Attachment in adults

In psychology, attachment theory extends to adult relationships, encompassing friendships, emotional affairs, and romantic or sexual partnerships. Furthermore, the theory may also encompass relationships with inanimate objects, often termed "transitional objects." While initially developed in the 1960s and 1970s to explain child-parent dynamics, attachment theory was subsequently expanded in the late 1980s to include adult relationships. Bowlby's concept of internal working models, developed from childhood experiences, establishes interactional patterns that are posited to persist and influence adult relational dynamics.

Researchers have investigated the structural organization and temporal stability of the mental working models that form the basis of these attachment styles. Additionally, studies have examined the influence of attachment styles on relationship outcomes and their operational role within relational dynamics.

Development of Attachment Theory in Adulthood

The contemporary framework of attachment theory was established by Mary Ainsworth and John Bowlby, based on their research into child-caregiver interactions. For an extended period, the theory's primary focus remained on the dynamics between children and their caregivers. During the 1980s, Sue Johnson initiated the application of attachment theory within adult therapeutic contexts. Concurrently, Cindy Hazan and Phillip Shaver advanced research by analyzing adult relationships. Hazan and Shaver observed notable parallels between adult interactions and those between children and caregivers. For instance, both romantic and platonic partners exhibit a desire for proximity, mirroring the child's need for closeness to their caregiver. Adults experience comfort in the presence of their attachment figures, yet report heightened anxiety or loneliness in their absence. Romantic relationships, for example, function as a secure base, enabling individuals to navigate life's uncertainties, opportunities, and challenges. These observed commonalities prompted Hazan and Shaver to broaden the scope of attachment theory to encompass adult relationships.

Nevertheless, adult relationships also exhibit distinctions from child-caregiver dynamics. While not identical, the fundamental tenets of attachment theory remain applicable to both child-caregiver and adult relational contexts.

Researchers often articulate the core principles of attachment theory through the lens of their specific theoretical perspectives. Consequently, their formulations may appear superficially divergent. For instance, Fraley and Shaver delineate the "central propositions" of adult attachment as follows:

• The emotional and behavioral dynamics observed in infant-caregiver bonds and adult relationships are regulated by a common biological system.
• Individual differences evident in infant-caregiver relationships parallel those observed across diverse close adult relationships.
• Variations in adult attachment behaviors stem from individuals' expectations and beliefs about themselves and their close relationships, which are shaped by their attachment histories; these "working models" exhibit relative stability and may thus reflect early caregiving experiences.
• Romantic love, in its conventional understanding, encompasses the intricate interplay of attachment, caregiving, and sexual components.

In contrast, Rholes and Simpson enumerate five "core propositions" of attachment theory as follows:

• While biological factors provide the fundamental impetus for forming attachment relationships, the specific bonds children develop with their caregivers are profoundly influenced by interpersonal experiences.
• Prior relational experiences generate internal working models and attachment styles that systematically influence subsequent attachment relationships.
• The attachment orientations of adult caregivers exert an influence on the attachment bonds their children form with them.
• Internal working models and attachment orientations demonstrate relative stability across time, yet they are not immutable.
• Certain manifestations of psychological maladjustment and clinical disorders are partially attributable to the impact of insecure working models and attachment styles.

Although these two sets of propositions distinctly reflect the theoretical orientations of their respective proponents, a detailed examination uncovers several common themes. These shared themes assert that:

• Individuals possess a biological predisposition to form attachments with others, but the developmental process of these attachments is shaped by learning experiences.
• Individuals develop distinct attachment patterns based on their expectations and beliefs concerning relationships. These expectations and beliefs form internal "working models" that subsequently guide their relational behaviors.
• Although susceptible to experiential influences, these internal "working models" exhibit considerable stability.
• Variations in individual attachment styles can exert either beneficial or detrimental effects on mental health and the caliber of interpersonal relationships.

While these thematic elements may be articulated in diverse ways, and additional themes could be incorporated, the fundamental insight of attachment theory remains that its core principles apply consistently to close relationships across the entire lifespan. Specifically, the principles governing adult relationships are considered identical to those observed between children and their caregivers. Nevertheless, some researchers have critiqued adult attachment theory, asserting that it merely presumes the enduring influence of childhood attachment principles into adulthood.

