Post by ghost on Dec 27, 2006 15:48:45 GMT -5
this is a copy of the wikipedia page..
you can wiki it yourself if you want the links.. i did not link it here because wikipedia hijacks the whole page and won't let you get back to the forum.. but the links to the 'attachment style' tests work:
Attachment theory
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Attachment theory is a theory (or group of theories) about the psychological concept of attachment: the tendency to seek closeness to another person and feel secure when that person is present. Attachment theory has its origins in the observation of and experiments with animals. Much of the early research on attachment in humans was done by John Bowlby and his associates. [1] [2] [3] [4]
Attachment theory assumes that humans are social beings; they do not just use other people to satisfy their drives. In this way, attachment theory is similar to object relations theory.
In a famous series of experiments on infant monkeys, Harlow and Harlow (1969) demonstrated that attachment is not a simple reaction to internal drives such as hunger. [5] In these experiments, young monkeys were separated from their mother shortly after birth. After that, they were offered two dolls which were thought of as surrogates to the mother. The first doll had a body of wire mesh. The second doll had a body of terry cloth and foam rubber. Both of these dolls could be made a source of food by attaching a milk bottle to its chest. The objective of the experiment was to see what would determine to which doll the monkey would cling: the soft contact of the cloth or the source of food. It turned out that the monkeys would cling to the soft-clothed doll, irrespective of whether it provided food. The monkeys also explored more when the soft-cloth doll was near. Apparently, the doll provided them with a sense of security. However, the passive doll was not an adequate alternative for a real mother. Infant monkeys which were raised without contact with other monkeys showed abnormal behavior in social situations. They were either very fearful of other monkeys or responded with unprovoked aggression when they encountered other monkeys. They also showed abnormal sexual responses. Female monkeys who were raised in isolation often neglected or abused their infants. This abnormal behaviour is thought to demonstrate that a bond with the mother is necessary for further social development.
Contents
[hide]
1 Attachment of children to caregivers
1.1 The Strange Situation
1.2 Other Approaches to Evaluating a Child's Pattern of Attachment
1.3 Attachment styles in children
1.3.1 Secure attachment
1.3.2 Anxious-ambivalent insecure attachment
1.3.3 Anxious-avoidant insecure attachment
1.3.4 Disorganized attachment
2 Attachment in adult romantic relationships
2.1 Measuring attachment in adults
2.1.1 Adult Attachment Interview (AAI)
2.1.2 Self-report questionnaires
2.2 Attachment styles in adults
2.2.1 Secure attachment
2.2.2 Preoccupied attachment
2.2.3 Dismissive avoidant attachment
2.2.4 Fearful avoidant attachment
2.3 Working models in adults
2.3.1 Nature of working models
2.3.2 Stability of working models
2.4 Attachment and relationship outcomes
2.4.1 Satisfaction
2.4.2 Duration
2.5 Attachment and relationship dynamics
2.5.1 Emotion regulation
2.5.2 Jealousy
2.5.3 Support
2.5.4 Motivation
3 Attachment and psychotherapy
4 Recommended Reading
5 See also
6 References
7 External links
[edit]
Attachment of children to caregivers
Attachment theory led not only to increased attention to attachments as a psychosocial process, it also led to a new understanding of child development. Freudian theory suggested that as libidinal drives fixed on different objects, former attachments would be broken; failure to break an attachment effectively would constitute a sort of trauma that could lead to later mental illness. Attachment theory, however, suggested that growing children did not break former attachments, but rather (1) learned to become more active (or sovereign) within previously established attachments, and (2) added new attachments, which did not necessarily require a break with (and are not necessarily substitutes for) previous attachments.
[edit]
The Strange Situation
Mary Ainsworth is a developmental psychologist who devised a procedure called The Strange Situation, to observe attachment relationships between a human caregiver and child. [6] In this procedure the child is observed playing for 20 minutes while caregivers and strangers enter and leave the room, recreating the flow of the familiar and unfamiliar presence in most children's lives. The situation varies in stressfulness and the child's responses are observed. The child experiences the following situations:
1.Mother and baby enter room.
2.Mother sits quietly on a chair, responding if the infant seeks attention.
3.A stranger enters, talks to the mother then gradually approaches infant with a toy. The mother leaves the room.
4.The stranger leaves the infant playing unless he/she is inactive and then tries to interest the infant in toys. If the infant becomes distressed this episode is ended.
5.Mother enters and waits to see how the infant greets her. The stranger leaves quietly and the mother waits until the baby settles, and then she leaves again.
6.The infant is alone. This episode is curtailed if the infant appears to be distressed.
7.The stranger comes back and repeats episode 3.
8.The mother returns and the stranger goes. Reunion behaviour is noted and then the situation is ended.
Two aspects of the child's behaviour are observed:
The amount of exploration (e.g. playing with new toys) the child engages in throughout, and
The child's reactions to the departure and return of its caregiver.
[edit]
Other Approaches to Evaluating a Child's Pattern of Attachment
Narrative and story-stem approaches are often used with older toddlers, children, and teens to determine their state of mind with respect to attachment. The Attachment Story Completion Test is one such methodology.
[edit]
Attachment styles in children
On the basis of their behaviours, the children can be categorized into four groups. Each of these groups reflects a different kind of attachment relationship with the mother. (It should be noted that Bowlby believed that mothers were the primary attachment figure in children's lives, but subsequent research has confirmed that children form attachments to both their mothers and their fathers. Bowlby, like many of his colleagues at the time, infused the gender norms of the day into otherwise "unbiased" scientific research.)
Modern studies use a variety of standardized interviews, questionnaires, and tests to identify attachment styles.[7] [8] [9] [10] [11] The most commonly used procedures for children are the Strange Situation Protocol and various narrative approaches and structured observational methods.[12] A frequently used method of assessing attachment styles in adults is the Adult Attachment Interview developed by Mary Main and Erik Hesse. [13] Attachment styles in adults can also be assessed using a questionnaire developed by Shaver and colleagues. All of these methods can be used to classify people into the classic attachment styles described below.
Readers curious about their own attachment style can take the questionnaire developed by Shaver and colleagues at www.web-research-design.net/cgi-bin/crq/crq.pl.
[edit]
Secure attachment
A child who is securely attached to its mother will explore freely while the mother is present, will engage with strangers, will be visibly upset when the mother departs, and happy to see the mother return.
Securely attached children are best able to explore when they have the knowledge of a secure base to return to in times of need (also known as "rapprochement", meaning in French "bring together"). When assistance is given, this bolsters the sense of security and also, assuming the mother's assistance is helpful, educates the child in how to cope with the same problem in the future. Therefore, secure attachment can be seen as the most adaptive attachment style. According to some psychological researchers, a child becomes securely attached when the mother is available and able to meet the needs of the child in a responsive and appropriate manner. Others have pointed out that there are also other determinants of the child's attachment, and that behavior of the parent may in turn be influenced by the child's behavior.
[edit]
Anxious-ambivalent insecure attachment
A child with an anxious-resistant attachment style is anxious of exploration and of strangers, even when the mother is present. When the mother departs, the child is extremely distressed. The child will be ambivalent when she returns - seeking to remain close to the mother but resentful, and also resistant when the mother initiates attention.
According to some psychological researchers, this style develops from a mothering style which is engaged but on the mother's own terms. That is, sometimes the child's needs are ignored until some other activity is completed and that attention is sometimes given to the child more through the needs of the parent than from the child's initiation.
[edit]
Anxious-avoidant insecure attachment
A child with an anxious-avoidant attachment style will avoid or ignore the mother - showing little emotion when the mother departs or returns. The child will not explore very much regardless of who is there. Strangers will not be treated much differently from the mother. There is not much emotional range displayed regardless of who is in the room or if it is empty.
This style of attachment develops from a mothering style which is more disengaged. The child's needs are frequently not met and the child comes to believe that communication of needs has no influence on the mother.
[edit]
Disorganized attachment
A fourth category termed disorganized attachment is actually the lack of a coherent style or pattern for coping. While ambivalent and avoidant styles are not totally effective, they are strategies for dealing with the world. Children with disorganized attachment experienced their caregivers as either frightened and frightening. Human interactions are experienced as erratic, thus children cannot form a coherent interactive template. If the child uses the caregiver as a mirror to understand the self, the disorganized child is looking into a mirror broken into a thousand pieces. It is more severe than learned helplessness as it is the model of the self rather than of a situation.
This was not one of Ainsworth's initial three categories, but identified by Mary Main in subsequent research.
[edit]
Attachment in adult romantic relationships
Building on the work of John Bowlby and Mary Ainsworth, Cindy Hazan and Phillip Shaver detected similar patterns of behavior in adult relations with romantic partners and spouses. [14] [15] [16] Hazen and Shaver were seeking a theoretical framework for understanding the nature of loving relationships throughout the lifespan. They noticed the relationship dynamics between adult romantic partners shared similarities to the relationship dynamics between children and caregivers. For example, romantic partners desire to be close to one another. Romantic partners feel comforted when their partners are present and anxious or lonely when their partners are absent. Romantic relationships serve as a secure base that help partners face the surprises, opportunities, and challenges life presents. Similarities such as these led Hazen and Shaver to propose that attachment theory applies to adult romantic relationships as well as child-caregiver relationships.
Of course, romantic relationships between adults differ in many important ways from relationships between caregivers and children. The claim is not that these two kinds of relationships are identical. The claim is that the core principles of attachment theory apply to both kinds of relationships.
