CHAPTER 12

Major Principles of Attachment Theory Overview, Hypotheses, and Research Ideas

Jeffry A. Simpson W. Steven Rholes Jami Eller Ramona L. Paetzold

uring the past five decades, few theories in plains modal (species-typical) attachment pro- Dpsychology have generated as much inter- cesses and patterns of behavior in humans, and est, research, and debate as attachment theory (2) an individual-difference component, which (Bowlby, 1969/1982, 1973, 1980, 1988) and its explains individual deviations from modal recent extensions (see Cassidy & Shaver, 2016). processes and behavioral patterns. Most of the Attachment theory is an extensive, inclusive major principles and hypotheses we discuss in theory of personality and social development this chapter are normative ones, but we also “from the cradle to the grave” (Bowlby, 1979, highlight principles associated with well-estab- p. 129). Being a lifespan theory, it is relevant to lished individual differences in attachment pat- several areas in psychology, including develop- terns (in children) and attachment orientations mental, personality, social, cognitive, neurosci- (in adults), including how they are related to a ence, and clinical. host of personal and relational processes and Because attachment theory covers the entire outcomes. life course, it has several fundamental prin- We began our work on this chapter by sur- ciples and core hypotheses, most of which ad- veying the theoretical and empirical literature dress how and why people think, feel, and be- on attachment processes across the lifespan and have in particular ways within relationships at generated an initial list of potential principles different points of their lives. Given the focus and hypotheses. We then asked several lead- of this volume, our primary goal in this chapter ing attachment scholars working in different is to provide a brief, representative overview of areas of psychology (e.g., clinical, developmen- the key principles and central hypotheses that tal, personality, social) to indicate what they underlie attachment theory, both as originally thought were the most important principles/ articulated by Bowlby and his contemporaries hypotheses.1 Informed by this information, we (e.g., Ainsworth, Blehar, Waters, & Wall, 1978) next identified what we believe are nine of the and as expanded upon in recent theory and re- most important, foundational principles and hy- search (Cassidy & Shaver, 2016). potheses that serve as the foundation of attach- Attachment theory has two major compo- ment theory (see Table 12.1, which serves as a nents: (1) a normative component, which ex- guide to the following discussion).

222

VanLange_Book.indb 222 6/30/2020 11:17:33 AM  12. Major Principles of Attachment Theory 223

TABLE 12.1. Major Attachment Principles and Hypotheses Principle A: Attachment theory is an evolutionary, biologically based theory explaining a predisposition to engage in proximity to important others for safety and survival. 1. All human infants, and certain other species, engage in this behavior (universality hypothesis) as a means of meeting basic physical and emotional needs. 2. The relationship state of engaging in proximity with an important caregiver who can meet basic safety and survival needs is referred to as an attachment. 3. Close others who meet the attachment needs of an individual are attachment figures.

Principle B: The attachment system coexists with other innate behavioral systems, such as the caregiving system, the sexuality system, and the exploration system. 1. All of these systems are important and interrelated. 2. However, the attachment behavioral system comes to the forefront (is dominant) during times of distress, fear, loss, pain, or separation (threat activation hypothesis), motivating proximity seeking to attachment figures.

Principle C: The connection between the attachment and caregiving systems determines whether infants form attachments that are secure or insecure. 1. Attachment-relevant behavior develops largely in response to the quality of early caregiving, such that high-quality and consistent early caregiving—particularly during times of distress—leads to attachment security (sensitivity hypothesis). 2. Early inconsistent, rejecting, or absent caregiving by attachment figures during times of distress leads to attachment insecurity.

Principle D: There are three major functions of attachment relationships—to promote proximity seeking, provide a safe haven, and offer a secure base—all of which facilitate self-regulation and emotion regulation. 1. Proximity seeking promotes safety and survival of the individual, through either greater physical closeness to an attachment figure or internalized feelings of closeness to an attachment figure (felt security). 2. A safe haven helps the individual regulate emotions during times of actual or perceived distress/threat. 3. A secure base allows the individual to explore the world and develop greater autonomy, growth, competence, eventually resulting in better self-regulation and psychological development.

Principle E: Attachment figures, and types of attachments to them (secure vs. insecure), shape internal working models (mental representations) of the self and others. 1. Internal working models consist of preverbal and verbal memories, which shape cognitions, perceptions, emotions, attitudes, and behaviors toward the self, others, and the world more generally. 2. In infants and young children, the organization of attachment behavior (e.g., expressing distress, seeking comfort, being soothed by comforting) varies based on prior caregiving experiences with attachment figures (e.g., parents or other caregivers). Children are classified as secure, ambivalent (anxious), avoidant, or disorganized based on their responses to their attachment figures. These responses are viewed as adaptive given the specific nature of the child’s caregiving environment. 3. Over time, internal working models become more elaborate and important, eventually developing into adult attachment orientations, which include anxiety, avoidance, and disorganization (with low scores on these dimensions representing security).

Principle F: The attachment system is relevant from “the cradle to the grave.” 1. Internal working models based on an individual’s entire attachment history with various caregivers guide cognitions, perceptions, emotions, attitudes, and behaviors across the individual’s entire life. 2. Attachment orientations in adulthood are relatively stable within people across time and context; they are “trait-like,” particularly attachment security (stability hypothesis). 3. However, attachment orientations can change in response to attachment-relevant events/contexts (e.g., therapy, experiences that sharply contradict existing internal working models) (change hypothesis). (continued)

VanLange_Book.indb 223 6/30/2020 11:17:33 AM 224 I. Principles in Theory

TABLE 12.1. (continued) Principle G: Attachment security is an inner resource that can facilitate resilience (broaden-and-build hypothesis), whereas attachment insecurity is a vulnerability often associated with poorer life outcomes. 1. Mental health outcomes 2. Interpersonal difficulties

Principle H: Individuals have specific reactions when they are separated from or lose their attachment figures. 1. They experience three stages of grief: protest, despair, and detachment. 2. Each of these responses serves an adaptive purpose.

Principle I: The attachment system, although universal, is culturally dependent and promotes culturally specific forms of adaptation and development. 1. In some cultures, most individuals develop secure attachments, because they are exposed to sensitive and appropriate caregiving by their attachment figures/caregivers (normativity and sensitivity hypotheses), especially in plentiful, nonthreatening environments. 2. In other cultures, relatively more individuals develop insecure attachments, because they are exposed to less sensitive and inappropriate caregiving by their attachment figures/caregivers, especially in less plentiful, more threatening environments.

Major Principles hood that seeking proximity to this person can (or will) be achieved (Bowlby, 1973; Mikulincer We now discuss each principle and the key hy- & Shaver, 2003). potheses associated with it, present representa- Bowlby believed that all human infants—as tive research relevant to each principle/hypoth- well as young offspring in many other species— esis, and identify a few important, unanswered engage in behaviors that reflect the operation of questions relevant to each principle. the attachment system, most notably when they are either acutely or chronically ill, stressed, fa- Principle A: Attachment Theory Is an tigued, or threatened. This is termed the univer- Evolutionary, Biologically Based Theory sality hypothesis. Bowlby further claimed that the state of seeking and maintaining proximity According to Bowlby (1969/1982, 1973, 1980, with a person who can meet one’s basic safety 1988), the attachment system evolved and is and survival needs involves being attached to deeply ingrained in our nature because it solved that person, and that people who meet attach- one of the greatest adaptive challenges our an- ment needs become “attachment figures.” cestors faced—how to improve the chances of Bowlby also highlighted the important role survival during childhood in ancestral environ- that care and nurturance assume in the survival, ments. Inspired by Darwin (1859, 1872), Bowl- growth, and thriving of all individuals, includ- by (1969/1982) believed that the “attachment ing in nonthreatening situations. He claimed that system” was genetically wired into our species good caregivers tend to provide “a secure base through directional selection. At its core, the from which a child or an adolescent can make attachment system is designed to detect and sorties into the outside world and to which he respond to potential threats when they arise. [sic] can return knowing for sure that he will be The system has three central features: (1) moni- welcomed when he gets there, nourished physi- toring/appraising potentially threating events, cally and emotionally, comforted if distressed, which activate (turn on) the attachment sys- reassured if frightened” (1988, p. 11). This type tem, (2) monitoring/appraising the availability of care and nurturance, which Bowlby believed and responsiveness of another person who can was governed primarily by the parenting be- provide protection/comfort in response to the havioral system in nonthreatening situations, threat, and (3) monitoring/appraising the likeli- allows individuals to develop many of the skills,

VanLange_Book.indb 224 6/30/2020 11:17:34 AM  12. Major Principles of Attachment Theory 225

attributes, and abilities necessary for competent guides behavior (relative to the other behavioral functioning in other life domains, such as learn- systems) when children and adults feel threat- ing new tasks, developing self-confidence, and ened, distressed, fatigued, or fearful, especially establishing warm, communal relationships in response to potential, impending, or actual with other people. loss or separation of their attachment figures. Several gaps in our understanding of these is- This is known as the threat activation hypoth- sues remain. For example, we need to know more esis, which makes attachment theory unique about how attachment relationships are formed compared to other theories of personality and across time, particularly among adults and their social development. The primary evolved func- romantic partners. We also need to know more tion of threat activation is to motivate “at-risk” about how children and adults develop and individuals to seek closer physical and/or psy- manage relationships with multiple attachment chological proximity to their attachment fig- figures, including the conditions under which ures. As threatening events and distress termi- they turn to and use specific attachment figures nate or abate, the attachment system becomes for specific needs or purposes (e.g., for comfort, deactivated and attachment-relevant behavior reassurance, support, information, advice). Fi- (e.g., seeking proximity) subsides, permitting nally, regarding the universality hypothesis, we other behavioral systems once again to become need to know more about the conditions under activated by relevant motives and environmen- which attachment relationships may develop in tal cues. early deviant environments. Our knowledge regarding how these behav- ioral systems operate in relation to one another is Principle B: The Attachment System still limited. What we currently know is that the Coexists with Other Behavioral Systems attachment system becomes activated and tends to suppress the operation of many other systems The attachment system is one of several biologi- (e.g., exploration, mating/sexuality) when indi- cally based behavioral systems, each of which viduals feel threatened. The attachment system, affects and interacts with the others to impact however, most likely plays an important role in what a person does in a specific situation. In triggering and/or facilitating the operation of children, for example, the other primary behav- other systems, especially the caregiving sys- ioral systems include the exploration system tem (in adult–child and adult–adult attachment (which can activate when the attachment sys- relationships) and the mating/sexuality system tem is inactive, permitting the learning of new (in adult–adult attachment relationships). In information and skills relevant to survival and adults, for instance, attachment processes prob- social development), the social system (which ably facilitate the emotional bonds necessary to also can activate when the attachment system keep parents together long enough to raise their is quiescent, allowing individuals to reap the children, which may have been necessary for benefits of forging personal ties with different survival in ancestral environments (Fletcher, people), and the caregiving system (which oper- Simpson, Campbell, & Overall, 2015; Zeifman ates in tandem with the attachment system to & Hazan, 2016). provide care and protection, particularly when an offspring or partner’s attachment system is Principle C: The Attachment System activated; Cassidy, 2016). In adulthood, other and the Caregiving System Are Interrelated biologically based behavioral systems become relevant, especially the sexual/mating system, This principle involves the special connec- which evolved to promote reproductive fitness tion between the attachment and caregiving (Birnbaum, 2016). behavioral systems, which largely determines According to Bowlby (1969/1982, 1973, whether infants and adults form secure or inse- 1980), and as supported by considerable re- cure attachment patterns with their attachment search with children (e.g., Marvin, Britner, & figures. Although most children and adults be- Russell, 2016) and adults (e.g., Mikulincer & come attached to their caregivers/attachment Shaver, 2016; Simpson & Rholes, 2012), the figures, not all individuals become securely attachment system dominates attention and attached (Bowlby, 1956). According to attach-

VanLange_Book.indb 225 6/30/2020 11:17:34 AM 226 I. Principles in Theory

ment theory, the types of bonds that children tachment figure, coupled with the presence of a and adults form depend on the type, quantity, stranger, should be alarming to children in the and quality of caregiving they have received age range (12–18 months) for which the Strange from prior caregivers/attachment figures. Situation was developed. Bowlby’s (1944) observations of maladjusted Four behavioral patterns are witnessed in youth led him to conjecture that disruptions the Strange Situation (Ainsworth et al., 1978). in the early caregiver–child relationship often Secure (Type B) infants explore and are com- generate certain predispositions that affect a fortable with the stranger when their caregiver person’s later life outcomes. Children, for ex- is present, become upset when the caregiver ample, can detect whether and the degree to leaves, and are rather easily and quickly calmed which their caregivers are sensitive, responsive, when the caregiver returns to the room. Anx- and attentive to their needs, particularly when ious–avoidant (Type A) infants typically do not they are upset. According to the sensitivity hy- explore the room (regardless of the caregiver’s pothesis, attachment-relevant behavior devel- or the stranger’s presence or absence) and dis- ops primarily in response to the type and qual- play minimal visible affective changes when ity of early care received, with higher-quality their caregiver leaves or reenters the room. and more consistent early care usually resulting Anxious–ambivalent (Type C) infants are often in attachment security, and with lower-quality distressed before separation from their caregiv- and/or more inconsistent care generating at- er, become even more upset when their caregiv- tachment insecurity. er leaves the room, and often fail to calm down The sensitivity hypothesis has been support- when their caregiver returns. Disorganized ed by meta-analytic evidence (e.g., De Wolff (Type D) infants exhibit strange, inconsistent, & van IJzendoorn, 1997) and holds true across and sometimes bizarre behaviors in the Strange several different cultures and social contexts, Situation, which can include signs of fear, odd affirming Bowlby’s original claims (see Mes- movements, freezing, or other unusual reac- man, van IJzendoorn, & Sagi-Schwartz, 2016). tions when they are separated from or reunited Although the exact behaviors that constitute with their caregiver (see Main & Hesse, 1990). sensitive care vary somewhat from culture to Each of these attachment patterns has dis- culture, the function and outcome of these be- tinct caregiving origins (Ainsworth et al., 1978). haviors is the same cross-culturally. Sensitive Secure attachment typically develops when care, however, does not always take the same children receive consistent, warm, and respon- form or have the same impact on all children sive care from their caregivers. Anxious–avoid- within the same culture (Fearon & Belsky, ant attachment usually develops when children 2016). Variability exists due to the specific receive rejecting and/or absent care from their needs, motives, and dispositions of each child, caregivers. Anxious–ambivalent attachment which may affect what the optimal form of care- often develops when children receive inconsis- giving may be. tent or mixed care from their caregivers. And Inspired by Bowlby, Mary Ainsworth (1967) disorganized attachment develops when chil- conducted the first series of naturalistic behav- dren are exposed to frightening, strange, or un- ioral observations by examining how different usual parenting often associated with abuse or caregiving behaviors were associated with dif- their caregiver’s clinical disorders (Lyons-Ruth ferent attachment-related motivations. Based & Jacobvitz, 2016). These latter three forms of on these observations, she and colleagues de- attachment represent types of attachment inse- veloped the Strange Situation procedure to curity. evaluate young children’s patterns of attach- A number of unanswered questions still exist. ment with their mothers (Ainsworth et al., For example, how are the caregiving and at- 1978). The Strange Situation consists of two tachment systems interrelated? Some research brief separations and reunions during which suggests they may operate in a bidirectional the caregiver and a stranger enter and leave the fashion to one another (Fearon & Belsky, 2016), room, while the child’s reactions to these events but further research is needed to determine the are observed and coded. The absence of an at- exact nature of this bidirectional association.

