Lecture 19 - Attachment Flashcards
Attachment
“An affectional tie that one person or animal forms between him[her]self and another specific one – a tie that binds them together in space and endures over time.”
More than connection
between 2 individuals:
Desire for regular contact
Distress upon separation
Attachment theory history
Bowlby (1944, 1951)
maternal separation and
delinquency
Studied homeless orphans after ww2
Maternal separation had sig links with these kids
Believed it had ethological routes and promoted survival of offspring
Separation protest, despair, detachment reflects operating of innate attachment system designed to promote close physical contact between infant and caregiver
The Attachment System
Functions
Components
- Behavioral strategies
- Internal working models
Attachment patterns/orientations
Proximity maintenance
Kids cry when separated
Keeps them near carers
Safe haven
When there are threats can turn to caregiver for comfort
Secure base
Need to explore the world
Use carers as a safe base to do so
When older, the carer does not need to be physically present, they can be internally present
Components:
Behavioral Strategies
Primary
Primary strategy/security-based strategy
-Seeking an attachment figure for comfort and support
when distressed
-Engaging in constructive/ problem-focused ways of
dealing with distress
These allow people to meet attachment needs
If security-based strategy does not work, secondary
strategies are pursued…
Secondary strategies
Hyperactivation
Hypervigilance to threat/
exaggerated appraisals of
threat
Excessive proximity-seeking of an attachment figure when distressed
Distress response involves
heightening distress (e.g,
rumination, catastrophizing)
Secondary strategies
Deactivation
Hypervigilance to threat/
attention diverted away from
threat
Develops when infants learn getting access to caregivers is impossible
Avoid proximity-seeking of an attachment figure when
distressed
Distress response involves
inhibiting/suppressing distress
Plans and strategies (e.g, psychologically or behaviorally
escaping/avoiding distress)
Components:
Internal Working Models
Memories
Recollections and interpretations of specific
episodes or interactions with attachment figures
-Times when attachment figure is available or not
Beliefs, attitudes, and expectations
-Beliefs involve information viewed as ‘truths’ about
oneself and others
-Attitudes involve evaluations individuals have about themselves, others, and their relationships
-Expectations involve future- oriented assumptions
regarding the self, the partner, or their relationship
(These are used to predict how future social interactions will go)
Goals and needs
-Objective wants that motivate individuals to behave in specific ways to help them obtain love and
comfort
-The primary goal of the attachment system is to
maintain/attain felt security
Plans and strategies
-Procedural knowledge about how to negotiate relationships and the behaviors needed to achieve attachment-related
goals (e.g. felt security)
e.g. what do i need to do to get love from a sig other
Components:
Internal Working Models
How formed
Attachment figures shape them
Contain mental representations or schemas of the self and others
Contains info about:
Is self worthy of love and affection
Are others trustworthy/reliable
Scripts for how close relationships should unfold
Are formed by repeated interaction with caregivers
The “Strange Situation”
Mary Ainsworth
Paradigm to empirically study human attachment
Individual differences…
• “Secure”
– Infant distressed but plays and seeks comfort upon
reunion
• “Anxious/ambivalent”
– Infant distressed but not reassured; preoccupied
with availability of caregiver
• “Avoidant”
– Infant does not display signs of distress upon
separation (but internal discomfort?)
Stable over time
Secure: 62%
Avoidant: 23%
Anxious/ambivalent: 15%
The “Love Survey”
Adult attachment relationships with lover
Asked
Which of the following best describes your
feelings?
I find it relatively easy to get close to others and
am comfortable depending on them and having
them depend on me. I donʼt often worry about
being abandoned or about someone getting too
close to me
(secure)
I am somewhat uncomfortable being close to others; I find it difficult to trust them completely,
difficult to allow myself to depend upon them. I
am nervous when anyone gets too close, and
often love partners want me to be more intimate
than I feel comfortable being.
(Avoidant)
I find that others are reluctant to get as close as I
would like. I often worry that my partner doesnʼt
really love me or wonʼt want to stay with me. I
want to merge completely with another person,
and this desire sometimes scares people away.
(Anxious)
Posted in Lifestyle section of Rocky Mountain newspaper
-620 respondents (415 women; age: 14-82)
-Attachment styles applicable to adult romantic
relationships
The love survey results
Distribution:
56% secure (62%)
25% avoidant (23%)
19% anxious/ambivalent (15%)
Mirrors strange situation test
Correlates of insecure
attachment
Anxious
Anxious-ambivalence
– Jealousy
– Low self-esteem
– Indiscriminate self-disclosure
Correlates of insecure
attachment
Avoidance
– Judged by others as more hostile – Uncommitted sexual relations – Reduce tension with alcohol and other substances (instead of turning to others)
Attachment model, gender &
relationship stability
(Kirkpatrick & Davis, 1994)
Does attachment predict relationship stability?
Is there a gendered effect?
Does attachment predict relationship stability?
Is there a gendered effect?
• 354 dating couples
• Time 1:
• No anxious-anxious or avoidant-avoidant pairs
• makes theoretical sense—people pair with others
who fulfill expectations
• Avoidant expect clingy, dependent
• Anxious expect avoid intimacy, withdraw
• If man avoidant, relationship rated as more
negative by both partners
• If woman anxious, relationship rated as more
negative by then men (but not the women
• 7-14 months later
– Avoidant and secure men more stable than anxious
men
• 30-36 months later:
– Anxious women more stable than other women
Odd, recall:
• If man avoidant, relationship rated as more negative
by both partners
• If woman anxious, relationship rated as more
negative by then men (but not the women)
• So why are avoidant men and anxious women in
more stable relationships???
• Women are “maintainers and breakers of
relationships”
– Anxious women more active and accommodating
b/c of desire for closeness
– Compared to avoidant women, anxious & secure
women are more motivated and skilled and will try
harder to hold onto avoidant partner (even though
unhappy)
– Avoidant women less motivated and skilled
Attachment model, gender &
relationship stability
(Kirkpatrick & Davis, 1994)
How does attachment matter
Attachment predicts more than satisfaction
There are more dynamics beyond satisfaction and these are affected by attachment
People can be unsatisfied but stable
Distress and coping response
(Mikulincer et al 1993)
Israelis war
Split into 3 attachment styles and consequences
Can people use these as safe bases?
- 140 Israeli students assessed 2 weeks after Gulf War
- Assessed post-traumatic adjustment to missile attacks
• Residence area dangerous vs. less dangerous
• Anxious (vs. secures)
– More distress
• Avoidances (vs. secures)
– More hostility
– More somatization
- BUT, PxS interaction:
- Attachment effects significant only amongst those living in dangerous areas—stressful conditions trigger the attachment system (cf. neuroticism), like strange situation
Coping mechanisms
• Secures
– Support seeking
– Safe haven is psychological resource: The believe that life adversities,
although difficult, are manageable
• Anxious/ambivalent
– Emotion focused
• Avoidant
– Distancing
• Insecures unable to work through trauma and
put distress behind them
Anxiety & social support in lab
Like the Isreali study but in a lab
(Simpson, 1992)
83 dating couples
Female was told she would do an anxiety provoking task (told it would be scary but not how)
Secretly watched in the waiting room before she begins “anxiety
provoking activity”
Behaviour coded for
(1) Anxiety of woman
(2) Support seeking
RESULTS
Sig interaction
Secure: with increased anxiety, increased support seeking
Insecure - opposite, increased anxiety leads to decreased support seeking
Physiological response to stress
(Feeney & Kirkpatrick, 1996)
Part 2 of waiting room study
What happens if the dating partner leaves the
room?
Dating partner sent to another room
Women perform stress inducing arithmetic task
Measure heart rate and blood pressure
(1) Baseline
(2) On task
(3) Return to baseline
• Physiological response
– Avoidants & anxious > secures
• Why not for secures?
– Knowledge of partner down the hall (vs. physical
presence)
– Psychological resource – appraised event as less
stressful
Physiological response to stress
(Feeney & Kirkpatrick, 1996)
Part 2 of waiting room study
Why would avoidants have strong physiological
response?
Why would avoidants have strong physiological
response?
Although they appear to not care about separation, they do exhibit physiological
response
Overt but not covert deactivation?
Or, deactivation of attachment system itself?
Avoidance
-Disinterested in closeness
Fear of rejection (pattern of primary caregivers failing to meet one’s needs: fear of rejection
Variation in anxiety… (avoidance can be contaminated with anxiety)
How to measure the types of avoidance?
We measure individual differences in attachment via two axes,
High-Low Anxiety
High-Low Avoidance