Attachment Styles

Adults typically exhibit four distinct attachment styles:

• Secure
• Anxious-Preoccupied
• Dismissive-Avoidant
• Fearful-Avoidant

These adult attachment styles correspond respectively to the secure, anxious-ambivalent, anxious-avoidant, and disorganized attachment styles observed in children. The subsequent descriptions of adult attachment styles are derived from the relationship questionnaire developed by Bartholomew and Horowitz, alongside a review of research conducted by Pietromonaco and Barrett. Both the style and quality of attachment relationships demonstrate a direct correlation with adult life satisfaction. Furthermore, the average duration of a relationship can be associated with the attachment styles of the individuals involved.

Numerous professionals, including Sue Johnson, have developed various therapeutic interventions for adults and couples, drawing upon principles from Ainsworth and Bowlby's attachment theory. These treatments encompass traditional psychotherapy, cognitive psychotherapy, and emotionally focused couples therapy.

Secure Attachment

Individuals exhibiting a secure attachment style typically maintain a positive self-perception and a favorable view of others.

Adults with a secure attachment orientation commonly endorse the subsequent statements:

• "Achieving emotional closeness with others is relatively straightforward for me."
• "I am comfortable both relying on others and being relied upon by them."
• "I do not experience anxiety about solitude or the potential for social rejection."

This attachment pattern typically originates from a history of warm and responsive interactions within their relationships. Securely attached adults generally hold positive perceptions of themselves, their relational partners, and their relationships overall. Research indicates that a secure attachment style facilitates a seamless transition from adolescence into emerging adulthood. These individuals frequently report higher levels of satisfaction and better adjustment in their relationships compared to adults with alternative attachment styles, demonstrating comfort with both intimacy and independence.

Secure attachment and adaptive psychological functioning are fostered by caregivers who are emotionally available, appropriately responsive to their child's attachment behaviors, and adept at regulating both their own positive and negative emotions.

Anxious-Preoccupied Attachment

Individuals exhibiting an anxious-preoccupied attachment style typically hold a negative self-perception while maintaining a positive view of others.

Adults characterized by an anxious-preoccupied attachment orientation commonly endorse the subsequent statements:

• "While I desire complete emotional intimacy with others, I frequently observe a reluctance in others to achieve the level of closeness I seek."
• "I experience discomfort when lacking close relationships, yet I occasionally fear that others do not value me as highly as I value them."

Adults exhibiting this attachment style frequently pursue substantial intimacy, affirmation, and responsiveness from their attachment figures. Their valuation of intimacy can sometimes lead to excessive dependence on these figures. Relative to securely attached individuals, those with anxious-preoccupied attachments typically possess a less positive self-perception. They may experience anxiety that only dissipates upon interaction with the attachment figure. Such individuals often question their personal value and attribute the attachment figure's unresponsiveness to their own shortcomings. Furthermore, adults with an anxious-preoccupied attachment style may demonstrate elevated emotional expressiveness, dysregulation, apprehension, and impulsivity within their relational dynamics.

Dismissive-Avoidant Attachment

The dismissive-avoidant attachment style characterizes individuals who maintain a positive self-perception while holding a negative view of others.

Individuals exhibiting a dismissive-avoidant attachment pattern often concur with the following assertions:

• "I am comfortable without close emotional relationships."
• "It is important to me to feel independent and self-sufficient."
• "I prefer not to depend on others or have others depend on me."

Individuals with this attachment style typically prioritize a high degree of independence. This pursuit of independence frequently manifests as an effort to circumvent attachment entirely. They perceive themselves as self-sufficient and impervious to the emotions linked with intimate connections. A common characteristic is the denial of any need for close relationships, with some even deeming such connections relatively insignificant. They pursue less intimacy with attachment figures, whom they often regard less favorably than themselves. Researchers frequently observe the defensive nature inherent in this attachment style. Adults demonstrating a dismissive-avoidant attachment pattern typically suppress and conceal their emotions, responding to rejection by creating distance from its origins, such as their attachment figures or relationships. Despite their tendency to suppress feelings and appear emotionally unaffected, studies suggest that these individuals can still exhibit robust physiological responses to emotionally charged circumstances and stimuli.

Fearful-Avoidant Attachment

Fearful-avoidant attachment behaviors are characteristic of individuals who hold an inconsistent or variable perception of both themselves and others.

Individuals who have experienced significant losses or other traumas, including childhood and adolescent abuse, may develop this attachment pattern and frequently endorse the subsequent statements:

• "I am somewhat uncomfortable getting close to others."
• "I want emotionally close relationships, but I find it difficult to completely trust others, or to depend on them."
• "I sometimes worry that I will be hurt if I allow myself to become too close to other people."

These individuals typically experience discomfort with emotional intimacy. Such sentiments are often coupled with implicit, negative self-perceptions and views regarding their attachment figures. They commonly perceive themselves as undeserving of responsiveness from their attachments and frequently distrust the motives of those attachments. Analogous to the dismissive-avoidant style, adults with a fearful-avoidant attachment pattern pursue less intimacy from attachment figures and frequently suppress or deny their emotions. Consequently, their comfort level in expressing affection is significantly reduced.

Research indicates that individuals exhibiting an insecure attachment style may face an increased susceptibility to mental health conditions, including depression and anxiety disorders, alongside difficulties in forming healthy adult attachments. Furthermore, another investigation has demonstrated a correlation between an individual's attachment style and their adult self-esteem.

Assessing and Measuring Adult Attachment

Two primary dimensions of adult attachment have been subjects of extensive research. Social psychologists, particularly those investigating romantic attachment, examine the structure and consistency of the mental working models that underpin various attachment styles. Conversely, developmental psychologists, focusing on an individual's attachment-related state of mind, typically investigate how attachment influences relationship dynamics and ultimately affects relational outcomes. The organizational structure of these mental working models tends to exhibit greater stability, whereas an individual's attachment-related state of mind is more prone to fluctuation. Some scholars propose that adults do not maintain a singular set of working models. Rather, they possess a foundational layer of general rules and assumptions concerning attachment relationships. Concurrently, at a distinct level, they retain specific information pertaining to particular relationships or relational occurrences. Information across these different hierarchical levels is not necessarily congruent. Consequently, individuals may develop and maintain distinct internal working models for various relationships.

A diverse array of instruments exists for measuring adult attachment, with self-report questionnaires and coded interviews derived from the Adult Attachment Interview being the most frequently employed. These diverse measures were primarily conceived as research instruments, each designed for specific objectives and addressing distinct relational domains, such as romantic, platonic, parental, or peer relationships. Certain measures categorize an adult's attachment-related state of mind and patterns by referencing early childhood experiences, while others evaluate relational behaviors and perceived security within parental and peer contexts.

Working Models

Bowlby posited that children acquire knowledge through their interactions with primary caregivers. Across numerous interactions, children develop expectations regarding the availability and responsiveness of these caregivers. These expectations, in turn, reflect children's perceptions of both themselves and their caregivers, as follows:

Confidence that an attachment figure is, apart from being accessible, likely to be responsive can be seen to turn on at least two variables: (a) whether or not the attachment figure is judged to be the sort of person who generally responds to calls for support and protection; (b) whether or not the self is judged to be the sort of person towards whom anyone, and the attachment figure, in particular, is likely to respond in a helpful way. Logically, these variables are independent. In practice, they are apt to be confounded. As a result, the model of the attachment figure and the model of the self are likely to develop to be complementary and mutually confirming. (Bowlby, 1973, p. 238)

Children's perceptions of their caregivers, combined with their self-perceptions regarding their deservingness of adequate care, collectively constitute working models of attachment. These working models serve to guide behavior by enabling children to foresee and prepare for caregiver reactions. Bowlby hypothesized that, once established, working models tend to exhibit considerable stability. Typically, children assimilate new experiences through the lens of their existing working models, rather than altering these models to accommodate novel information. Nevertheless, in instances where experiences are irreconcilable with their current working models, children may subsequently revise these models.

When Hazen and Shaver expanded attachment theory to encompass adult romantic relationships, they incorporated the concept of working models. Investigations into adult working models have primarily addressed two key questions. Firstly, how are the cognitive elements that constitute working models structured within the mind? Secondly, what degree of temporal stability do these working models exhibit? These inquiries are explored in subsequent discussions.

Organization of Working Models

Bartholomew and Horowitz posited that working models comprise two distinct components. One component pertains to self-perceptions, while the other relates to perceptions of others. They additionally suggested that an individual's self-perceptions are typically either predominantly positive or predominantly negative. A similar dichotomy applies to an individual's perceptions of others. To empirically evaluate these propositions, Bartholomew and Horowitz investigated the interrelationships among attachment styles, self-esteem, and sociability. The observed relationships are illustrated in the accompanying diagram.

Individuals exhibiting secure and dismissive attachment styles generally demonstrate higher self-esteem compared to those with anxious and fearful attachment styles. This observation aligns with the differentiation between positive and negative self-perceptions within working models. Furthermore, secure and anxious attachment styles are linked to greater sociability than dismissive or fearful styles, which corresponds to the distinction between positive and negative perceptions of others in working models. These findings collectively suggest that working models comprise two distinct domains—self-perception and perception of others—each capable of being characterized as broadly positive or negative.

Baldwin and collaborators have integrated the theory of relational schemas into the framework of attachment working models. Relational schemas encapsulate data regarding the consistent interaction patterns among attachment figures. Consequently, for every recurring interaction pattern between partners, a specific relational schema is formulated, comprising the subsequent elements:

• Data pertaining to the self.
• Information concerning the attachment figure.
• Details regarding the typical progression of the interaction.

For instance, if an individual consistently requests physical affection from a partner, and the partner consistently reciprocates, the individual develops a relational schema that encapsulates this predictable interaction. This schema incorporates self-referential information (e.g., "I require substantial physical affection"), partner-specific information (e.g., "My partner is an affectionate individual"), and details regarding the typical progression of the interaction. This composite information is articulable as an if-then statement (e.g., "If I ask my partner for a hug or kiss, then my partner will respond with a hug or kiss and comfort me"). Relational schemas thus facilitate behavioral guidance in relationships by enabling individuals to foresee and strategize for partner responses.

Baldwin and collaborators have postulated that attachment working models are constituted by relational schemas. The inclusion of self and other information within relational schemas aligns with prior conceptualizations of working models. However, the distinctive contribution of relational schemas to working models lies in their representation of the typical unfolding of interactions with attachment figures. Specifically, relational schemas integrate conditional if-then statements about interactions into working models. To empirically illustrate the organization of working models as relational schemas, Baldwin and colleagues developed a series of written scenarios depicting interactions concerning trust, dependency, and closeness. For instance, scenarios related to closeness encompassed:

• You desire to allocate more time with your attachment figure.
• You initiate physical affection with your partner.
• You articulate profound emotional sentiments to your attachment figure.

Subsequent to each scenario, participants were offered two potential responses from their attachment figures: 'acceptance' or 'rejection'. Participants were then instructed to evaluate the probability of each response on a seven-point Likert scale. The ratings of anticipated attachment responses correlated with participants' established attachment styles. Adults exhibiting secure attachment styles demonstrated a higher propensity to anticipate accepting responses from their attachment figures. For instance, their relational schema for the third closeness scenario would be, "If I tell my partner how deeply I feel for them, then my partner will accept me." Conversely, adults with other attachment styles exhibited a lower propensity to anticipate accepting responses. Their relational schema for the third closeness scenario would be, "If I tell my partner how deeply I feel for them, then my attachment will reject me." These divergences in attachment styles thus indicated differences in underlying relational schemas. Consequently, relational schemas offer a framework for comprehending the organization of attachment working models, a finding corroborated by subsequent research.

The relational schemas integral to working models are presumably structured hierarchically. As posited by Baldwin:

A generalized working model of relationships might suggest that others are only partially and unpredictably responsive to an individual's needs. This expectation, however, diversifies when applied to distinct relational roles, such as those of a customer or a romantic partner. Within romantic relationships, these expectations can vary significantly, contingent upon the specific attachment, the particular situation, or the precise needs being communicated. (Baldwin, 1992, p. 429).

The hierarchical structure's highest stratum encompasses highly generalized relational schemas, universally applicable to all relationships. The intermediate level features relational schemas tailored to particular relationship categories. Conversely, the lowest tier contains relationship schemas specific to individual relationships.

The hierarchical structuring of working models has been advanced by multiple theorists. Pietromonaco and Barrett, for instance, state:

From this perspective, individuals do not maintain a singular set of working models for the self and others; instead, they possess a family of models. These models incorporate, at higher levels, abstract rules or assumptions concerning attachment relationships, and at lower levels, specific information about individual relationships and events within them. This conceptualization further implies that working models are not monolithic entities but rather multifaceted representations, where information at one level does not necessarily need to be consistent with information at another. (Pietromonaco & Barrett, 2000, page 159).

Each hierarchical framework for working models encompasses both generalized working models, positioned at higher levels, and relationship-specific working models, situated at lower levels. Empirical studies have corroborated the existence of both these categories of working models. Individuals are capable of reporting a general attachment style, and the majority of their relationships typically align with this overarching style, thereby indicating a generalized working model applicable across numerous relational contexts. However, individuals also report distinct attachment styles when referring to friends, parents, and romantic partners. These relationship-specific attachment styles signify corresponding relationship-specific working models. Further evidence supporting the hierarchical organization of generalized and relationship-specific working models is provided by a study conducted by Overall, Fletcher, and Friesen.

In summary, the mental working models that form the basis of attachment styles appear to integrate information about the self and others, organized into relational schemas. These relational schemas are themselves structured within a three-tier hierarchy. The highest tier comprises relational schemas for a generalized working model, applicable to all relationships. The middle tier encompasses relational schemas for working models relevant to different categories of relationships (e.g., friends, parents, romantic partners). The lowest tier, conversely, contains relational schemas for working models specific to individual relationships.

Stability of Working Models

Researchers investigate the stability of working models by analyzing the consistency of attachment styles. Given that attachment styles reflect the cognitive patterns and expectations constituting working models, any alterations in attachment styles consequently indicate changes in the underlying working models.

Approximately 70–80% of individuals demonstrate no significant alterations in their attachment styles over time. This observation, indicating stability for a majority, suggests that working models are relatively consistent. However, roughly 20–30% of individuals do experience shifts in attachment styles, which can manifest over periods as short as weeks or months. The incidence of these changes, combined with the relatively brief durations over which they occur, implies that working models are not immutable personality traits.

The reasons underlying changes in attachment styles remain an area of limited understanding. Waters, Weinfield, and Hamilton hypothesize that negative life experiences frequently precipitate alterations in attachment styles. This proposition is corroborated by findings indicating that individuals who encounter adverse life events are prone to experiencing shifts in their attachment patterns. Davila, Karney, and Bradbury have delineated four categories of factors potentially influencing changes in attachment styles: (a) situational events and circumstances, (b) modifications in relational schemas, (c) personality variables, and (d) combinations of personality variables and situational events. They undertook research to ascertain which factor category most effectively elucidated changes in attachment styles. The investigation revealed that all four categories of factors contribute to these changes. Consequently, alterations in attachment styles are intricate and contingent upon a confluence of elements.

Relational Outcomes

Adult relationships exhibit diverse outcomes. Individuals within certain relationships report higher levels of satisfaction compared to those in others, which raises the inquiry into whether attachment patterns influence both the satisfaction and duration of relationships.

Satisfaction

Numerous investigations have established a correlation between attachment styles and relationship satisfaction. Adults possessing a secure attachment style typically report enhanced satisfaction with their relationships. Conversely, adults with insecure (anxious or avoidant) attachment styles are often associated with diminished satisfaction and reduced commitment within their relationships.

Although the link between attachment styles and marital satisfaction has been robustly demonstrated, the specific mechanisms by which attachment styles influence marital satisfaction are not yet fully elucidated. Communication represents a potential mediating mechanism. Secure attachment styles can foster more constructive communicative patterns and deeper self-disclosure, thereby augmenting relational satisfaction. Additional mechanisms through which attachment styles might impact relational satisfaction encompass emotional expressiveness, strategies for coping with conflict, and perceived support from partners. Subsequent research is requisite to comprehensively delineate how attachment styles influence relationship satisfaction.

Duration

Research indicates that adults with a secure attachment style experience more enduring relationships. This phenomenon may be partially attributable to commitment, as individuals with a secure attachment style typically demonstrate higher levels of commitment to their relationships. Furthermore, adults with a secure attachment style also generally report greater satisfaction with their relationships, potentially motivating them to maintain their relationships for extended periods. However, possessing a secure attachment style does not unequivocally guarantee relational longevity. Relationship participants with anxious and avoidant attachment styles are associated with diminished commitment levels.

Furthermore, secure attachment styles are not exclusively correlated with relational stability. Adults with the anxious–preoccupied attachment style frequently engage in relationships characterized by longevity but also by dissatisfaction. Anxious–preoccupied attachment styles are frequently characterized by apprehension regarding abandonment and uncertainties concerning one's relational value. Such affective and cognitive patterns may predispose individuals to persist in dissatisfying relationships.

Relationship Dynamics

Attachment is instrumental in shaping interpersonal interactions. Illustrative instances include its influence on affect regulation, social support, intimacy, and jealousy. Attachment also influences various other interactions, such as conflict, communication, and sexuality.

Affect Regulation

Bowlby, through his research with children, noted that specific events elicit anxiety, prompting individuals to alleviate this distress by seeking proximity and solace from caregivers. Three primary categories of conditions are identified as anxiety triggers in children:

• Child-specific conditions (e.g., fatigue, hunger, illness, pain, cold).
• Caregiver-related circumstances (e.g., caregiver absence, departure, discouragement of proximity, or allocation of attention to another child).
• Environmental conditions (e.g., alarming occurrences, criticism, or social rejection).

The anxiety triggered by these conditions prompts individuals to seek physical proximity to caregivers. This dynamic extends to adult relationships characterized by mutual care. In adults, anxiety can be precipitated by factors related to personal well-being, relational dynamics, or environmental circumstances. To mitigate this anxiety, adults typically endeavor to establish both physical and psychological closeness with their partners.

Mikulincer, Shaver, and Pereg have proposed a model to elucidate this dynamic. This model posits that individuals experiencing anxiety attempt to diminish it by pursuing proximity to their relationship partners. Nevertheless, partners may either accede to or rebuff these overtures for increased intimacy. Consequently, individuals employ diverse strategies to alleviate anxiety. Specifically, three primary strategies are utilized for anxiety reduction.

The initial strategy is termed the security-based approach.

An individual perceives an anxiety-provoking stimulus. Subsequently, the individual endeavors to mitigate anxiety by seeking physical or psychological proximity to their attachment figure. The attachment figure's positive response to this bid for closeness reinforces a sense of security and diminishes anxiety. The individual then resumes normal activities.

The second strategy is designated as hyperactivation, also known as the anxious attachment strategy.

This sequence commences similarly. An anxiety-inducing event prompts the individual to seek physical or psychological proximity to their attachment figure. However, the attachment figure rebuffs the overture for increased intimacy. This unresponsiveness intensifies feelings of insecurity and anxiety. Consequently, the individual becomes entrapped in a cyclical pattern with the attachment figure: repeated attempts to achieve closeness are met with rejection, prompting more fervent efforts, which are again rebuffed, perpetuating the cycle. This cycle terminates either when the dynamic transitions to a security-based strategy (due to the attachment figure's eventual positive response) or when the individual adopts an attachment-avoidant strategy (abandoning the expectation of a positive response from the attachment figure).

The third strategy is termed the attachment avoidance approach.

This sequence mirrors the initiation of the security-based strategy. An individual perceives an anxiety-provoking stimulus and endeavors to mitigate anxiety by seeking physical or psychological proximity to their attachment figure. However, the attachment figure is either inaccessible or rejects the bid for closeness. This absence of responsiveness exacerbates insecurity and intensifies anxiety. Consequently, the individual relinquishes the expectation of a positive response from the attachment figure, suppresses their anxiety, and establishes emotional distance from the attachment.

Mikulincer, Shaver, and Pereg assert that these distinct strategies for managing attachment anxiety yield divergent outcomes. The security-based strategy fosters more positive cognitive patterns, including more favorable interpretations of others' behaviors and more positive recollections of individuals and occurrences. Such positive cognitions can facilitate more innovative approaches to challenging problems or distressing circumstances. Conversely, both hyperactivation and attachment avoidance strategies are associated with increased negative ideation and reduced creativity in addressing problems and stressful scenarios. Significantly, the efficacy of the security-based strategy is predicated upon a positive response from the attachment figure. Therefore, from this standpoint, individuals would benefit from having attachment figures who are both willing and capable of responding affirmatively to bids for closeness, thereby enabling the utilization of security-based strategies for anxiety management.

Support

Individuals experience reduced anxiety when in proximity to their attachment figures, as these figures can offer support during challenging circumstances. This support encompasses the comfort, aid, and information individuals derive from their attachment relationships.

Attachment significantly impacts both an individual's perception of external support and their inclination to seek it. Adults in relationships characterized by consistent and affirmative responses to bids for closeness typically develop secure attachments, leading them to actively solicit more support. Conversely, individuals whose partners exhibit inconsistent positive reactions or frequently reject requests for support often develop alternative attachment styles. Securely attached adults tend to trust their partners to provide assistance, a trust rooted in past reliable support, making them more prone to seek help when necessary. In contrast, individuals with insecure attachment styles, often lacking a history of consistent supportive responses, may exhibit reduced reliance on their partners and a diminished propensity to request support, although other variables might also contribute to this dynamic.