VanLange_Book.indb 226 6/30/2020 11:17:34 AM  12. Major Principles of Attachment Theory 227

Additionally, under what circumstances might felt security. According to attachment theorists attachment insecurity be more functional or (e.g., Bowlby, 1969/1982; Mikulincer & Shaver, adaptive than attachment security? One pos- 2003), proximity seeking is the primary default sibility is that the behavioral tendencies that strategy of the attachment behavioral system, define insecurity might be more adaptive in and most people—including adults—resist un- harsh or unpredictable environments in which necessary or prolonged separations from their resources are either limited or highly variable, primary attachment figures (Fraley & Shaver, other people cannot be trusted, and watching 1998). out for one’s best interests is necessary (Sz- In young children, proximity seeking mani- epsenwol & Simpson, 2019). Our knowledge fests in attempts to gain closer physical prox- of the unique ways in which avoidance, anxi- imity to one’s primary caregiver(s). Children do ety, and disorganization might be adaptive in this with signaling behaviors (e.g., distressed specific environments and social situations is facial expressions), aversive behaviors (e.g., negligible. Furthermore, precisely how does crying), approach behaviors (e.g., moving to- security protect or buffer people when separa- ward the caregiver), or contact maintenance tions from their attachment figures occur, and behaviors (e.g., clinging to the caregiver). Most what are the long-term effects on health, well- adults also seek closer contact with their attach- being, and social functioning? Although some ment figures (typically their romantic partners), researchers are beginning to address this im- particularly when their attachment system is portant issue (e.g., Sbarra & Coan, 2017), our activated (Collins & Feeney, 2004). However, understanding remains limited. the way in which adults seek proximity differs from that of children, particularly when threat/ Principle D: Attachment Relationships stress is at lower levels. Adult proximity seek- Serve Three Functions—Proximity ing typically involves direct forms of verbal Seeking, Safe Haven, and Secure Base communication in which the distressed adult’s The need to feel safe and secure is one of the specific needs, concerns, or desires are ex- most fundamental human needs (Bowlby, pressed to their attachment figures (Feeney & 1969/1982). Indeed, both children and adults Woodhouse, 2016). need to feel safe, with some amount of “felt Once proximity has been achieved, the safe security” (Sroufe & Waters, 1977) before they haven function becomes relevant. Attachment can engage in and benefit from other impor- figures who provide a safe haven help their dis- tant life tasks such as exploring, playing, and tressed partners down-regulate to assuage their affiliating with others. Individuals who are ef- negative emotions and thoughts. Attachment fective attachment figures typically foster these figures who effectively enact the safe haven outcomes by providing and facilitating three es- function support their partners by allowing sential functions, especially when their children them to return to and remain in the relation- or partners feel distressed: remaining open to ship in order to receive comfort, reassurance, proximity seeking, providing a safe and com- and assistance until their distress attenuates forting haven from threats and stressors, and (Bowlby, 1988; Collins & Feeney, 2000). They providing a secure base from which their part- accomplish this by providing the specific type ners can reengage with the world. and amount of support their partners actually The first function, seeking proximity to one’s need, taking into account the current situation, attachment figure, promotes safety and protec- their partners’ goals, wishes, concerns, and the tion, a tendency that most likely enhanced the need to express their feelings, after which they survival of children and perhaps adults dur- adjust their caregiving behaviors accordingly ing evolutionary history (Bowlby, 1969/1982). (Bowlby, 1988). Less sensitive and less respon- Proximity seeking is achieved by establishing sive attachment figures, on the other hand, ne- closer physical contact with one’s attachment glect, fail to understand, or are either overin- figure or via internalized perceptions of greater volved or out of synchrony with their distressed contact/closeness to him or her, both of which partners’ actual needs (Kunce & Shaver, 1994). begin the process of increasing the sense of The net result of effective safe haven behavior

VanLange_Book.indb 227 6/30/2020 11:17:34 AM 228 I. Principles in Theory

is the further restoration of felt security (Feeney seeking, safe haven, and secure base functions & Collins, 2014). “transferred” from parents (or early attachment Unlike that for young children, an adult’s safe figures) to adult romantic partners? To what ex- haven behavior can involve mental representa- tent do the behaviors of one’s parents or early tions of his or her supportive attachment fig- attachment figures impact this process, and to ure. Studies in which threat is experimentally what extent do the novel characteristics of adult induced have revealed that these manipulations attachment figures override these earlier expe- automatically trigger mental representations riences (see Zeifman & Hazan, 2016)? More- of romantic partners who serve the safe haven over, how does the attachment security of the function. When this happens, adults report less distressed person or his or her attachment fig- negative affect, even though their romantic ure facilitate better, more effective exploration partners (attachment figures) are not physically and the accomplishment of other important life present (e.g., Mikulincer, Gillath, & Shaver, tasks in adulthood? These questions need to be 2002). answered. After distressed partners have been soothed, the third function—providing a secure base— Principle E: Attachment Figures, helps calmed partners to reengage once again in and the Type of Attachment to Them, other life tasks. A secure base promotes autono- Shape Internal Working Models my, growth, and competence, eventually result- Bowlby (1969/1982, p. 81) introduced the con- ing in better self-regulation, greater well-being, cept of “internal working models” to describe a and positive psychosocial development (Feeney mental representational system that is dynamic, & Woodhouse, 2016). Attachment figures who allowing individuals to conduct “small-scale effectively serve as a secure base for their part- experiments within the head” in order to un- ners remain available, do not interfere with their derstand and predict behavior, particularly that partners’ explorations, and actively encourage of their attachment figures. Internal working such explorations (Bowlby, 1988; Feeney & models are aggregate representations of a per- Thrush, 2010). Those who are ineffective do not son’s entire life history of attachment-relevant notice or disregard their partners’ goals, needs, experiences (Sroufe, Egeland, Carlson, & Col- and feelings, intrude on their partners’ explora- lins, 2005). They capture preverbal and early tions, discourage and impede them, and tend to language experiences, along with conscious be unsupportive or unhelpful. and unconscious attitudes, emotions, cogni- In young children, secure base behaviors in- tions, beliefs, and expectations (Collins, Guich- clude looking back or “checking in” to ensure ard, Ford, & Feeney, 2004). In essence, working their caregiver’s presence as they explore their models encapsulate an individual’s attachment- surroundings. As children age, they start ven- related thoughts about, feelings toward, and ex- turing farther from their attachment figures, periences with their attachment figures. particularly those who provide a solid, secure No systematic theory of internal working base. In adults, secure base behavior involves models exists in Bowlby’s writings (Bretherton attachment figures providing support for part- & Munholland, 2016), but he posited several ners’ important needs, plans, and goals, and re- things that had to be true for working models sponding in a timely, responsive, and sensitive to fulfill some basic functions in attachment manner when partners embark on new or chal- relationships. Bowlby theorized the following lenging life tasks (Waters & Cummings, 2000). functions, among others: Working models (1) In general, more effective proximity-seeking, store, manipulate, and update information to safe haven, and secure base behaviors tend to help individuals decide how to react and behave be enacted by attachment figures and distressed in specific situations (Bowlby, 1988); (2) facili- partners (both children and adults) who are se- tate appraisals of others, oneself, and the world curely rather than insecurely attached (Feeney more broadly (Bowlby, 1969/1982); (3) identify & Woodhouse, 2016). attachment figures and form expectations about At present, a few basic questions remain their availability and responsiveness (Bowlby, unanswered. For example, how are proximity- 1988); (4) allow for conscious and unconscious

VanLange_Book.indb 228 6/30/2020 11:17:34 AM  12. Major Principles of Attachment Theory 229

applications of stored information in attach- difficult to dismiss or ignore what their attach- ment-related situations (Bowlby, 1969/1982); ment figures tell them. Thus, in cases like these, and (5) provide a means of internalization, such young children, because they have more limited that the working model becomes part of one’s cognitive abilities than adults, may find them- self-concept and identity (Bowlby, 1988). selves with irreconcilable information, resulting According to Bowlby (1969/1982; 1973), in highly incongruent working models. Bowlby working models have two parts: (1) a model hypothesized that such children often develop of the self and (2) a model of specific attach- uneasy, unstable compromises in an attempt to ment figures and attachment figures in gen- reconcile such conflicting information. Finally, eral. These have both evaluative and internal working models can also be incoherent because structural components. The models of self and attachment figures teach their children not to specific attachment figure(s) or attachment think independently. For example, parents may figures in general can be positive or negative. teach their children that they cannot view their Each of these models can also be either inter- parents’ actions objectively, but simply must nally consistent or incoherent, and individuals accept what their parents say about themselves may have more than one working model of the (Bowlby, 1973). Incongruent models make the same person (Bowlby, 1980). When they exist, world less predictable and less explainable, multiple models typically consist of a simple, making decisions about how to behave within rudimentary model developed in infancy or relationships more difficult, sometimes even early childhood and a later model that is more contributing to clinical disorders (Liotti, 1992). fully articulated, more sophisticated, and often For example, multiple images of attachment more accessible to conscious awareness. Bowl- figures can make it difficult to decide how to by believed that both working models were im- behave in their presence. As another example, portant because they guided behavior, thought, dissociation is associated with contradictions perceptions, and emotions. He conjectured that within the self system. in some situations, earlier, more primitive mod- Working models underlie attachment patterns els could be more influential than later ones in children. As children develop into adoles- (Bowlby, 1980). cents and adults, these attachment patterns are A major question about working models is replaced by attachment orientations. There are how internally consistent they tend to be. Mod- two primary adult attachment orientations: anx- els of the self and other (i.e.., the attachment iety and avoidance. The adult attachment litera- figure) can be incongruent, especially if the ture has covered them extensively, particularly attachment figure’s behavior is inconsistent or in conjunction with relationship conflict, care- unpredictable. Models may also be incongruent giving and support, relationship satisfaction, if their basic components—what individuals emotion regulation, stress, and depression (e.g., experience, what they are told by attachment Mikulincer & Shaver, 2016). A third attachment figures, and what they learn from other peo- orientation, disorganized attachment, is less ple—are inconsistent with one another. For ex- understood and is just beginning to be studied ample, Bowlby (1973) wrote that a child might (Paetzold, Rholes, & Kohn, 2015). It is impor- be labeled a “bad child” by his or her mother tant to note that attachment orientations reflect based on behavior of which the mother disap- habitual patterns of behavior, preferences, goals, proved. However, the child might also be told fears, and so forth, that one brings to relation- that the mother loves the child dearly, despite ships. Although attachment orientations are a his or her badness. From this, the child might reflection of working models, they should not be learn that he or she is bad, but not so bad as confused with them, even though they are often to be unlovable. The behavior of this “loving” discussed somewhat interchangeably in some of mother, however, might actually be quite un- the attachment literature. An understanding of loving, resulting in the storage of inconsistent working models is essential to a broader under- information between the mother’s words and standing of the attachment system. The precise the child’s actual experiences with her. Bowlby workings and structure of working models have also believed that many young children find it not been examined directly. Fraley (2007), how-

