Guide
From birth, we need someone to turn to when we are afraid, in pain or need comfort. Attachment theory explains how this need works, how it is shaped in childhood and how it continues to act in our adult relationships. It is one of the most studied theories in psychology, and also one of the most distorted online.
A survival system
From the 1950s onwards, the British psychiatrist John Bowlby proposed that attachment is a motivational system present in humans and in other species. A young one that stays close to a protective adult is more likely to survive. When it feels threatened (fear, pain, tiredness, separation), this system is activated and pushes it to seek the closeness of its attachment figure. When it feels calm, the system settles and makes room for exploration.
The attachment figure fulfils two complementary functions:
- a safe haven: you return to it when things go wrong, to be comforted;
- a secure base: you set out from it to explore the world, knowing you can come back.
A little theory · Bowlby called the expectations that children build from these experiences “internal working models”: “Are others there when I need them? Do I deserve to be cared for?”. These expectations later partly guide the way we experience relationships (Bowlby, 1982, 1988).
The “strange situation” and childhood patterns
The psychologist Mary Ainsworth studied how children aged around one react to brief separations from and reunions with their mother or father, in the laboratory (the “strange situation”). She described three main patterns:
- Secure: the child protests or becomes sad at the separation, seeks out the adult on their return, lets themselves be comforted and goes back to playing.
- Insecure avoidant: the child seems little affected and ignores the adult on their return, although physiological measures show that they are stressed.
- Insecure ambivalent (or resistant): the child is very upset, seeks out the adult but is hard to comfort, sometimes angrily.
Mary Main and Judith Solomon later described a fourth pattern, disorganised: contradictory or frozen behaviours, observed especially when the adult is at once a source of comfort and of fear.
A little theory · In a meta-analysis of the strange situation in eight countries, the secure pattern was the most common in all of them, but the distribution of the insecure patterns varied between countries, and sometimes more within a single country than between countries (van IJzendoorn and Kroonenberg, 1988).
Attachment in adulthood
In 1987, Cindy Hazan and Phillip Shaver proposed that adult love is also an attachment process: a partner often becomes the main attachment figure. Since then, hundreds of studies have shown that adult attachment can be described with two dimensions:
- attachment anxiety: the fear of being abandoned or of not being loved enough, the need for reassurance;
- attachment avoidance: discomfort with closeness and dependence, a preference for relying only on yourself.
A little theory · The words “secure”, “preoccupied”, “avoidant” (or “dismissing”) and “fearful” come from Bartholomew and Horowitz’s four-category model (1991). But statistical analyses show that the differences between people are continuous, not separate types, in both children and adults (Fraley and Spieker, 2003; Fraley et al., 2015). So you don’t “have” a style: you sit higher or lower on each dimension, and not necessarily in the same way with each person.
Two strategies when the need isn’t met
When we learn that the attachment figure doesn’t respond reliably, we develop “secondary” strategies, which made sense at some point in our lives:
- Hyperactivating the system (the anxiety side): watching for signs of rejection, seeking reassurance, protesting, clinging. A way of getting the attention of an unpredictable figure.
- Deactivating the system (the avoidance side): minimising your own needs, managing on your own, keeping your distance, avoiding showing vulnerability. A way of protecting yourself from a rejecting figure.
A little theory · Mario Mikulincer and Phillip Shaver described these two strategies and their effects on emotion regulation: hyperactivation amplifies distress and threat-related thoughts; deactivation keeps it at a distance, but at the cost of emotions that remain active in the background (Mikulincer, Shaver and Pereg, 2003; Mikulincer and Shaver, 2016).
Can it change?
Yes. Attachment has a certain stability, but it isn’t set in stone. Studies that follow people over time show moderate stability, which decreases as the interval lengthens and when life changes (separation, bereavement, a new relationship, stress).
A little theory · Two meta-analyses find moderate stability of secure or insecure attachment from early childhood, which decreases over time (Fraley, 2002; Pinquart et al., 2013). There is also talk of “earned” security: adults who describe a difficult childhood, but who have been able to understand and integrate it, have secure attachment in adulthood (Roisman et al., 2002).