Investigators tend to describe the core principles of attachment theory in light of their own theoretical interests. Their descriptions seem quite different on a superficial level. For example, Fraley and Shaver [17] describe the "central propositions" of attachment in adults as follows:
The emotional and behavioral dynamics of infant-caregiver relationships and adult romantic relationships are governed by the same biological system.
The kinds of individual differences observed in infant-caregiver relationships are similar to the ones observed in romantic relationships.
Individual differences in adult attachment behavior are reflections of the expectations and beliefs people have formed about themselves and their close relationships on the basis of their attachment histories; these "working models" are relatively stable and, as such, may be reflections of early caregiving experiences.
Romantic love, as commonly conceived, involves the interplay of attachment, caregiving, and sex.
Compare this to the five "core propositions" of attachment theory listed by Rholes and Simpson: [18]
Although the basic impetus for the formation of attachment relationships is provided by biological factors, the bonds that children form with their caregivers are shaped by interpersonal experience.
Experiences in earlier relationships create internal working models and attachment styles that systematically affect attachment relationships.
The attachment orientations of adult caregivers influence the attachment bond their children have with them.
Working models and attachment orientations are relatively stable over time, but they are not impervious to change.
Some forms of psychological maladjustment and clinical disorders are attributable in part to the effects of insecure working models and attachment styles.
While these two lists clearly reflect the theoretical interests of the investigators who created them, a closer inspection reveals important themes shared in common. The common themes claim that:
People are biologically driven to form attachments with others, but the process of forming attachments is influenced by learning experiences.
Individuals form different kinds of attachments depending on the expectations and beliefs they have about their relationships. These expecations and beliefs constitute internal "working models" used to guide relationship behaviors.
Internal "working models" are relatively stable even though they can be influenced by experience.
Individual differences in attachment can contribute positively or negatively to mental health and to quality of relationships with others.
No doubt these themes could be described in a variety of ways (and other themes added to the list). Regardless of how one describes the core principles of attachment theory, the main insight is that the same principles of attachment apply to close relationships throughout the lifespan. The principles of attachment between adult romantic partners are fundamentally the same as the principles of attachment between children and caregivers.
[edit]
Measuring attachment in adults
The two main ways of measuring attachment in adults include the Adult Attachment Interview (AAI) and self-report questionnaires. The AAI and the self-report questionnaires were created with somewhat different aims in mind. Shaver and Fraley note:
"If you are a novice in this research area, what is most important for you to know is that self-report measures of romantic attachment and the AAI were initially developed completely independently and for quite different purposes. One asks about a person's feelings and behaviors in the context of romantic or other close relationships; the other is used to make inferences about the defenses associated with an adult's current state of mind regarding childhood relationships with parents. In principle, these might have been substantially associated, but in fact they seem to be only moderately related--at least as currently assessed. One kind of measure receives its construct validity mostly from studies of romantic relationships, the other from prediction of a person's child's behavior in Ainsworth's Strange Situation. Correlations of the two kinds of measures with other variables are likely to differ, although a few studies have found the AAI to be related to marital relationship quality and a few have found self-report romantic attachment measures to be related to parenting." (Shaver & Fraley, 2004) [19]
The AAI and the self-report questionnaires offer distinct, but equally valid, perspectives on adult attachment. It's therefore worthwhile to become familiar with both approaches.
[edit]Adult Attachment Interview (AAI)
Developed by Mary Main and her colleagues, this is a semi-structured interview that takes about one hour to administer. It involves about twenty questions and has extensive research validation to support it. A good description can be found in Chapter 19 of Attachment Theory, Research and Clinical Applications, edited by Shaver & Cassidy, Guilford Press, NY, 1999.
[edit]Self-report questionnaires
Hazen and Shaver created the first questionnaire to measure attachment in adults. [14] Their questionnaire was designed to classify adults into the three attachment styles identified by Ainsworth (see attachment styles in children). The questionnaire consisted of three sets of statements, each set of statements describing an attachment style:
Secure - I find it relatively easy to get close to others and am comfortable depending on them and having them depend on me. I don't often worry about being abandoned or about someone getting too close to me.
Avoidant - I am somewhat uncomfortable being close to others; I find it difficult to trust them completely, difficult to allow myself to depend on them. I am nervous when anyone gets too close, and often, love partners want me to be more intimate that I feel comfortable being.
Anxious/Ambivaent - I find that others are reluctant to get as close as I would like. I often worry that my partner doesn't really love me or won't want to stay with me. I want to merge completely with another person, and this desire sometimes scares people away.
People participating in their study were asked to choose which set of statements best described their feelings. The chosen set of statements indicated their attachment style. Later versions of this questionnaire presented scales so people could rate how well each set of statements described their feelings.
One important advance in the development of attachment questionnaires was the addition of a fourth style of attachment. Kim Bartholomew and Leonard Horowitz presented a model that identified four categories or styles of adult attachment. [20] Their model was based on the idea attachment styles reflected people's thoughts about their partners and thought about themselves. Specifically, attachment styles depended on whether or not people judge their partners to be generally accessible and responsive to requests for support, and whether or not people judge themselves to be the kind of individuals towards which others want to respond and lend help. Bartholomew and Horowitz proposed four categories based on people's positive or negative thoughts about their partners and their positive or negative thoughts about themselves.
Bartholomew and Horowitz used this model to create the Relationship Questionnaire (RC). The RC consisted of four sets of statements, each describing a category or style of attachment:
Secure - It is relatively easy for me to become emotionally close to others. I am comfortable depending on others and having others depend on me. I don't worry about being alone or having others not accept me.
Dismissive - I am comfortable without close emotional relationships. It is very important to me to feel independent and self-sufficient, and I prefer not to depend on others or have others depend on me.
Preoccupied - I want to be completely emotionally intimate with others, but I often find that others are reluctant to get as close as I would like. I am uncomfortable being without close relationships, but I sometimes worry that others don't value me as much as I value them.
Fearful - I am somewhat uncomfortable getting close to others. I want emotionally close relationships, but I find it difficult to trust others completely, or to depend on them. I sometimes worry that I will be hurt if I allow myself to become too close to others.
Tests demonstrated the four attachment styles were distinct in how they related to other kinds of psychological variables. Adults indeed appeared to have four styles of attachment instead of three attachment styles.
David Schmitt, together with a large number of colleagues, validated the attachment questionnaire created by Bartholomew and Horowitz in 62 cultures. [21] The distinction of thoughts about self and thoughts about partners proved valid in nearly all cultures. However, the way these two kinds of thoughts interacted to form attachment styles varied somewhat across cultures. The four attachment styles had somewhat different meanings across cultures.
A second important advance in attachment questionnaires was the use of independent items to assess attachment. Instead of asking people to choose between three or four sets of statements, people rated how strongly they agreed with dozens of individual statements. The ratings for the individual statements were combined to provide an attachment score.
The two most popular questionnaires of this type are the Experiences in Close Relationships (ECR) questionnaire and the Experiences in Close Relationships - Revised (ECR-R) questionnaire. The ECR was created by Brennan, Clark, and Shaver in 1998. [9] The ECR-R was created by Fraley, Waller, and Brennan in 2000. [11] Readers who wish to take the ECR-R and learn their attachment style can find an online version of the questionnaire at www.web-research-design.net/cgi-bin/crq/crq.pl.
Analysis of the ECR and ECR-R reveal that the questionnaire items can be grouped into two dimensions of attachment. One group of questionnaire items deal with how anxious a person is about their relationship. These items serve as a scale for anxiety. The remaining items deal with how avoidant a person is in their relationship. These items serve as a scale for avoidance. Many researchers now use scores from the anxiety and avoidance scales to perform statistical analyses and test hypotheses. Yet, the patterns of scores on the anxiety and avoidance scales can be used to classify people into the four adult attachment styles. [8] [9] The secure style of attachment is characterized by low anxiety and low avoidance; the preoccupied style of attachment is characterized by high anxiety and low avoidance; the dismissive avoidant style of attachment is characterized by low anxiety and high avoidance; and the fearful avoidant style of attachment is characterized by high anxiety and high avoidance.
[edit]
Attachment styles in adults
Adults have four attachment styles: secure, preoccupied, dismissive avoidant, and fearful avoidant. The secure attachment style in adults corresponds to the secure attachment style in children. The preoccupied attachment style in adults corresponds to the anxious/ambivalent attachment style in children. However, the dismissive avoidant attachment style and the fearful avoidant attachment style, which are distinct in adults, correspond to a single avoidant attachment style in children. More detailed descriptions of the four adult attachment styles are offered below.
[edit]Secure attachment
People with secure attachment styles tend to agree with the following statements: "It is relatively easy for me to become emotionally close to others. I am comfortable depending on others and having others depend on me. I don't worry about being alone or having others not accept me."
[edit]Preoccupied attachment
People with preoccupied attachment styles tend to agree with the following statements: "I want to be completely emotionally intimate with others, but I often find that others are reluctant to get as close as I would like. I am uncomfortable being without close relationships, but I sometimes worry that others don't value me as much as I value them."
[edit]Dismissive avoidant attachment
People with dismissive attachment styles tend to agree with the following statements: "I am comfortable without close emotional relationships. It is very important to me to feel independent and self-sufficient, and I prefer not to depend on others or have others depend on me."
[edit]Fearful avoidant attachment
People with fearful avoidant attachment styles tend to agree with the following statements: "I am somewhat uncomfortable getting close to others. I want emotionally close relationships, but I find it difficult to trust others completely, or to depend on them. I sometimes worry that I will be hurt if I allow myself to become too close to others."
you can wiki it yourself if you want the links.. i did not link it here because wikipedia hijacks the whole page and won't let you get back to the forum.. but the links to the 'attachment style' tests work:
Attachment theory
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Attachment theory is a theory (or group of theories) about the psychological concept of attachment: the tendency to seek closeness to another person and feel secure when that person is present. Attachment theory has its origins in the observation of and experiments with animals. Much of the early research on attachment in humans was done by John Bowlby and his associates. [1] [2] [3] [4]
Attachment theory assumes that humans are social beings; they do not just use other people to satisfy their drives. In this way, attachment theory is similar to object relations theory.
In a famous series of experiments on infant monkeys, Harlow and Harlow (1969) demonstrated that attachment is not a simple reaction to internal drives such as hunger. [5] In these experiments, young monkeys were separated from their mother shortly after birth. After that, they were offered two dolls which were thought of as surrogates to the mother. The first doll had a body of wire mesh. The second doll had a body of terry cloth and foam rubber. Both of these dolls could be made a source of food by attaching a milk bottle to its chest. The objective of the experiment was to see what would determine to which doll the monkey would cling: the soft contact of the cloth or the source of food. It turned out that the monkeys would cling to the soft-clothed doll, irrespective of whether it provided food. The monkeys also explored more when the soft-cloth doll was near. Apparently, the doll provided them with a sense of security. However, the passive doll was not an adequate alternative for a real mother. Infant monkeys which were raised without contact with other monkeys showed abnormal behavior in social situations. They were either very fearful of other monkeys or responded with unprovoked aggression when they encountered other monkeys. They also showed abnormal sexual responses. Female monkeys who were raised in isolation often neglected or abused their infants. This abnormal behaviour is thought to demonstrate that a bond with the mother is necessary for further social development.
Contents
[hide]
1 Attachment of children to caregivers
1.1 The Strange Situation
1.2 Other Approaches to Evaluating a Child's Pattern of Attachment
1.3 Attachment styles in children
1.3.1 Secure attachment
1.3.2 Anxious-ambivalent insecure attachment
1.3.3 Anxious-avoidant insecure attachment
1.3.4 Disorganized attachment
2 Attachment in adult romantic relationships
2.1 Measuring attachment in adults
2.1.1 Adult Attachment Interview (AAI)
2.1.2 Self-report questionnaires
2.2 Attachment styles in adults
2.2.1 Secure attachment
2.2.2 Preoccupied attachment
2.2.3 Dismissive avoidant attachment
2.2.4 Fearful avoidant attachment
2.3 Working models in adults
2.3.1 Nature of working models
2.3.2 Stability of working models
2.4 Attachment and relationship outcomes
2.4.1 Satisfaction
2.4.2 Duration
2.5 Attachment and relationship dynamics
2.5.1 Emotion regulation
2.5.2 Jealousy
2.5.3 Support
2.5.4 Motivation
3 Attachment and psychotherapy
4 Recommended Reading
5 See also
6 References
7 External links
[edit]
Attachment of children to caregivers
Attachment theory led not only to increased attention to attachments as a psychosocial process, it also led to a new understanding of child development. Freudian theory suggested that as libidinal drives fixed on different objects, former attachments would be broken; failure to break an attachment effectively would constitute a sort of trauma that could lead to later mental illness. Attachment theory, however, suggested that growing children did not break former attachments, but rather (1) learned to become more active (or sovereign) within previously established attachments, and (2) added new attachments, which did not necessarily require a break with (and are not necessarily substitutes for) previous attachments.
[edit]
The Strange Situation
Mary Ainsworth is a developmental psychologist who devised a procedure called The Strange Situation, to observe attachment relationships between a human caregiver and child. [6] In this procedure the child is observed playing for 20 minutes while caregivers and strangers enter and leave the room, recreating the flow of the familiar and unfamiliar presence in most children's lives. The situation varies in stressfulness and the child's responses are observed. The child experiences the following situations:
1.Mother and baby enter room.
2.Mother sits quietly on a chair, responding if the infant seeks attention.
3.A stranger enters, talks to the mother then gradually approaches infant with a toy. The mother leaves the room.
4.The stranger leaves the infant playing unless he/she is inactive and then tries to interest the infant in toys. If the infant becomes distressed this episode is ended.
5.Mother enters and waits to see how the infant greets her. The stranger leaves quietly and the mother waits until the baby settles, and then she leaves again.
6.The infant is alone. This episode is curtailed if the infant appears to be distressed.
7.The stranger comes back and repeats episode 3.
8.The mother returns and the stranger goes. Reunion behaviour is noted and then the situation is ended.
Two aspects of the child's behaviour are observed:
The amount of exploration (e.g. playing with new toys) the child engages in throughout, and
The child's reactions to the departure and return of its caregiver.
[edit]
Other Approaches to Evaluating a Child's Pattern of Attachment
Narrative and story-stem approaches are often used with older toddlers, children, and teens to determine their state of mind with respect to attachment. The Attachment Story Completion Test is one such methodology.
[edit]
Attachment styles in children
On the basis of their behaviours, the children can be categorized into four groups. Each of these groups reflects a different kind of attachment relationship with the mother. (It should be noted that Bowlby believed that mothers were the primary attachment figure in children's lives, but subsequent research has confirmed that children form attachments to both their mothers and their fathers. Bowlby, like many of his colleagues at the time, infused the gender norms of the day into otherwise "unbiased" scientific research.)
Modern studies use a variety of standardized interviews, questionnaires, and tests to identify attachment styles.[7] [8] [9] [10] [11] The most commonly used procedures for children are the Strange Situation Protocol and various narrative approaches and structured observational methods.[12] A frequently used method of assessing attachment styles in adults is the Adult Attachment Interview developed by Mary Main and Erik Hesse. [13] Attachment styles in adults can also be assessed using a questionnaire developed by Shaver and colleagues. All of these methods can be used to classify people into the classic attachment styles described below.
Readers curious about their own attachment style can take the questionnaire developed by Shaver and colleagues at www.web-research-design.net/cgi-bin/crq/crq.pl.
[edit]
Secure attachment
A child who is securely attached to its mother will explore freely while the mother is present, will engage with strangers, will be visibly upset when the mother departs, and happy to see the mother return.
Securely attached children are best able to explore when they have the knowledge of a secure base to return to in times of need (also known as "rapprochement", meaning in French "bring together"). When assistance is given, this bolsters the sense of security and also, assuming the mother's assistance is helpful, educates the child in how to cope with the same problem in the future. Therefore, secure attachment can be seen as the most adaptive attachment style. According to some psychological researchers, a child becomes securely attached when the mother is available and able to meet the needs of the child in a responsive and appropriate manner. Others have pointed out that there are also other determinants of the child's attachment, and that behavior of the parent may in turn be influenced by the child's behavior.
[edit]
Anxious-ambivalent insecure attachment
A child with an anxious-resistant attachment style is anxious of exploration and of strangers, even when the mother is present. When the mother departs, the child is extremely distressed. The child will be ambivalent when she returns - seeking to remain close to the mother but resentful, and also resistant when the mother initiates attention.
According to some psychological researchers, this style develops from a mothering style which is engaged but on the mother's own terms. That is, sometimes the child's needs are ignored until some other activity is completed and that attention is sometimes given to the child more through the needs of the parent than from the child's initiation.
[edit]
Anxious-avoidant insecure attachment
A child with an anxious-avoidant attachment style will avoid or ignore the mother - showing little emotion when the mother departs or returns. The child will not explore very much regardless of who is there. Strangers will not be treated much differently from the mother. There is not much emotional range displayed regardless of who is in the room or if it is empty.
This style of attachment develops from a mothering style which is more disengaged. The child's needs are frequently not met and the child comes to believe that communication of needs has no influence on the mother.
[edit]
Disorganized attachment
A fourth category termed disorganized attachment is actually the lack of a coherent style or pattern for coping. While ambivalent and avoidant styles are not totally effective, they are strategies for dealing with the world. Children with disorganized attachment experienced their caregivers as either frightened and frightening. Human interactions are experienced as erratic, thus children cannot form a coherent interactive template. If the child uses the caregiver as a mirror to understand the self, the disorganized child is looking into a mirror broken into a thousand pieces. It is more severe than learned helplessness as it is the model of the self rather than of a situation.
This was not one of Ainsworth's initial three categories, but identified by Mary Main in subsequent research.
[edit]
Attachment in adult romantic relationships
Building on the work of John Bowlby and Mary Ainsworth, Cindy Hazan and Phillip Shaver detected similar patterns of behavior in adult relations with romantic partners and spouses. [14] [15] [16] Hazen and Shaver were seeking a theoretical framework for understanding the nature of loving relationships throughout the lifespan. They noticed the relationship dynamics between adult romantic partners shared similarities to the relationship dynamics between children and caregivers. For example, romantic partners desire to be close to one another. Romantic partners feel comforted when their partners are present and anxious or lonely when their partners are absent. Romantic relationships serve as a secure base that help partners face the surprises, opportunities, and challenges life presents. Similarities such as these led Hazen and Shaver to propose that attachment theory applies to adult romantic relationships as well as child-caregiver relationships.
Of course, romantic relationships between adults differ in many important ways from relationships between caregivers and children. The claim is not that these two kinds of relationships are identical. The claim is that the core principles of attachment theory apply to both kinds of relationships.