VanLange_Book.indb 229 6/30/2020 11:17:34 AM 230 I. Principles in Theory

ever, has begun to lay the groundwork for a the- Principle F: The Attachment System Is ory of how working models typically operate. Operative from “the Cradle to the Grave” Using a connectionist approach, Fraley suggests Bowlby (1979, p. 129) believed that attachment that working models operate across different in- processes are relevant from “the cradle to the terpersonal and social contexts that also allow grave.” There are several things this phrase for within-person variability across time. This could mean. One is that early attachment expe- approach provides clues regarding how and why riences have enduring effects. Another is that multiple representations of attachment figures proximity seeking and other attachment behav- exist and may shift from being relationship-spe- iors are just as relevant to older people as they cific to more general (global) in nature. This ap- are to infants, children, and younger adults be- proach also explains why working models tend cause the attachment system continues to oper- to be rather stable over time but can also change ate similarly throughout life. Yet another is that in response to changing environments (see Prin- working models and attachment orientations, ciple F below). One strength of this approach is once formed, remain relatively constant across that early experiences tend to have a “privileged the lifespan. The issue of temporal stability is status” in the working model memory system, particularly relevant to attachment theory be- even if they recur even rarely over time, which is cause the theory maintains that although change in line with Bowlby’s (1980) initial assumptions. in working models and attachment orientations Other strengths of this approach include no- is possible, it is the exception rather than the tions that (1) mental representations are based rule (Bowlby, 1980). on an individuals’ own learning systems; (2) no According to the theory, attachment orienta- a priori notions are needed about how general tions and working models should be relatively representations are constructed from relation- constant and stable over time (the stability hy- ship-specific ones because general (global) pothesis). Consistent with this view, studies of models emerge from a set of repeated, specific adult romantic attachment reveal that attach- experiences; (3) behaviors can be contingently ment orientations show fairly high test–retest inconsistent over time, depending on context, correlations (e.g., .60–.80 over varying lengths which indicates that working models are more of time; Stern et al., 2018). Correlations by than merely a set of “if–then” scripts (as has themselves, however, do not provide the best commonly been believed; Mikulincer & Shav- evidence for or against stability. There are two er, 2016); and (4) the organization of working possible ways in which change in attachment models is based on characteristics of the rela- orientations can occur. One possibility is known tionship partner rather than his or her relation- as the revisionist model, and the other is the ship status. If, for example, a new relation- prototype model. According to the revisionist ship partner resembles an individual’s mother, model, environmental changes (e.g., the devel- working model organization may be based on opment of a new relationship or the demise of the shared characteristics of mother and partner an old one) affect and sometimes change work- instead of the category “relationship partner” ing models and attachment orientations, often (Fraley, 2007). gradually over time. In test–retest studies, the Several important issues still need to be in- longer the period between tests, the more op- vestigated, and the connectionist approach of- portunity for environmental events to influence fers insights to address them. These include attachment orientations. Thus, there should determining how working models differ from be less similarity (i.e., a lower correlation) be- general schemas or sets of scripts, how new tween testing sessions. The prototype model, information is incorporated over time and how in contrast, suggests there is an unchanging at- much weight is given to particular experiences, tachment prototype underlying attachment ori- how working models tend to transform from entations that limits the amount of change that early infancy and childhood into adulthood, and can occur. If so, test–retest correlations should how close the information that organizes work- remain at similar levels across time, no matter ing models must be to actual attachment experi- how long the intervals between testing. Current ences in order to influence working models. empirical evidence favors the prototype model

VanLange_Book.indb 230 6/30/2020 11:17:34 AM  12. Major Principles of Attachment Theory 231

(Fraley, Vicray, Brumbaugh, & Roisman, 2011; orientation—does the inconsistency between Jones et al., 2018), which implies that, absent support giving and the cardinal features of a change in the underlying prototype, changes avoidance weaken the avoidant working model, in attachment orientations are likely to be su- resulting in lower levels of avoidance? Simp- perficial or temporary, and they will eventually son and colleagues found that, consistent with revert to prototypical levels. Bowlby’s hypothesis, clashes between new, in- Although prototypes limit change, they do coming information and old information stored not eliminate it. Bowlby (1973) proposed that in working models predicted changes in attach- change in attachment orientations occurs slow- ment orientations across a chronically stressful ly and rather arduously (the change hypothesis). life event (the transition to parenthood). He stated: Several other researchers have tested whether interpersonal and psychotherapeutic experi- In general when new information clashes with es- ences motivate change. Kirkpatrick and Davis tablished [working] models . . . an old model may (1994), for example, found that the experience be replaced by a new one. Nevertheless, much evidence suggests that we undertake such re- of divorce increased attachment insecurity, and placements only very reluctantly. . . . To dismantle that entry into a new relationship was associ- a model which has played and is still playing a ated with the growth of security (i.e., decreased major part in our daily life and to replace it with avoidance). In a longitudinal study, Fraley, a new one is a slow and arduous task. (Bowlby, Roisman, Booth-LaForce, Owen, and Holland 1973, pp. 230–231) (2013) found that receiving nurturing maternal care and having a close childhood friendship in- There are several reasons why replacement creased security. In another longitudinal study, tends to be uncommon, slow, and difficult. One Chopik, Moors, and Edelstein (2014) document- source of resistance to change is the tendency ed that having a nurturing mother is associated for new information to be accepted if it is con- with greater security across time. Conceptual- sistent with existing perspectives and rejected if izing psychopathology as a vulnerability factor it is not (Lord, Ross, & Lepper, 1979). Another for instability in adult attachment orientations, is the tendency to appraise new information Davila, Burge, and Hammen (1997) found that in ways that make it seem consistent with old psychopathology is related to larger changes in information, which also limits change. An ad- attachment orientations. ditional relevant factor is that, with time, infor- While informative, this literature has limita- mation processing becomes automated and less tions. First, most studies reveal that positive re- subject to conscious inspection, decreasing the lationship events are associated with increases likelihood that new information will be reflect- in security, and vice versa. However, they have ed upon and its inconsistency with old informa- not sufficiently addressed how, why, or when tion will be noticed. Also relevant is Bowlby’s this occurs. Questions of mediation and mod- (1980) notion that some attachment figures tell eration have not received the attention they their children that they cannot view them (the deserve. Second, past work has not examined parents) objectively, but must accept the parents the full lifespan of the changes that have been as they present themselves (Bowlby, 1980, p. observed. Are changes deep and permanent, 56). When parents successfully do this, it is dif- or are they superficial, eventually returning to ficult for individuals to unlearn what they were baseline values over time? The evidence sup- taught and reflect on their attachment history porting the prototype model suggests that they and working models objectively. may often be superficial. Simpson, Rholes, Campbell, and Wilson (2003) tested Bowlby’s idea that clashes between incoming information and information stored in Principle G: Attachment Security Is an Inner Resource That Facilitates Resilience; working models may produce changes in work- Attachment Insecurity Is a Vulnerability ing models. For example, when a highly avoid- Associated with Poorer Outcomes ant person perceives that he or she is providing emotional support to the partner—a behavior According to Bowlby, attachment security in that is incongruent with an avoidant attachment early life prepares people to cope better with

VanLange_Book.indb 231 6/30/2020 11:17:34 AM 232 I. Principles in Theory

trauma by allowing them to be more resilient attachment insecurity. Additionally, externaliz- (the competence hypothesis; Bowlby, 1980; van ing symptomatology, such as substance abuse IJzendoorn, 1990). Attachment insecurity, on and antisocial behaviors, have been linked to the other hand, leads individuals to cope with attachment insecurity (see Ein-Dor & Doron, the world’s unpredictability by either “shrink- 2016). ing from it or by doing battle with it” (Bowlby, Most studies examining poor life outcomes 1973, p. 208). Thus, Bowlby viewed attachment and attachment insecurity are correlational and insecurity as a vulnerability or risk factor for conducted on community samples. Conradi, poorer life outcomes, including depression Kamphuis, and de Jonge (2018) conducted one (1980), anxiety disorders (1973), and agorapho- study that is noteworthy for its longitudinal de- bia (which he viewed as an extension of separa- sign (7 years) and use of clinically diagnosed tion anxiety; Bowlby, 1973). participants. They found that higher levels of In recent years, resilience has come to be attachment anxiety and avoidance were as- viewed through the “broaden-and-build” hy- sociated with higher severity of depression pothesis (Fredrickson, 2001), based on the and lower perceptions of being symptom-free. notion that positive emotions, which provide Other studies reveal a positive association with emotional stability in times of stress, allow for attachment anxiety, but equivocal results for a broadening of internal resources (e.g., skills, avoidance, perhaps due to the absence of im- flexibility in coping) and an increased ability to portant moderators. Similarly, anxiety disor- use external resources via strong social connec- ders have been linked to attachment anxiety, tions (Sroufe et al., 2005). Frederickson’s (2001) but the connection for avoidance is less clear. upward spiral model of the broaden-and-build Agoraphobia has been associated with anxiety hypothesis for resilience is bidirectional, allow- in adulthood, as has borderline personality dis- ing for the development of inner resources that order in both community and clinical samples. permit reappraisal of past experiences, which Recent connections have also been established can generate even greater resilience over time. between attachment insecurity and coping with Sroufe (2016) has tied Frederickson’s ideas to stress, dissociation, and schizophrenia (e.g., attachment security, based on the notion that Fillo, Simpson, Rholes, & Kohn, 2015; Paet- secure people are better able to recuperate from zold, Rholes, & Andrus, 2017). stress, cope with adversity, regulate negative Despite all this research, several issues still emotions, rely on the support of others, and need to be explored. First, appropriate modera- use adversity as an opportunity for personal tors of the connection between attachment ori- growth. Additionally, highly secure individuals entations and poorer life outcomes are needed. have positive views of themselves and others, This could help to resolve the equivocal find- along with greater positivity, which helps them ings for attachment avoidance. Second, under- be more hopeful and optimistic (Berant, Miku- standing the mechanisms that link attachment lincer, & Florian, 2001). insecurity to poorer life outcomes is important. A considerable amount of research has veri- For example, Kwon, Lee, and Kwon (2017) have fied Bowlby’s belief that attachment insecu- shown that excessive reassurance seeking me- rity is associated with poorer life outcomes, diates the relation between anxiety and depres- including both internalizing and externalizing sion. Others (e.g., Shaver, Schachner, & Miku- behaviors. Social and clinical psychologists lincer, 2005) argue that excessive reassurance have examined psychopathologies such as de- seeking is part of the anxiety construct itself. A pression, social anxiety disorder, generalized distinct and viable mediating construct could be anxiety disorder, posttraumatic stress disorder emotion dysregulation, which mediates the rela- (PTSD), eating disorders, agoraphobia, border- tion between attachment anxiety/avoidance and line personality disorder, and dissociation, as depression/generalized anxiety disorder (Mar- well as general reactions to stress, to determine ganska, Gallagher, & Miranda, 2013). their linkages to attachment orientations. More Finally, nearly all the data on resilience and recently, psychosis and obsessive–compulsive vulnerability is correlational and cross-sectional. disorders also have been shown to be related to Longitudinal studies are needed to identify

VanLange_Book.indb 232 6/30/2020 11:17:34 AM  12. Major Principles of Attachment Theory 233

causal, explanatory pathways connecting secu- individuals gradually begin to resume normal rity to resilience or vulnerability to insecurity. activities without their caregiver/attachment These models should include the possibility figure, resume exploring the environment, and of bidirectional relationships in line with the become more self-reliant. According to Bowlby broaden-and-build hypothesis. (1980), the function of detachment/reorganiza- tion is to come to terms with the loss, which Principle H: Individuals Experience facilitates the forging of new affectional bonds a Specific Sequence of Reactions When with subsequent caregivers/attachment figures. Separated from or When They Lose From the standpoint of evolution, detachment/ Their Attachment Figures reorganization helps individuals to reformu- Across many, if not all, human cultures (Rosen- late representations of themselves and their lost blatt, 2008) and myriad species (Archer, 1999), caregiver/attachment figure, which helps them young, vulnerable children (as well as most establish new attachment bonds with partners adults) experience a series of reactions after who can provide the attention, protection, and being separated from their caregivers/attach- resources needed for survival (in children) and ment figures (Bowlby, 1980). Immediately reproduction (in adults). Bowlby believed that following separation, young children (and es- these reactions to separation not only evolved pecially adults) become disoriented and expe- via natural selection primarily to promote the rience “numbness,” which often is quickly fol- survival of young, vulnerable children (see also lowed by intense protest as individuals search Cassidy, 2016), but they also characterize adults for their missing caregiver/attachment figure. who experience prolonged or permanent sepa- Bowlby conjectured that numbness alerts and rations from their romantic partners (Parkes, directs an individual’s attention to the care- 2006). giver’s/attachment figure’s absence. Follow- Bowlby (1980) did not view these stages as oc- ing this, a period of protest during the initial curring in a rigid or fixed sequence. People can phases of caregiver absence is a good strategy and do move between different stages, or they to promote survival (Archer, 1999), especially may experience a mixture of two stages within for young offspring in species that have devel- short periods of time (e.g., vacillating between opmentally immature, highly dependent young. protest and despair), depending on their attach- In many instances, intense protest draws care- ment orientations and the circumstances of their givers back to their young children who, during separation or loss. Bowlby’s key contribution evolutionary history, would have been suscep- was to identify the evolutionary functions and tible to injury or predation if left unattended. psychological experiences associated with each If persistent protest fails to retrieve the care- stage of the general grief/bereavement process giver/attachment figure, most young children (Fraley & Shaver, 2016). and many adults enter a state of despair, dur- It is also important to note that numbing ing which their activity diminishes and they (and the disorientation associated with it) is fall silent. From an evolutionary standpoint, often more prolonged in adults than in young despondency is a good second strategy to pro- children. Protest and despair also tend to be mote survival, especially in young, vulnerable expressed differently in children versus adults, children, because excessive movement could and the process of detachment/reorganization result in accident or injury, and loud, prolonged is different due to the greater cognitive and in- protests might draw predators. If protest fails to ferential abilities of adults compared to young bring back the caregiver, the next best survival children. strategy is to disengage from actions that might Contrary to some claims, Bowlby (1980) be- increase the risk of self-inflicted harm or preda- lieved that individuals retain attachment bonds tion. with their former figures, even when they detach Over time, most young children and many from them (Fraley & Shaver, 2016). During the adults who do not reunite with their caregivers/ detachment process, most people—especially attachment figures experience a final stage— older children and adults—reorganize their detachment/reorganization. During this phase, working models of their lost attachment figures

