s alternative explanation
Bowlby’s monotropic theory proposes that attachment has an innate and evolutionary basis.
According to the biological functions of attachment:
Infants are born with behaviours that attract caregiver attention.
Caregivers are biologically prepared to respond.
Attachment increases the infant’s chance of survival.
The attachment becomes more than an association with food.
This provides an alternative to the environmental explanation offered by learning theory.
Why an innate explanation may be stronger
A biological explanation can account for why:
Attachment-related behaviour appears across different cultures.
Infants seek caregivers when frightened rather than only when hungry.
Physical security and emotional responsiveness matter.
Attachment can form to people who do not provide most feeding.
Learning theory may therefore underestimate biologically influenced attachment systems.
Learning theory is reductionist
Environmental reductionism
Learning theory is an example of environmental reductionism.
It reduces attachment to basic processes such as:
Stimulus-response associations.
Reinforcement.
Drive reduction.
This is useful because simple processes can be studied scientifically.
However, attachment is a complex emotional relationship involving:
Security.
Trust.
Responsiveness.
Distress on separation.
Comfort on reunion.
Exploration from a secure base.
Reducing this relationship to food and reinforcement may overlook its emotional and social complexity.
Attachment is more than visible behaviour
Behaviourists focus on observable responses.
However, attachment also involves internal experiences that are difficult to observe directly.
Two infants might both approach a caregiver but have different expectations about:
Whether the caregiver will respond.
Whether the caregiver is dependable.
Whether the environment is safe.
These differences become important when considering secure and insecure attachment patterns.
Learning theory may describe the behaviour without fully explaining the emotional meaning of the relationship.
The role of caregiver responsiveness
Feeding does not equal sensitive care
A caregiver can provide food without responding sensitively to the infant’s signals.
Another caregiver may provide:
Reassurance.
Physical comfort.
Attention.
Consistent responses.
Learning theory predicts that the feeder should become the main attachment figure.
However, attachment may depend more heavily on the quality and responsiveness of interaction than on who supplies food.
How learning theory could respond
A supporter of learning theory could broaden the idea of reinforcement.
The caregiver may reinforce attachment through:
Warmth.
Smiling.
Touch.
Attention.
Comfort.
Play.
This makes learning theory more flexible because food is no longer the only reward.
However, it also weakens the original cupboard love explanation, which gives hunger reduction a central role.
Attachment does not occur only during feeding
Infants often seek attachment figures when they are:
Frightened.
Tired.
In an unfamiliar environment.
In pain.
Separated from the caregiver.
These situations do not necessarily involve hunger.
The infant may be seeking emotional security rather than drive reduction.
Harlow’s monkeys showed this when they approached the cloth mother during fear despite receiving food from the wire mother.
Secure-base behaviour
The use of a caregiver as a secure base is difficult to explain solely through feeding.
The infant may move away to explore and return for reassurance.
This behaviour suggests that the caregiver regulates fear and provides safety.
It is not simply a response to hunger.
Learning theory may not explain different attachment qualities
Classical and operant conditioning explain how a preference might develop.
They are less successful at explaining why attachments differ in quality.
For example, infants may show:
Confidence and effective comfort-seeking.
Avoidance of the caregiver.
intense distress combined with resistance to comfort.
These patterns are identified through assessing attachment behaviour in the Strange Situation.
A food-based learning account does not clearly explain why infants exposed to feeding develop different patterns of reunion and exploration behaviour.
Learning theory is deterministic
Environmental determinism
Learning theory is environmentally deterministic because it proposes that attachment is shaped by conditioning histories.
The infant’s behaviour is treated as the predictable result of:
Stimuli.
Associations.
Reinforcement.
This can be useful for scientific prediction.
However, it underestimates:
Biological influences.
Individual differences.
Active contributions from the infant.
The emotional meaning of the relationship.
The infant is not simply a passive receiver of food and reinforcement.
Interaction between infant and caregiver
Attachment develops through ongoing interaction.
The infant’s behaviour influences the caregiver, and the caregiver’s responses influence the infant.
Operant conditioning partly recognises this mutual influence.
However, the explanation may still be incomplete because it does not fully address:
Temperament.
Caregiver sensitivity.
Emotional communication.