A little theory · A systematic review shows that attachment security tends to increase, and attachment anxiety to decrease, during psychotherapy, whatever the approach and the population; the results on avoidance are less clear (Taylor et al., 2015). In children, programmes that help parents recognise their child’s needs, such as the Circle of Security, can change attachment (Hoffman et al., 2006).
Why it is useful to understand it
- Attachment insecurity is associated with more psychological difficulties: anxiety, depression, relationship problems (Mikulincer and Shaver, 2012). It isn’t a single cause, but one vulnerability factor among others.
- In adulthood too, feeling supported by your loved ones as a haven (in difficult moments) and as a base (for daring, moving forward) helps you be well and grow (Feeney and Collins, 2015).
- In therapy, the relationship with the psychologist can itself serve as a secure base. A meta-analysis finds that attachment anxiety is associated with poorer therapy outcomes, and security with better ones; avoidance was not related to outcomes (Levy et al., 2011). Knowing this helps adapt the support.
What attachment is not: mistaken ideas
- “I have an anxious style, it’s my identity.” No: these are tendencies on continuous dimensions, which vary from one relationship to another and can change. Quick online “tests” aren’t validated tools.
- “It all comes from my parents.” Not only. Parents’ attachment partly predicts the child’s, but parental sensitivity explains only part of that link (van IJzendoorn, 1995). Temperament, other adults in childhood, life events, later relationships and the social context count too. And parents who did what they could in difficult conditions aren’t “guilty”.
- “An attachment style is a disorder.” No. The attachment disorders described in the classifications (reactive attachment disorder, disinhibited social engagement disorder) affect children who suffered serious deprivation of care. Attachment insecurity, on the other hand, is common and isn’t an illness.
- “There is only one right way to raise a child.” The theory has been criticised for taking as the norm middle-class Western families with a single main figure. In many cultures children are surrounded by several figures and the ways of responding to their needs are different, without being worse (Keller, 2018).
How to use it
- Identify your attachment figures, past and present: a parent, a grandparent, a partner, a friend, sometimes a teacher or a therapist (worksheets 149 and 153).
- Notice when your system is activated: an unanswered message, an argument, a goodbye. Notice whether you tend to move closer and protest, or to withdraw (worksheets 150 and 151).
- Link these reactions to your history, without judging anyone: what did you learn as a child about asking for help? (worksheet 152, with your psychologist).
- Practise saying clearly what you need, rather than making it known through anger or silence (worksheet 154).
- If you tend to manage on your own, practise receiving a little support (worksheet 155).
- Nourish your sense of security by remembering moments when someone was there for you (worksheet 156).
- Choose, as far as possible, relationships in which people respond to you reliably: security is also built in the present.
A little theory · Some experiments show that reminding people of those who have supported them (“security priming”) temporarily increases confidence, empathy and calm; repeated, these experiences might strengthen a more lasting sense of security, although this remains to be confirmed (Gillath, Selcuk and Shaver, 2008).
If your relationships cause you a lot of suffering, or if there is violence, neglect or major loss in your history, working with a psychologist is usually more useful than reading about the subject on your own.
Worksheets to practise
- 149 · My attachment figures · The people I turned to, then and now
- 150 · My attachment map · Anxiety and avoidance, depending on the relationship
- 151 · When my attachment system is activated · Recognising my reactions of moving closer or pulling away
- 152 · What I learnt as a child about relationships · My beliefs about myself and about others, and what remains of them
- 153 · My secure base today · The people and places that reassure and encourage me
- 154 · Saying what I need · Replacing protest or silence with a clear request
- 155 · Accepting help · For those used to doing everything on their own
- 156 · My memories of security · Remembering moments when someone was there for me
Sources
Bowlby, J. (1982). Attachment and Loss: Vol. 1. Attachment (2nd ed.). Basic Books. (1re éd. 1969)
Bowlby, J. (1988). A Secure Base: Parent-Child Attachment and Healthy Human Development. Basic Books.
