Misplaced Pages

Attachment theory

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 68.66.160.228 (talk) at 11:29, 16 June 2006. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 11:29, 16 June 2006 by 68.66.160.228 (talk)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

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.

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. 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.

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.

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. 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.

Attachment styles

On the basis of their behaviours, the children can be categorized into three 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.

The most commonly used procedures for children are the Strange Situation Protocol and various narrative approaches and structured observational methods..(Ainsworth, M., Blehar, M., Waters, E., & Wall, S., (1978).

A frequently used method of assessing attachment styles in adults is the Adult Attachment Interview developed by Mary Main and Erik Hesse .(Hesse, E., (1999). 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 http://www.web-research-design.net/cgi-bin/crq/crq.pl.

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.

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.

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.

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 both 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.

Attachment in intimate relationships

Building on the work of John Bowlby and Mary Ainsworth, Phillip Shaver, Cindy Hazan, and other adult attachment researchers have detected similar patterns of behavior in adult relations with romantic partners and spouses. Securely attached people are able to place trust in their partner which, in turn, means they can confidently spend time apart. People with an anxious ambivalent attachment style may have difficulties because their way of behaving in relationships can be seen as needy or clingy by their partner. They are prone to worry about whether their partner loves them or whether they are valued by their partner. People with an avoidant attachment style are uncomfortable being close to others. They have difficulties in trusting other people and do not like to depend on others.

Such patterns are believed to be working models that develop in infancy, but can be modified as people enter into new relationships.

Treatment

Attachment Theory has become the dominant theory used today in the study of infant and toddler behavior and in the fields of infant mental health, treatment of children, and related fields. Several evidence-based and effective treatments are based on attachment theory including Theraplay and Dyadic Developmental Psychotherapy.(Becker-Weidman & Shell, 2005). (Becker-Weidman, A., 2006). Nearly all mainstream programs for the prevention and treatment of disorders of attachment attachment disorder use attachment theory. For example, the Circle of Security Program, (Dr. Robert Marvin, University of VA) is one such early intervention program with demonstrated effectiveness. Dr. Marvin and Dr. Siegel (University of California) both also endorse Dyadic Developmental Psychotherapy Other promising treatment methods remain under clinical investigation, for example, the Circle of Security Program of Dr. Robert Marvin at the University of Virginia, Developmental, Individual-difference, Relationship-based therapy (DIR or Floor Time) by Stanley Greenspan.

Dyadic developmental psychotherapy is an evidence-based treatment(1) approach for the treatment of attachment disorder and reactive attachment disorder. Children who have experienced pervasive and extensive trauma, neglect, loss, and/or other dysregulating experiences can benefit from this treatment. Dyadic Developmental Psychotherapy is based on principles derived from Attachment Theory and Research; see the work of Bowlby. The treatment meets the standards of the American Professional Society on Child Abuse, The American Academy of Child Psychiatry, American Psychological Association, American Psychiatric Association, National Association of Social Workers, and various other groups' standards for the evaluation and treatment of children and adolescents. This is a non-coercive treatment.

Various organizations have adopted standards against the use of coercive interventions: APSAC, the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, the American Psychological Association, the American Psychiatric Association, the National Association of Social Workers. All of the aforementioned organizations have adopted formal statements (in some cases practice parameters) opposing the coercive treatments. Recognized professional organizations have been unanimous in recommending against the use of coercive treatments. Circle of Security, Theraplay, Dyadic Developmental Psychotherapy, and others being non-coercive approaches, meet these standards as evidenced by the support of Dyadic Developmental Psychotherapy by Dr. Daniel Siegel of the University of California at LA medical school and author of The Developing Mind, among many other articles and books and Dr. Robert Marvin of the University of Virginia Attachment Clinic.

See also

References

  1. Bartholomew, K., & Horowitz, L. M. (1991). Attachment styles among young adults: A test of a four-category model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 226-244.
  2. Bartholomew, K., & Shaver, P. R. (1998). Measures of attachment: Do they converge? In J. A. Simpson & W. S. Rholes (Eds.), Attachment theory and close relationships (pp. 25-45). New York: Guilford Press.
  3. Brennan, K. A., Clark, C. L., & Shaver, P. R. (1998). Self-report measurement of adult romantic attachment: An integrative overview. In J. A. Simpson & W. S. Rholes (Eds.), Attachment theory and close relationships (pp. 46-76). New York: Guilford Press.
  4. Crowell, J. A., & Treboux, D. (1995). A review of adult attachment measures: Implications for theory and research. Social Development, 4, 294-327.
  5. Fraley, R. C., Waller, N. G., & Brennan, K. A. (2000). An item-response theory analysis of self-report measures of adult attachment. Journal of Personality and Social Psycology, 78, 350-365.
  6. Ainsworth, M., Blehar, M., Waters, E., & Wall, S.,(1978). Patterns of Attachment. Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc., Hillsdale, NJ., 1978.
  7. Hesse, E., (1999). The Adult Attachment Interview in Jude Cassidy & Phillip Shaver (Eds.) Handbook of Attachment: Theory, Research, and Clinical Applications. Guilford Press, NY pp. 395-433.
  8. Arthur Becker-Weidman & Deborah Shell, MA, Eds., (2005). Creating Capacity For Attachment, Wood N Barnes, Oklahoma City:OK
  9. Becker-Weidman, A., (2006). Treatment for Children with Trauma-Attachment Disorders: Dyadic Developmental Psychotherapy, Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal. Vol. 13 #1, April 2006.
  • Ainsworth. Mary D. (1978) Patterns of Attachment: A Psychological Study of the Strange Situation. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. ISBN 0898594618.
  • Becker-Weidman, A., & Shell, D., Eds., (2005) Creating Capacity for Attachment. Wood N Barnes, Oklahoma City, OK. ISBN 1885473729.
  • Bowlby, J., Attachment, Separation, & Loss.
  • Greenspan, S. (1993) Infancy and Early Childhood. Madison, CT: International Universities Press. ISBN 0823626334.
  • Harlow, H. F. & Harlow, M. K. (1969) "Effects of various mother-infant relationships on rhesus monkey behaviors". In B. M. Foss (Ed.) Determinants of infant behavior (Vol. 4). London: Methuen.
  • Holmes, J. (1993) John Bowlby and Attachment Theory. Routledge. ISBN 0415077303.
  • Holmes, J. (2001) The Search for the Secure Base: Attachment Theory and Psychotherapy. London: Brunner-Routledge. ISBN 1583911529.
  • Siegler R., DeLoache, J. & Eisenberg, N. (2003) How Children develop. New York: Worth. ISBN 1572592494.

External links

Categories: