Learning theory of attachment is a behaviorist explanation that suggests that attachment develops through classical or operant conditioning. It is sometimes called the pantry theory of love, as the child becomes attached to the figure who provides food. Classical conditioning is learned through association and occurs when a response is naturally produced by a given stimulus. This is then associated with another stimulus that is not normally linked to that particular response. While operant conditioning is based on the ideas of reward and punishment. This means learning through the reinforcement of certain behaviors. This increases the chances that the behavior will happen again. However, there are other factors related to attachment that are not taken into account as it is proven that children can form attachments with a person who is not their primary caregiver. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay Learning theory offers many different ideas about how attachments might form, one study supporting learning theory is by Ivan Pavlov (1902). He observed and recorded information about the dogs and their salivation rates. Pavlov said the dogs were demonstrating classical conditioning as he used an unconditioned food stimulus to elicit an unconditioned salivation response. He used the conditioning process where there is a neutral stimulus which is a bell, which on its own does not produce a response, such as drooling. There is also an unconditioned stimulus which is food, which will make dogs salivate, which is an unconditioned response. This supports the idea that learning theory is an explanation of attachment, however this may not hold for humans. Although classical conditioning has now been explored with young children. For example, the child will be happy when given food which is an unconditioned response given by an unconditioned stimulus. When the unconditioned stimulus is given with a natural stimulus being the mother, the unconditioned response of the child who is happy is also given. Now, when the mother is alone, which is the conditioned stimulus, the child is happy, which is the conditioned response. On the other hand, there are studies that oppose learning theory and the ideas it proposes. Schaffer and Emerson (1964) found that in 39% of cases the mother was not the primary caregiver of the child. This suggests that nutrition is not the primary explanation for attachment, which goes against learning theory. This evidence can also be supported by Harlow's (1959) rhesus monkey study. He used newborn monkeys to see whether attachments are formed primarily through food, as explained by learning theory. A wire surrogate and a sponge surrogate were created and placed in four different conditions. The baby monkeys very often chose the soft sponge mother whenever she was available. He also found that some monkeys clung to the comfort of their towel mothers as they leaned to feed from their wire mothers. This goes against learning theory as it suggests that attachment is about comfort of contact more than food. Please note: this is just an example. Get a custom paper from our expert writers now. Get a Custom Essay Another study that supports learning theory is Dollard and Miller (1950) who proposed the idea that attachment is a learned behavior that is.