VanLange_Book.indb 233 6/30/2020 11:17:34 AM 234 I. Principles in Theory

by integrating their former partner’s memory Principle I: The Attachment System Is and continued psychological presence into Universal, Yet Also Culturally Dependent their own revised identity, plans, and life story The attachment system, which ostensibly (Bowlby, 1980; Fraley & Shaver, 2016). Detach- evolved and should be universal, is affected ment, therefore, does not involve completely by cultural events, norms, rules, and practices severing psychological ties to departed or de- that can result in culturally specific forms of ceased attachment figures. adaptation and social development. To date, A growing body of research has revealed that the majority of attachment research in devel- anxiously attached adults are more likely to ex- opmental psychology has focused on attach- perience prolonged or chronic grief/mourning ment processes and patterns in young children, following the loss of their romantic partners, as primarily in Western cultures. While there is a indexed by greater depression, anxiety, and pro- growing body of attachment research on indi- longed grief symptoms. Some highly avoidant viduals raised in various non-Western cultures adults are inclined to experience the absence (see Mesman et al., 2016), we are just beginning of grief/mourning and significantly less emo- to learn about them. tional disruption, whereas other highly avoidant Most cross-cultural attachment research has adults experience greater dysfunction and more examined four central attachment hypotheses: chronic problems in the aftermath of loss. Se- the universality hypothesis (when given an cure adults, who tend to be more well regulated, opportunity, virtually all infants become at- exhibit more normal patterns of grief/mourn- tached to one or more caregivers), the norma- ing (i.e., strong emotional distress early in the tivity hypothesis (most infants develop secure process, followed by gradual recovery), and attachments, especially in stable, nonthreaten- they adjust better across time (Fraley & Shaver, ing environments), the sensitivity hypothesis 2016). (attachment security is shaped by the quality When individuals fail to move through and of caregiving, particularly sensitivity and con- “resolve” the stages of grief, they may experi- tingent responsiveness), and the competence ence pathological mourning. Ten to 15% of peo- hypothesis (secure attachment typically leads to ple have such severe grief reactions (Bonanno, more positive developmental outcomes). 2004), but most are resilient following major Reviewing studies conducted in different interpersonal losses (Fraley & Shaver, 2016; cultures in Africa, East Asia, Latin America, Parkes, 2006). Some highly avoidant people and the Middle East, Mesman and colleagues may not experience the stages of grief in the (2016) conclude there is strong cross-cultural way that other people do because they may not support for three of these hypotheses. Specifi- form strong attachment bonds with their roman- cally, in virtually all of these cultures, almost tic partners, which means that their typically all nonneurophysiologically impaired infants subdued reactions may not be pathological. become attached to one or more caregivers, the In summary, this attachment principle is majority of infants form secure attachments in pivotal because it is not only a hallmark fea- nonthreatening environments, and attachment ture of the attachment behavioral system, but it security is strongly tied to sensitive, respon- also ushers in the formation of new attachment sive caregiving provided by attachment figures. bonds, both completing and restarting a cycle There currently is less evidence bearing on the in which the other attachment principles once competence hypothesis because it has been test- again become relevant. Several important ques- ed less frequently. The available evidence, how- tions, however, still need to be addressed. For ever, suggests there also may be a connection example, little is known about detachment/re- between early attachment security and more organization, including how this process works, adaptive functioning later in life (e.g., Aviezer, how long it takes to complete, whether cultural Sagi, & van IJzendoorn, 2002; Gini, Oppen- differences affect its expression, and how “de- heim, & Sagi-Schwartz, 2007). tached” or “reorganized” children and adults Additionally, there is a reasonable amount of must be to start forming strong, enduring at- variation both within and between cultures with tachment bonds with new attachment figures. respect to these outcomes. This is particularly

VanLange_Book.indb 234 6/30/2020 11:17:34 AM  12. Major Principles of Attachment Theory 235

true of outcomes associated with the sensitivity and behavioral tendencies within harsh or un- hypothesis. For example, young children raised predictable environments, in which trusting and in Japan, Indonesia, Israel, and several African depending on others who may be less trustwor- cultures are somewhat more likely to develop thy or undependable could result in poorer long- anxious attachment patterns than young chil- term outcomes, including well-being (Main, dren raised in most Western cultures, where 1990; Simpson & Belsky, 2016). rates of the avoidance pattern tend to be slightly Cultures also differ in the norms and roles as- higher (Grossmann, Grossmann, Spangler, cribed to different caregivers. Multiple caregiv- Suess, & Unzner, 1985; van IJzendoorn & Sa- ers or alloparents (e.g., aunts, uncles, grandpar- gi-Schwartz, 2008). These cultural differences ents) are common in many Asian and African may be partly attributable to different parenting cultures, most of which grant specific roles and goals, expectations, and practices enacted in responsibilities to each caregiver (Mesman et these cultures. In many non-Western cultures, al., 2016). Children in these cultures frequently parents strive to instill a sense of interdepen- form attachment relationships with different dence with and connections to others, whereas caregivers but typically have a primary attach- parents in many Western cultures place greater ment figure to whom they turn, especially when emphasis on fostering independence and auton- distressed. omy in their children (Rothbaum, Weisz, Pott, Less is known about how culture impacts Miyake, & Morelli, 2000). attachment process and orientations in adults. What is most striking, however, is how simi- Some research has addressed whether living lar the base rates of different attachment pat- in a collectivistic versus individualistic culture terns tend to be across diverse cultures that have affects how individuals tend to fare, based on different practices. One likely reason for this is their attachment orientation. Collectivistic cul- that distinctive parenting behaviors may serve tures emphasize the well-being of the group and similar or identical functions across different maintaining social harmony, which generates cultures (Bornstein, Cote, Haynes, Suwalsky, strong adherence to group norms and making & Bakeman, 2012). Moreover, the amount of sacrifices for the good of the group (Hofstede, sensitive, responsive caregiving tends to be 1984). Individualistic cultures place greater im- fairly similar across most (but not all) cultures, portance on the independence and autonomy of despite the fact it is expressed somewhat dif- each person in the group, which results in greater ferently (e.g., Kartner, Keller, & Yovsi, 2010). freedom to make decisions based on one’s per- When deviations from common base rates in sonal goals and preferences. Thus, people who attachment patterns are found, they can usually have an avoidant orientation in a collectivistic be explained by the unique parenting practices culture should find themselves in a difficult po- enacted within a specific culture. sition because their personal orientation (to be In cultures in which there tend to be fewer independent) should be at odds with the norms stressors and more resources, relatively more of their culture (to be interdependent). In a study children should be securely attached because comparing people in three cultures, Friedman they are more inclined to receive sensitive, re- and colleagues (2010) found that people who sponsive caregiving from their caregivers (Bel- are avoidantly attached to their romantic part- sky, Steinberg, & Draper, 1991). Conversely, ners experienced greater conflict, perceived less in cultures in which there is greater stress and support and investment from their partners, and fewer resources, relatively more children should had poorer relationship satisfaction if they lived be insecurely attached because they are more in Hong Kong (a collectivistic culture) than in likely to receive poorer caregiving. Indeed, the United States (an individualistic culture). In cross-cultural research on socioeconomically Mexico, which is an autonomous-relatedness disadvantaged groups confirms that insecure culture between Hong Kong and the United attachment patterns are significantly more States, avoidance was more strongly associated common among such groups (Mesman et al., with lower relationship satisfaction, less per- 2016). This is another instance of the potential ceived partner support, and greater relationship “adaptive value” of insecure working models conflict than in the United States.

VanLange_Book.indb 235 6/30/2020 11:17:34 AM 236 I. Principles in Theory

Several pressing cross-cultural questions re- cal study of the Strange Situation. Hillsdale, NJ: main unanswered. For instance, how are basic Erlbaum. attachment processes, such as the ways in Archer, J. (1999). The nature of grief: The evolution which attachment bonds form, are maintained, and psychology of reactions to loss. New York: Routledge. and dissolve, expressed in different cultures? Aviezer, O., Sagi, A., & van IJzendoorn, M. H. What kinds of interpersonal experiences pro- (2002). Collective sleeping for kibbutz children: duce stability or change in people’s attachment An experiment in nature predestined to fail. Fam- orientations across the lifespan in different ily Process, 41, 435–454. cultures? And how do important, culturally Belsky, J., Steinberg, L., & Draper, P. (1991). Child- specific norms and practices shape or alter the hood experience, interpersonal development, and normative attachment processes discussed in reproductive strategy: An evolutionary theory of the chapter? socialization. Child Development, 62, 647–670. Berant, E., Mikulincer, M., & Florian, V. (2001). Attachment style and mental health: A 1-year Conclusion follow-up study of mothers of infants with con- genital heart disease. Personality and Social Psy- chology Bulletin, 27, 956–968. In this chapter, we have reviewed the major key Birnbaum, G. E. (2016). Attachment and sexual mat- principles that have defined attachment theory ing: The joint operation of separate motivational and guided prior research. While doing so, we systems. In J. Cassidy & P. R. Shaver (Eds.), have highlighted some of the most central hy- Handbook of attachment: Theory, research, and potheses, postulates, and ideas associated with clinical applications (3rd ed., pp. 464–483). New each key principle. Additionally, we have pro- York: Guilford Press. posed several novel and potentially fruitful Bonanno, G. (2004). Loss, trauma, and human re- directions in which future work on attachment silience: Have we underestimated the human ca- processes might head. Our hope is that cover- pacity to thrive after extremely aversive events? age of these essential features of attachment American Psychologist, 59, 20–28. Bornstein, M. H., Cote, L. R., Haynes, O. M., Suwal- theory will help to spawn the next generation of sky, J. T. D., & Bakeman, R. (2012). Modalities of research applying one of psychology’s grandest infant–mother interaction in Japanese, Japanese and most powerful lifespan approaches to per- American immigrant, and European American sonality and social development from the cradle dyads. Child Development, 83, 2073–2088. to the grave. Bowlby, J. (1944). Forty-four juvenile thieves: Their characters and home life. International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 25, 19–52, 107–127. NOTE Bowlby, J. (1956). The growth of the independence in the young child. Royal Society of Health Jour- 1. We thank Ximena Arriaga, Mary Dozier, Judy nal, 76, 587–591. Feeney, Chris Fraley, Omri Gillath, Sue John- Bowlby, J. (1973). Attachment and loss: Vol. 2. Sepa- son, Gery Karantzas, Geoff MacDonald, Mario ration: Anxiety and anger. New York: Basic Books. Mikulincer, Nikola Overall, Paula Pietromonaco, Bowlby, J. (1979). The making and breaking of af- Glenn Roisman, and Alan Sroufe for their com- fectional bonds. London: Tavistock. ments on key principles underlying attachment Bowlby, J. (1980). Attachment and loss: Vol. 3. Loss: theory. Their expert insights and general consen- Sadness and depression. New York: Basic Books. sus played an important role in the development of Bowlby, J. (1982). Attachment and loss: Vol. 1. At- this chapter. tachment (2nd ed.). New York: Basic Books. (Original work published 1969) Bowlby, J. (1988). A secure base: Clinical applica- REFERENCES tions of attachment theory. London: Routledge. Bretherton, I., & Munholland, K. A. (2016). The Ainsworth, M. D. S. (1967). Infancy in Uganda: internal working model construct in light of con- Infant care and the growth of attachment. Balti- temporary neuroimaging research. In J. Cassidy more: Johns Hopkins University Press. & P. R. Shaver (Eds.), Handbook of attachment: Ainsworth, M. D. S., Blehar, M., Waters, E., & Wall, Theory, research, and clinical applications (3rd S. (1978). Patterns of attachment: A psychologi- ed., pp. 63–88). New York: Guilford Press.

VanLange_Book.indb 236 6/30/2020 11:17:35 AM  12. Major Principles of Attachment Theory 237

Cassidy, J. (2016). The nature of the child’s ties. In Shaver (Eds.), Mechanisms of social connection: J. Cassidy & P. R. Shaver (Eds.), Handbook of at- From brain to group (pp. 291–314). Washington, tachment: Theory, research, and clinical appli- DC: American Psychological Association. cations (3rd ed., pp. 3–24). New York: Guilford Feeney, B. C., & Thrush, R. L. (2010). Relationship Press. influences on exploration in adulthood: The char- Cassidy, J., & Shaver, P. R. (Eds.). (2016). Handbook acteristics and function of a secure base. Journal of attachment: Theory, research, and clinical ap- of Personality and Social Psychology, 98, 57–76. plications (3rd ed.). New York: Guilford Press. Feeney, B. C., & Woodhouse, S. S. (2016). Caregiv- Chopik, W. J., Moors, A. C., & Edelstein, R. S. ing. In J. Cassidy & P. R. Shaver (Eds.), Handbook (2014). Maternal nurturance predicts decreases of attachment: Theory, research, and clinical ap- in attachment avoidance in emerging adulthood. plications (3rd ed., pp. 827–851). New York: Guil- Journal of Research in Personality, 53, 47–53. ford Press. Collins, N. L., & Feeney, B. C. (2000). A safe haven: Fillo, J., Simpson, J. A., Rholes, W. S., & Kohn, J. An attachment theory perspective on support L. (2015). Dads doing diapers: Individual and seeking and caregiving in intimate relationships. relational outcomes associated with the division Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, of childcare across the transition to parenthood. 1053–1073. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Collins, N. L., & Feeney, B. C. (2004). Working 108, 298–316. models of attachment shape perceptions of social Fletcher, G. J. O., Simpson, J. A., Campbell, L., & support: Evidence from experimental and obser- Overall, N. C. (2015). Pair-bonding, romantic vational studies. Journal of Personality and So- love, and evolution: The curious case of Homo cial Psychology, 87, 363–383. sapiens. Perspectives on Psychological Science, Collins, N. L., Guichard, A. C., Ford, M. B., & Fee- 10, 20–36. ney, B. C. (2004). Working models of attachment: Fraley, R. C. (2007). A connectionist approach to the New developments and emerging themes. In W. organization and continuity of working models of S. Rholes & J. A. Simpson (Eds.), Adult attach- attachment. Journal of Personality, 75, 1157–1180. ment: Theory, research and clinical implications Fraley, R. C., Roisman, G. I., Booth-LaForce, C., (pp. 196–239). New York: Guilford Press. Owen, M. T., & Holland, A. S. (2013). Interper- Conradi, H. J., Kamphuis, J. H., & de Jonge, P. sonal and genetic origins of adult attachment (2018). Adult attachment predicts the seven-year styles: A longitudinal study from infancy to early course of recurrent depression in primary care. adulthood. Journal of Personality and Social Psy- Journal of Affective Disorders, 225, 160–166. chology, 104, 817–838. Darwin, C. (1859). The origin of species by means of Fraley, R. C., & Shaver, P. R. (1998). Airport sepa- natural selection: Or, the preservation of favored rations: A naturalistic study of adult attachment races in the struggle for life. London: John Mur- dynamics in separating couples. Journal of Per- ray. sonality and Social Psychology, 75, 1198–1212. Darwin, C. (1872). The expression of the emotions in Fraley, R. C., & Shaver, P. R. (2016). Attachment, man and animals. London: John Murray. loss, and grief: Bowlby’s views, new develop- Davila, J., Burge, D., & Hammen, C. (1997). Why ments, and current controversies. In J. Cassidy does attachment style change? Journal of Person- & P. R. Shaver (Eds.), Handbook of attachment: ality and Social Psychology, 73, 826–838. Theory, research, and clinical applications (3rd De Wolff, M., & van IJzendoorn, M. H. (1997). ed., pp. 40–62). New York: Guilford Press. Sensitivity and attachment: A meta-analysis on Fraley, R. C., Vicray, A. M., Brumbaugh, C. C., & parental antecedents of infant attachment. Child Roisman, G. I. (2011). Patterns of stability in adult Development, 68, 571–591. attachment: An empirical test of two models of Ein-Dor, T., & Doron, G. (2016). Extending the continuity and change. Journal of Personality and transdiagnostic model of attachment and psycho- Social Psychology, 101, 974–992. pathology. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1–6. Fredrickson, B. L. (2001). The role of positive emo- Fearon, R. M. P., & Belsky, J. (2016). Precursors tions in positive psychology: The broaden-and- of attachment security. In J. Cassidy & P. R. build theory of positive emotions. American Psy- Shaver (Eds.), Handbook of attachment: Theo- chologist, 56, 218–226. ry, research, and clinical applications (3rd ed., Friedman, M., Rholes, W. S., Simpson, J. A., Bond, pp. 291–313). New York: Guilford Press. M. H., Diaz-Loving, R., & Chan, C. (2010). At- Feeney, B. C., & Collins, N. L. (2014). A theoreti- tachment avoidance and the cultural fit hypoth- cal perspective on the importance of social con- esis: A cross-cultural investigation. Personal Re- nections for thriving. In M. Mikulincer & P. R. lationships, 17, 107–126.