Investigators tend to describe the core principles of attachment theory in light of their own theoretical interests. Their descriptions seem quite different on a superficial level. For example, Fraley and Shaver [17] describe the "central propositions" of attachment in adults as follows:
The emotional and behavioral dynamics of infant-caregiver relationships and adult romantic relationships are governed by the same biological system.
The kinds of individual differences observed in infant-caregiver relationships are similar to the ones observed in romantic relationships.
Individual differences in adult attachment behavior are reflections of the expectations and beliefs people have formed about themselves and their close relationships on the basis of their attachment histories; these "working models" are relatively stable and, as such, may be reflections of early caregiving experiences.
Romantic love, as commonly conceived, involves the interplay of attachment, caregiving, and sex.
Compare this to the five "core propositions" of attachment theory listed by Rholes and Simpson: [18]
Although the basic impetus for the formation of attachment relationships is provided by biological factors, the bonds that children form with their caregivers are shaped by interpersonal experience.
Experiences in earlier relationships create internal working models and attachment styles that systematically affect attachment relationships.
The attachment orientations of adult caregivers influence the attachment bond their children have with them.
Working models and attachment orientations are relatively stable over time, but they are not impervious to change.
Some forms of psychological maladjustment and clinical disorders are attributable in part to the effects of insecure working models and attachment styles.
While these two lists clearly reflect the theoretical interests of the investigators who created them, a closer inspection reveals important themes shared in common. The common themes claim that:
People are biologically driven to form attachments with others, but the process of forming attachments is influenced by learning experiences.
Individuals form different kinds of attachments depending on the expectations and beliefs they have about their relationships. These expecations and beliefs constitute internal "working models" used to guide relationship behaviors.
Internal "working models" are relatively stable even though they can be influenced by experience.
Individual differences in attachment can contribute positively or negatively to mental health and to quality of relationships with others.
No doubt these themes could be described in a variety of ways (and other themes added to the list). Regardless of how one describes the core principles of attachment theory, the main insight is that the same principles of attachment apply to close relationships throughout the lifespan. The principles of attachment between adult romantic partners are fundamentally the same as the principles of attachment between children and caregivers.
[edit]
Measuring attachment in adults
The two main ways of measuring attachment in adults include the Adult Attachment Interview (AAI) and self-report questionnaires. The AAI and the self-report questionnaires were created with somewhat different aims in mind. Shaver and Fraley note:
"If you are a novice in this research area, what is most important for you to know is that self-report measures of romantic attachment and the AAI were initially developed completely independently and for quite different purposes. One asks about a person's feelings and behaviors in the context of romantic or other close relationships; the other is used to make inferences about the defenses associated with an adult's current state of mind regarding childhood relationships with parents. In principle, these might have been substantially associated, but in fact they seem to be only moderately related--at least as currently assessed. One kind of measure receives its construct validity mostly from studies of romantic relationships, the other from prediction of a person's child's behavior in Ainsworth's Strange Situation. Correlations of the two kinds of measures with other variables are likely to differ, although a few studies have found the AAI to be related to marital relationship quality and a few have found self-report romantic attachment measures to be related to parenting." (Shaver & Fraley, 2004) [19]
The AAI and the self-report questionnaires offer distinct, but equally valid, perspectives on adult attachment. It's therefore worthwhile to become familiar with both approaches.
[edit]Adult Attachment Interview (AAI)
Developed by Mary Main and her colleagues, this is a semi-structured interview that takes about one hour to administer. It involves about twenty questions and has extensive research validation to support it. A good description can be found in Chapter 19 of Attachment Theory, Research and Clinical Applications, edited by Shaver & Cassidy, Guilford Press, NY, 1999.
[edit]Self-report questionnaires
Hazen and Shaver created the first questionnaire to measure attachment in adults. [14] Their questionnaire was designed to classify adults into the three attachment styles identified by Ainsworth (see attachment styles in children). The questionnaire consisted of three sets of statements, each set of statements describing an attachment style:
Secure - I find it relatively easy to get close to others and am comfortable depending on them and having them depend on me. I don't often worry about being abandoned or about someone getting too close to me.
Avoidant - I am somewhat uncomfortable being close to others; I find it difficult to trust them completely, difficult to allow myself to depend on them. I am nervous when anyone gets too close, and often, love partners want me to be more intimate that I feel comfortable being.
Anxious/Ambivaent - I find that others are reluctant to get as close as I would like. I often worry that my partner doesn't really love me or won't want to stay with me. I want to merge completely with another person, and this desire sometimes scares people away.
People participating in their study were asked to choose which set of statements best described their feelings. The chosen set of statements indicated their attachment style. Later versions of this questionnaire presented scales so people could rate how well each set of statements described their feelings.