Ainsworth, M. D. S., Blehar, M. C., Waters, E. & Wall, S. (1978). Patterns of Attachment: A Psychological Study of the Strange Situation. Erlbaum.
Main, M. & Solomon, J. (1990). Procedures for identifying infants as disorganized/disoriented during the Ainsworth Strange Situation. In M. T. Greenberg, D. Cicchetti & E. M. Cummings (Eds.), Attachment in the Preschool Years (pp. 121-160). University of Chicago Press.
van IJzendoorn, M. H. & Kroonenberg, P. M. (1988). Cross-cultural patterns of attachment: A meta-analysis of the Strange Situation. Child Development, 59(1), 147-156.
Hazan, C. & Shaver, P. (1987). Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(3), 511-524.
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(2), 226-244.
Brennan, K. A., Clark, C. L. & Shaver, P. R. (1998). Self-report measurement of adult attachment: An integrative overview. In J. A. Simpson & W. S. Rholes (Eds.), Attachment Theory and Close Relationships (pp. 46-76). Guilford.
Fraley, R. C. & Shaver, P. R. (2000). Adult romantic attachment: Theoretical developments, emerging controversies, and unanswered questions. Review of General Psychology, 4(2), 132-154.
Fraley, R. C. & Spieker, S. J. (2003). Are infant attachment patterns continuously or categorically distributed? A taxometric analysis of strange situation behavior. Developmental Psychology, 39(3), 387-404.
Fraley, R. C., Hudson, N. W., Heffernan, M. E. & Segal, N. (2015). Are adult attachment styles categorical or dimensional? A taxometric analysis of general and relationship-specific attachment orientations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 109(2), 354-368.
Mikulincer, M., Shaver, P. R. & Pereg, D. (2003). Attachment theory and affect regulation: The dynamics, development, and cognitive consequences of attachment-related strategies. Motivation and Emotion, 27(2), 77-102.
Mikulincer, M. & Shaver, P. R. (2012). An attachment perspective on psychopathology. World Psychiatry, 11(1), 11-15.
Mikulincer, M. & Shaver, P. R. (2016). Attachment in Adulthood: Structure, Dynamics, and Change (2nd ed.). Guilford.
Fraley, R. C. (2002). Attachment stability from infancy to adulthood: Meta-analysis and dynamic modeling of developmental mechanisms. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 6(2), 123-151.
Pinquart, M., Feußner, C. & Ahnert, L. (2013). Meta-analytic evidence for stability in attachments from infancy to early adulthood. Attachment & Human Development, 15(2), 189-218.
Roisman, G. I., Padrón, E., Sroufe, L. A. & Egeland, B. (2002). Earned-secure attachment status in retrospect and prospect. Child Development, 73(4), 1204-1219.
van IJzendoorn, M. H. (1995). Adult attachment representations, parental responsiveness, and infant attachment: A meta-analysis on the predictive validity of the Adult Attachment Interview. Psychological Bulletin, 117(3), 387-403.
Keller, H. (2018). Universality claim of attachment theory: Children’s socioemotional development across cultures. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(45), 11414-11419.
Feeney, B. C. & Collins, N. L. (2015). A new look at social support: A theoretical perspective on thriving through relationships. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 19(2), 113-147.
Levy, K. N., Ellison, W. D., Scott, L. N. & Bernecker, S. L. (2011). Attachment style. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 67(2), 193-203.
Taylor, P., Rietzschel, J., Danquah, A. & Berry, K. (2015). Changes in attachment representations during psychological therapy. Psychotherapy Research, 25(2), 222-238.
Gillath, O., Selcuk, E. & Shaver, P. R. (2008). Moving toward a secure attachment style: Can repeated security priming help? Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 2(4), 1651-1666.
Hoffman, K. T., Marvin, R. S., Cooper, G. & Powell, B. (2006). Changing toddlers’ and preschoolers’ attachment classifications: The Circle of Security intervention. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 74(6), 1017-1026.
These worksheets do not replace therapy. If you are in distress or having suicidal thoughts, call your local emergency number (112 in Europe; 3114 in France, free, 24/7).