Expectations developed from early relationships.
Evidence from animal research must be interpreted carefully
Both Lorenz and Harlow challenge the idea that feeding alone creates attachment.
However, animal research has limitations.
Strength of animal research
Animal studies allow researchers to:
Control early experiences.
Separate feeding from comfort.
Observe development from birth.
Investigate later behavioural effects.
This control makes cause-and-effect conclusions easier.
Limitation of animal research
Different species have different developmental needs.
For example:
Goslings rapidly follow a moving figure.
Rhesus monkeys seek prolonged physical contact.
Human infants develop through complex emotional and social interaction.
Animal research can reveal broad principles but cannot establish a complete explanation of human attachment.
Learning theory and later relationships
Learning theory focuses mainly on how attachment is acquired.
It provides less explanation of how early attachment may produce enduring expectations about relationships.
Bowlby proposes that early attachment creates an internal working model which influences later childhood and adult relationships.
Learning theory could argue that later behaviour reflects continued learning and reinforcement.
However, it does not provide as detailed an account of how an early relationship becomes a model for future relationships.
Is learning theory completely wrong?
A balanced evaluation should not conclude that conditioning has no role.
Learning theory may help explain:
How infants learn to recognise particular caregivers.
Why repeated comforting interactions strengthen proximity-seeking.
How infant and caregiver behaviours reinforce one another.
How familiar caregivers become associated with safety and pleasure.
Its main weakness is the claim that feeding and drive reduction provide the central basis of attachment.
The more reasonable conclusion is:
Learning contributes to attachment, but food-based conditioning is not a complete explanation of emotional attachment.
Comparing learning theory with Bowlby
Learning theory | Bowlby’s monotropic theory |
Attachment is learned | Attachment has an innate basis |
Emphasises food and reinforcement | Emphasises survival and natural selection |
Caregiver becomes a conditioned stimulus | Infants are biologically prepared to attach |
Attachment is a secondary drive | Attachment is an adaptive behavioural system |
Focuses on environmental experience | Focuses on biological preparation and early interaction |
Gives limited attention to later relationships | Includes the internal working model |
Predicts attachment to the feeder | Predicts preference for a primary attachment figure |
The theories are not necessarily completely incompatible.
An infant may be biologically prepared to form attachments while experience influences which relationships become strongest.
Answering application questions
Classical conditioning structure
Use four steps:
Identify the food.
Identify the natural response.
Explain how the caregiver is paired with food.
State how the caregiver becomes a conditioned stimulus.
Application template
Food acts as the unconditioned stimulus and naturally produces pleasure. The caregiver initially acts as a neutral stimulus but is repeatedly paired with food. The caregiver becomes a conditioned stimulus and produces a conditioned attachment response.
Operant conditioning structure
Use four steps:
Identify the infant’s behaviour.
Identify the rewarding consequence.
Explain how the consequence reinforces the behaviour.
Explain how the caregiver becomes a secondary reinforcer.
Application template
The infant’s crying brings food or comfort from the caregiver. This rewarding consequence reinforces proximity-seeking. Because the caregiver is associated with reducing hunger, they become a secondary reinforcer and attachment behaviour becomes more likely.
Evaluation structure
A developed evaluation paragraph should:
State the strength or limitation.
Present relevant evidence.
Explain what the evidence shows.
Link directly to learning theory.
Weak evaluation
Harlow disproved learning theory.
Stronger evaluation
Harlow found that infant monkeys preferred a soft cloth mother even when a wire mother provided milk. Learning theory predicts attachment to the feeding figure, so this preference suggests that contact comfort is more important than food-based reinforcement. However, the use of monkeys limits direct generalisation to humans.
Hints from the Examiner Reports đź’ˇ
Examiner hint:Â Explain attachment, not conditioning in isolation. AQA reported that a small minority of students described learning theory without connecting it to attachment and therefore gained little or no credit.
Examiner hint:Â Use the correct behavioural terminology. Strong responses accurately identified the neutral stimulus, conditioned stimulus, primary drive, secondary drive and reinforcement.
Examiner hint:Â A simple conditioning diagram can help organise a response, but each stage must be explained clearly in words.
Examiner hint:Â Include both classical and operant conditioning when a question asks for the learning theory of attachment. Do not give two versions of classical conditioning.
Examiner hint: In operant conditioning, explain the consequence. Saying that “the baby is reinforced” is incomplete unless you identify food, comfort or hunger reduction.
Examiner hint:Â Make the role of the caregiver explicit. The caregiver becomes associated with food and develops value as a conditioned stimulus or secondary reinforcer.
Examiner hint:Â Keep short answers focused. The June 2023 report noted that many students produced strong, concise accounts using classical and operant conditioning, while responses without an attachment link were unsuccessful.
Examiner hint: In evaluation, use research evidence to assess the explanation. Do not merely describe Harlow’s procedure. Explain why the cloth-mother preference challenges the prediction that attachment forms to the feeder.
Common Mistakes ⚠️
Mistake: Saying that food is the conditioned stimulus
Why this is incorrect:
Food naturally produces pleasure and is therefore the unconditioned stimulus.
How to improve:
Remember:
Food = UCS.
Caregiver after learning = CS.
Mistake: Calling the caregiver an unconditioned stimulus
Why this is incorrect:
Learning theory proposes that the caregiver’s value is learned.
How to improve:
Describe the caregiver as a neutral stimulus that becomes a conditioned stimulus.
Mistake: Saying the infant is born conditioned
Why this is incorrect:
Conditioning develops through repeated experience.
How to improve:
Explain the pairing between caregiver and food.
Mistake: Confusing classical and operant conditioning
Why this is incorrect:
Classical conditioning involves associations between stimuli. Operant conditioning involves consequences of behaviour.
How to improve:
Remember:
Classical = association.
Operant = reinforcement.
Mistake: Saying negative reinforcement is punishment
Why this is incorrect:
Negative reinforcement increases behaviour by removing something unpleasant.
How to improve:
Explain how feeding removes hunger or how the caregiver’s response stops crying.
Mistake: Saying that reinforcement always means giving food
Why this is incorrect:
Reinforcement can involve adding a reward or removing discomfort.
How to improve:
Identify the exact consequence affecting the infant or caregiver.
Mistake: Confusing a drive with a reinforcer
Why this is incorrect:
Hunger is a drive. Food is a reinforcer because it reduces hunger.
How to improve:
Use the sequence:
Hunger → food → drive reduction
Mistake: Calling the caregiver a primary reinforcer
Why this is incorrect:
The caregiver gains reinforcing value through association with food.
How to improve:
Describe the caregiver as a secondary reinforcer.
Mistake: Saying attachment is a primary drive
Why this is incorrect:
Learning theory describes attachment as learned through association with hunger reduction.
How to improve:
State that hunger is primary and attachment is secondary.
Mistake: Describing Harlow without linking it to learning theory
Why this is incomplete:
Research evidence earns evaluative value only when its implication is explained.
How to improve:
State that preference for the non-feeding cloth mother challenges cupboard love.
Mistake: Saying Harlow proves food has no role
Why this is too strong:
Food remains necessary and can contribute to learning, but it does not appear to be the main basis of attachment.
How to improve:
Conclude that food-based conditioning is incomplete rather than entirely irrelevant.
Mistake: Giving a generic reductionism criticism
Why this is incomplete:
The criticism must relate specifically to attachment.
How to improve:
Explain that reducing attachment to food and reinforcement overlooks emotional security, responsiveness and secure-base behaviour.
Mistake: Assuming learning theory explains attachment types
Why this is a limitation:
The theory explains the acquisition of a preference but gives little detail about different qualities of attachment.
How to improve:
Distinguish forming an attachment from explaining secure and insecure patterns.
Exam-Style Questions ✍️
Question 1
Which one of the following is the conditioned stimulus in the classical conditioning explanation of attachment?
A. Food
B. Hunger
C. The caregiver after repeated pairing with food
D. Pleasure naturally produced by feeding
[1 mark]
reveal mark scheme and indicative content
Answer: C. The caregiver after repeated pairing with food
Question 2
Define cupboard love in the context of attachment.
[2 marks]
reveal mark scheme and indicative content
Mark scheme
AO1 = 2
2 marks:Â Clear definition linking attachment to the caregiver's association with food or satisfaction of hunger.
1 mark:Â Limited or partial definition.
Indicative content
Learning theory emphasises food as the basis of attachment.
The infant becomes attached to the person associated with providing food.
The caregiver acquires rewarding properties through association with feeding.
Example answer
Cupboard love is the idea that infants become attached to caregivers because caregivers provide food and become associated with the pleasure of satisfying hunger.
AQA explicitly uses the term "cupboard love"Â when describing learning theory of attachment.
Question 3
Complete the following classical conditioning sequence:
Food =
Pleasure produced naturally by food =
Caregiver before conditioning =
Caregiver after conditioning =
[4 marks]
reveal mark scheme and indicative content
Mark scheme
AO1 = 4
Award 1 mark for each correct response.
Stage | Answer |
1. Food | Unconditioned stimulus, UCS |
2. Pleasure produced naturally by food | Unconditioned response, UCR |
3. Caregiver before conditioning | Neutral stimulus, NS |
4. Caregiver after conditioning | Conditioned stimulus, CS |
Indicative content
Food naturally produces pleasure or satisfaction. Through repeated pairing with food, the previously neutral caregiver becomes a conditioned stimulus.
AQA's mark scheme states that the caregiver begins as a neutral stimulus and becomes associated with food, eventually producing a conditioned response of pleasure.
Question 4
Explain attachment using classical conditioning.
[4 marks]
reveal mark scheme and indicative content
Mark scheme
AO1 = 4
Award 1 mark for each relevant point, up to 4 marks.
Indicative content
Food is an unconditioned stimulus.
Food naturally produces pleasure or satisfaction, an unconditioned response.
The caregiver initially acts as a neutral stimulus.
Through repeated pairing with food, the caregiver becomes a conditioned stimulus.
The caregiver then produces a conditioned response of pleasure, helping attachment to form.
Example answer
Food is an unconditioned stimulus that naturally produces pleasure, an unconditioned response. Initially the caregiver is a neutral stimulus. Through repeatedly being associated with food, the caregiver becomes a conditioned stimulus. Eventually the caregiver alone produces pleasure as a conditioned response, so the infant becomes attached to them.
Question 5
Explain attachment using operant conditioning.
[4 marks]
reveal mark scheme and indicative content
Mark scheme
AO1 = 4
Award 1 mark for each relevant point, up to 4 marks.
Indicative content
Food is an unconditioned stimulus.
Food naturally produces pleasure or satisfaction, an unconditioned response.
The caregiver initially acts as a neutral stimulus.
Through repeated pairing with food, the caregiver becomes a conditioned stimulus.
The caregiver then produces a conditioned response of pleasure, helping attachment to form.
Example answer
Food is an unconditioned stimulus that naturally produces pleasure, an unconditioned response. Initially the caregiver is a neutral stimulus. Through repeatedly being associated with food, the caregiver becomes a conditioned stimulus. Eventually the caregiver alone produces pleasure as a conditioned response, so the infant becomes attached to them.
Question 6
Maya usually feeds her baby brother. When he cries, Maya gives him a bottle and he becomes calm. After several weeks, he smiles when Maya enters the room and reaches towards her.
Use learning theory to explain the baby’s behaviour.
[6 marks]
reveal mark scheme and indicative content
Mark scheme
AO2 = 6
Award credit for effective application of both classical and operant conditioning.
Indicative content
Classical conditioning
The bottle or milk naturally produces pleasure and reduces hunger.
Maya is repeatedly associated with feeding.
Maya changes from a neutral stimulus into a conditioned stimulus.
Her presence alone can eventually produce pleasure, shown by the baby smiling.
Operant conditioning
Food reduces the baby's hunger and acts as a primary reinforcer.
Maya becomes associated with this reinforcement and becomes a secondary reinforcer.
Reaching towards Maya is strengthened because proximity to her has become rewarding.
Example answer
Classical conditioning can explain the baby's attachment because food naturally produces pleasure. Maya is repeatedly present when she gives him the bottle, so she becomes associated with this pleasure. She therefore changes from a neutral stimulus to a conditioned stimulus, explaining why he eventually smiles when she enters the room.
Operant conditioning also applies because the milk reduces hunger and acts as a primary reinforcer. Maya becomes associated with this reward and becomes a secondary reinforcer, so behaviours such as reaching towards her are strengthened.
AQA examiner guidance stresses that conditioning terminology must be explicitly used to explain attachment, rather than simply describing learning theory in general.
Question 7
An infant monkey receives milk from a wire surrogate but spends most of its time clinging to a soft cloth surrogate.
Explain why this finding creates a problem for learning theory as an explanation of attachment.
[4 marks]
reveal mark scheme and indicative content
Mark scheme
AO3 = 4
Award 1 mark each for:
Learning theory predicts that attachment should develop towards the person or figure associated with food.
The wire surrogate provides milk and should therefore become reinforcing according to the theory.
The monkey instead spends most of its time with the cloth surrogate.
This suggests contact comfort, rather than food, may be more important in attachment, weakening learning theory.
Example answer
Learning theory predicts that the monkey should become attached to the wire surrogate because it provides food and becomes associated with the reduction of hunger. However, the monkey prefers the cloth surrogate even though it does not provide milk. This suggests that contact comfort may be more important than food in attachment, contradicting the learning explanation.
AQA explicitly credits Harlow's finding that rhesus monkeys preferred contact comfort rather than food as evidence against learning theory.
Question 8
A researcher records the following results:
Caregiver behaviour | Mean number of proximity-seeking behaviours |
Provides food but little physical comfort | 8.4 |
Provides physical comfort but no food | 19.7 |
Provides both food and physical comfort | 21.2 |
Describe the pattern shown in the results. Explain one conclusion that could be drawn about learning theory.
[6 marks]
reveal mark scheme and indicative content
Mark scheme
AO2/AO3 = 6
Award up to 3 marks for describing the pattern and 3 marks for an explained conclusion.
Indicative content
Pattern
Food with little comfort produces the fewest proximity-seeking behaviours, 8.4.
Physical comfort without food produces substantially more, 19.7.
Food and comfort together produce the highest level, 21.2.
The difference between comfort alone and food plus comfort is relatively small compared with the food-only condition.
Conclusion
Physical comfort appears to be more strongly associated with attachment behaviour than food alone.
This challenges learning theory's emphasis on feeding as the basis of attachment.
Food may still have some role because the combined condition produces the highest score, but it does not appear sufficient by itself.
Example answer
Proximity seeking is lowest when the caregiver provides food but little comfort, at 8.4. It rises to 19.7 when the caregiver provides physical comfort without food and is highest at 21.2 when both are provided. This suggests that physical comfort is more important than food alone in producing attachment behaviour. The findings therefore challenge learning theory's emphasis on feeding, although food might still have a smaller additional effect because the combined condition produces the highest score.
This is consistent with AQA's use of Harlow's contact-comfort findings as evidence contradicting the food-based learning explanation.
Question 9
Outline one strength and one limitation of learning theory as an explanation of attachment.
[6 marks]
reveal mark scheme and indicative content
Mark scheme
AO3 = 6
Award up to 3 marks for the strength and 3 marks for the limitation.
Indicative content
Strength
Learning theory is based on established principles of classical and operant conditioning.
Conditioning processes can be investigated scientifically and objectively.
The association between having needs satisfied and the person who satisfies those needs provides a plausible mechanism for attachment.
Limitation
Research evidence challenges the importance placed on food.
Harlow's monkeys preferred a cloth surrogate providing contact comfort even when a wire surrogate provided food.
Schaffer and Emerson also found that many infants were not primarily attached to the person responsible for their physical care.
Sensitive responsiveness may therefore be more important than feeding.
AQA's specimen mark scheme specifically credits the explanation as plausible and scientific, while also crediting evidence from Harlow and Schaffer and Emerson as limitations of the food-based account.
Example answer
One strength is that learning theory is based on established scientific principles of classical and operant conditioning. These processes can be objectively investigated, and it is plausible that repeated association between a caregiver and satisfying an infant's needs could contribute to attachment.
One limitation is that evidence suggests food is not the main basis of attachment. Harlow found that infant monkeys preferred a soft cloth surrogate even when a wire surrogate provided milk. This suggests that contact comfort may be more important than feeding, weakening learning theory's explanation of attachment.
Question 10
Discuss learning theory as an explanation of attachment.
[16 marks]
Comments