One important advance in the development of attachment questionnaires was the addition of a fourth style of attachment. Kim Bartholomew and Leonard Horowitz presented a model that identified four categories or styles of adult attachment. [20] Their model was based on the idea attachment styles reflected people's thoughts about their partners and thought about themselves. Specifically, attachment styles depended on whether or not people judge their partners to be generally accessible and responsive to requests for support, and whether or not people judge themselves to be the kind of individuals towards which others want to respond and lend help. Bartholomew and Horowitz proposed four categories based on people's positive or negative thoughts about their partners and their positive or negative thoughts about themselves.
Bartholomew and Horowitz used this model to create the Relationship Questionnaire (RC). The RC consisted of four sets of statements, each describing a category or style of attachment:
Secure - It is relatively easy for me to become emotionally close to others. I am comfortable depending on others and having others depend on me. I don't worry about being alone or having others not accept me.
Dismissive - I am comfortable without close emotional relationships. It is very important to me to feel independent and self-sufficient, and I prefer not to depend on others or have others depend on me.
Preoccupied - I want to be completely emotionally intimate with others, but I often find that others are reluctant to get as close as I would like. I am uncomfortable being without close relationships, but I sometimes worry that others don't value me as much as I value them.
Fearful - I am somewhat uncomfortable getting close to others. I want emotionally close relationships, but I find it difficult to trust others completely, or to depend on them. I sometimes worry that I will be hurt if I allow myself to become too close to others.
Tests demonstrated the four attachment styles were distinct in how they related to other kinds of psychological variables. Adults indeed appeared to have four styles of attachment instead of three attachment styles.
David Schmitt, together with a large number of colleagues, validated the attachment questionnaire created by Bartholomew and Horowitz in 62 cultures. [21] The distinction of thoughts about self and thoughts about partners proved valid in nearly all cultures. However, the way these two kinds of thoughts interacted to form attachment styles varied somewhat across cultures. The four attachment styles had somewhat different meanings across cultures.
A second important advance in attachment questionnaires was the use of independent items to assess attachment. Instead of asking people to choose between three or four sets of statements, people rated how strongly they agreed with dozens of individual statements. The ratings for the individual statements were combined to provide an attachment score.
The two most popular questionnaires of this type are the Experiences in Close Relationships (ECR) questionnaire and the Experiences in Close Relationships - Revised (ECR-R) questionnaire. The ECR was created by Brennan, Clark, and Shaver in 1998. [9] The ECR-R was created by Fraley, Waller, and Brennan in 2000. [11] Readers who wish to take the ECR-R and learn their attachment style can find an online version of the questionnaire at www.web-research-design.net/cgi-bin/crq/crq.pl.
Analysis of the ECR and ECR-R reveal that the questionnaire items can be grouped into two dimensions of attachment. One group of questionnaire items deal with how anxious a person is about their relationship. These items serve as a scale for anxiety. The remaining items deal with how avoidant a person is in their relationship. These items serve as a scale for avoidance. Many researchers now use scores from the anxiety and avoidance scales to perform statistical analyses and test hypotheses. Yet, the patterns of scores on the anxiety and avoidance scales can be used to classify people into the four adult attachment styles. [8] [9] The secure style of attachment is characterized by low anxiety and low avoidance; the preoccupied style of attachment is characterized by high anxiety and low avoidance; the dismissive avoidant style of attachment is characterized by low anxiety and high avoidance; and the fearful avoidant style of attachment is characterized by high anxiety and high avoidance.
[edit]
Attachment styles in adults
Adults have four attachment styles: secure, preoccupied, dismissive avoidant, and fearful avoidant. The secure attachment style in adults corresponds to the secure attachment style in children. The preoccupied attachment style in adults corresponds to the anxious/ambivalent attachment style in children. However, the dismissive avoidant attachment style and the fearful avoidant attachment style, which are distinct in adults, correspond to a single avoidant attachment style in children. More detailed descriptions of the four adult attachment styles are offered below.
[edit]Secure attachment
People with secure attachment styles tend to agree with the following statements: "It is relatively easy for me to become emotionally close to others. I am comfortable depending on others and having others depend on me. I don't worry about being alone or having others not accept me."
[edit]Preoccupied attachment
People with preoccupied attachment styles tend to agree with the following statements: "I want to be completely emotionally intimate with others, but I often find that others are reluctant to get as close as I would like. I am uncomfortable being without close relationships, but I sometimes worry that others don't value me as much as I value them."
[edit]Dismissive avoidant attachment
People with dismissive attachment styles tend to agree with the following statements: "I am comfortable without close emotional relationships. It is very important to me to feel independent and self-sufficient, and I prefer not to depend on others or have others depend on me."
[edit]Fearful avoidant attachment
People with fearful avoidant attachment styles tend to agree with the following statements: "I am somewhat uncomfortable getting close to others. I want emotionally close relationships, but I find it difficult to trust others completely, or to depend on them. I sometimes worry that I will be hurt if I allow myself to become too close to others."