VanLange_Book.indb 237 6/30/2020 11:17:35 AM 238 I. Principles in Theory

Gini, M., Oppenheim, D., & Sagi-Schwartz, A. methodologies, and the concept of conditional (2007). Negotiation styles in mother–child nar- strategies. Human Development, 33, 48–61. rative co-constructions in middle childhood: As- Main, M., & Hesse, E. (1990). Parents’ unresolved sociations with early attachment. International traumatic experiences are related to infant disor- Journal of Behavioral Development, 31, 149–160. ganized attachment status: Is frightened and/or Grossmann, K., Grossmann, K. E., Spangler, G., frightening parental behavior the linking mecha- Suess, G., & Unzner, L. (1985). Maternal sen- nism? In M. T. Greenberg, D. Cicchetti, & E. M. sitivity and newborns’ orientation responses as Cummings (Eds.), Attachment in the preschool related to quality of attachment in northern Ger- years: Theory, research, and intervention (Vol. many. Monographs of the Society for Research 1, pp. 161–182). Chicago: University of Chicago in Child Development, 50(1–2, Serial No. 209), Press. 233–257. Marganska, A., Gallagher, M., & Miranda, R. (2013). Hofstede, G. (1984). Culture’s consequences: Inter- Adult attachment, emotion dysregulation, and national differences in work-related values. New- symptoms of depression and generalized anxiety bury Park, CA: SAGE. disorder. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, Jones, J. D., Fraley, R. C., Ehrlich, K. B., Stern, J. A., 83, 131–141. Lejuez, D. W., Shaver, P. R., & Cassidy, J. (2018). Marvin, R. S., Britner, P. A., & Russell, B. S. Stability of attachment style in adolescence: An (2016). Normative development: The ontogeny empirical test of alternative developmental pro- of attachment in childhood. In J. Cassidy & P. cesses. Child Development, 89, 871–880. R. Shaver (Eds.), Handbook of attachment: The- Kartner, J., Keller, H., & Yovsi, R. D. (2010). Moth- ory, research, and clinical applications (3rd ed., er–infant interaction during the first 3 months: pp. 273–290). New York: Guilford Press. The emergence of culture-specific contingency Mesman, J., van IJzendoorn, M. H., & Sagi- patterns. Child Development, 81, 540–554. Schwartz, A. (2016). Cross-cultural patterns of Kirkpatrick, L. A., & Davis, K. E. (1994). Attach- attachment. In J. Cassidy & P. R. Shaver (Eds.), ment style, gender, and relationship stability: A Handbook of attachment: Theory, research, and longitudinal analysis. Journal of Personality and clinical applications (3rd ed., pp. 852–877). New Social Psychology, 66, 502–512. York: Guilford Press. Kunce, L. J., & Shaver, P. R. (1994). An attachment- Mikulincer, M., Gillath, O., & Shaver, P. R. (2002). theoretical approach to caregiving in romantic Activation of the attachment system in adulthood: relationships. In K. Bartholomew & D. Perlman Threat-related primes increase the accessibility (Eds.), Advances in personal relationships (Vol. of mental representations of attachment figures. 5, pp. 205–237). London: Jessica Kingsley. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, Kwon, H., Lee, J. S., & Kwon, J. H. (2017). Interper- 881–895. sonal mediating mechanism underlying insecure Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2003). The attach- attachment and depression in people with major ment behavioral system in adulthood: Activation, depressive disorder. Journal of Social and Clini- psychodynamics, and interpersonal processes. In cal Psychology, 36, 64–86. M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental so- Liotti, G. (1992). Disorganized/disoriented attach- cial psychology (Vol. 35, pp. 53–152). New York: ment in the etiology of the dissociative disorders. Academic Press. Dissociation: Progress in the Dissociative Disor- Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2016). Attachment ders, 5, 196–204. in adulthood (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Press. Lord, C., Ross, L., & Lepper, M. (1979). Biased as- Paetzold, R. L., Rholes, W. S., & Andrus, J. L. similation and attitude polarization: The effect (2017). A Bayesian analysis of the link between of prior theories on subsequently considered evi- disorganized attachment and dissociative symp- dence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychol- toms. Personality and Individual Differences, ogy, 37, 2098–2109. 107, 17–22. Lyons-Ruth, K., & Jacobvitz, D. (2016). Attach- Paetzold, R. L., Rholes, W. S., & Kohn, J. L. (2015). ment disorganization from infancy to adulthood: Disorganized attachment in adulthood: Theory, Neurobiological correlates, parenting contexts, measurement, and implications for romantic re- and pathways to disorder. In J. Cassidy & P. R. lationships. Review of General Psychology, 19, Shaver (Eds.), Handbook of attachment: Theo- 146–156. ry, research, and clinical applications (3rd ed., Parkes, C. M. (2006). Love and loss: The roots of pp. 667–695). New York: Guilford Press. grief and its complications. New York: Taylor & Main, M. (1990). Cross-cultural studies of attach- Francis. ment organization: Recent studies, changing Rosenblatt, P. C. (2008). Grief across cultures: A re-

VanLange_Book.indb 238 6/30/2020 11:17:35 AM  12. Major Principles of Attachment Theory 239

view and research agenda. In M. S. Stroebe, R. O. Sroufe, L. A., Egeland, B., Carlson, E., & Collins, Hansson, H. Schut, & W. Stroebe (Eds.), Hand- W. A. (2005). The development of the person: book of bereavement research and practice: Ad- The Minnesota Study of Risk and Adaptation vances in theory and intervention (pp. 207–222). from Birth to Adulthood. New York: Guilford Washington, DC: American Psychological Asso- Press. ciation. Sroufe, L. A., & Waters, E. (1977). Attachment as an Rothbaum, F., Weisz, J., Pott, M., Miyake, K., & organizational construct. Child Development, 48, Morelli, G. (2000). Attachment and culture: Se- 1184–1199. curity in the United States and Japan. American Stern, J. A., Fraley, R. C., Jones, J. D., Gross, J. T., Psychologist, 55, 1093–1104. Shaver, P. R., & Cassidy, J. (2018). Developmental Sbarra, D. A., & Coan, J. A. (2017). Divorce and processes across the first two years of parenthood: health: Good data in need of better theory. Cur- Stability and change in adult attachment style. rent Opinion in Psychology, 13, 91–95. Developmental Psychology, 54, 975–988. Shaver, P. R., Schachner, D. A., & Mikulincer, M. Szepsenwol, O., & Simpson, J. A. (2019). Attach- (2005). Attachment style, excessive reassurance ment within life history theory: An evolution- seeking, relationship processes, and depression. ary perspective of individual differences in at- Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, tachment. Current Opinion in Psychology, 25, 343–359. 65–70. Simpson, J. A., & Belsky, J. (2016). Attachment van IJzendoorn, M. H. (1990). Developments in theory within a modern evolutionary framework. cross-cultural research on attachment: Some In J. Cassidy & P. R. Shaver (Eds.), Handbook of methodological notes. Human Development, 33, attachment: Theory, research, and clinical appli- 3–9. cations (3rd ed., pp. 91–116). New York: Guilford van IJzendoorn, M. H., & Sagi-Schwartz, A. (2008). Press. Cross-cultural patterns of attachment: Universal Simpson, J. A., & Rholes, W. S. (2012). Adult attach- and contextual dimensions. In J. Cassidy & P. R. ment orientations, stress, and romantic relation- Shaver (Eds.), Handbook of attachment: Theory, ships. In P. Devine & A. Plant (Eds.), Advances in research, and clinical applications (2nd ed., experimental social psychology (Vol. 45, pp. 279– pp. 880–905). New York: Guilford Press. 328). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Waters, E., & Cummings, E. M. (2000). A secure Simpson, J. A., Rholes, W. S., Campbell, L., & Wil- base from which to explore close relationships. son, C. L. (2003). Changes in attachment orienta- Child Development, 71, 164–172. tions across the transition to parenthood. Journal Zeifman, D. M., & Hazan, C. (2016). Pair bonds of Experimental Social Psychology, 39, 317–331. as attachments: Mounting evidence in support Sroufe, L. A. (2016). The place of attachment in de- of Bowlby’s hypothesis. In J. Cassidy & P. R. velopment. In J. Cassidy & P. R. Shaver (Eds.), Shaver (Eds.), Handbook of attachment: Theo- Handbook of attachment: Theory, research, and ry, research, and clinical applications (3rd ed., clinical applications (3rd ed., pp. 997–1011). New pp. 416–434). New York: Guilford Press. York: Guilford Press.

VanLange_Book.indb 239 6/30/2020 11:17:35 AM