Alterations in an individual's perception of attachment are frequently concomitant with shifts in their perception of support. A study investigating college students' perceptions of attachment to various figures—mothers, fathers, same-sex friends, and opposite-sex friends—revealed that reported changes in attachment within a specific relationship typically corresponded with concurrent changes in perceived support for that same relationship. Notably, modifications in attachment for one relationship did not influence the perception of support in other relational contexts, underscoring the relationship-specific nature of the link between attachment and support changes.

Intimacy

The significance of intimacy has consistently been acknowledged within attachment theory. Bowlby articulated this by stating:

Attachment theory posits that the inclination to form profound emotional connections with specific individuals constitutes a fundamental aspect of human nature, manifesting in rudimentary form during infancy and persisting throughout adulthood into old age. (Bowlby, 1988, pp. 120–121)

The innate desire for intimacy possesses biological origins and, for most individuals, endures from birth through the entirety of life. This fundamental yearning for intimacy carries substantial implications for attachment dynamics. Relationships that consistently fulfill the need for intimacy tend to foster more secure attachments, whereas those that infrequently satisfy this desire often result in less secure attachment patterns.

Collins and Feeney have conducted a comprehensive analysis of the interplay between attachment and intimacy. They conceptualize intimacy as a distinct series of interactions wherein an individual reveals significant personal information, and their attachment figure responds to this disclosure in a manner that engenders feelings of validation, comprehension, and care. While these interactions typically involve verbal self-disclosure, they can also encompass non-verbal expressions, including physical touch, embraces, kisses, and sexual activity. From this viewpoint, intimacy necessitates the subsequent elements:

• a readiness to articulate one's authentic thoughts, emotions, aspirations, and apprehensions
• a propensity to depend on an attachment figure for both care and emotional sustenance
• an openness to engaging in physical intimacy, particularly within romantic or potentially romantic partnerships

Collins and Feeney synthesized numerous studies illustrating the correlation between distinct attachment styles and the willingness to engage in self-disclosure, partner reliance, and physical intimacy. The secure attachment style is typically associated with higher levels of self-disclosure, greater dependence on partners, and increased physical intimacy compared to other attachment styles. Nevertheless, the degree of intimacy within a relationship can fluctuate based on individual personality traits and prevailing situational factors, suggesting that each attachment style may serve to facilitate an individual's adaptation to their specific relational intimacy context.

Mashek and Sherman's research highlights instances where individuals desire less intimacy with partners, suggesting that excessive closeness can be perceived as overwhelming. While a predictable correlation exists between attachment styles and the desire for proximity—with fearful-avoidant and anxious-preoccupied individuals typically seeking greater closeness, and dismissive-avoidant individuals preferring less—empirical data indicates a more complex reality. Studies reveal that a substantial proportion of individuals (up to 57%) express a desire for reduced closeness, a figure significantly exceeding the prevalence of dismissive-avoidant attachment styles. This observation implies that even individuals with secure, anxious-preoccupied, or fearful-avoidant attachment styles may, at times, seek less intimacy, indicating that attachment styles are not the sole determinants of this desire.

Jealousy

Jealousy is defined as the cognitive, affective, and behavioral responses elicited when an individual perceives a valued relationship to be jeopardized by a rival. Individuals experiencing jealousy often manifest anxiety regarding the preservation of relational support, intimacy, and other cherished attributes. Considering the established links between attachment, anxiety regulation, support, and intimacy, a connection between attachment and jealousy is logically anticipated.

Bowlby observed that the presence of a rival can activate attachment behaviors in children:

In most young children the mere sight of a mother holding another baby in her arms is enough to elicit strong attachment behavior. The older child insists on remaining close to his mother, or on climbing onto her lap. Often he behaves as though he were a baby. It is possible that this well-known behavior is only a special case of a child reacting to their mother's lack of attention and lack of responsiveness to him. The fact, however, that an older child often reacts in this way even when his mother makes a point of being attentive and responsive suggests that more is involved. The pioneer experiments of Levy (1937) also indicate that the mere presence of a baby on a mother's lap is sufficient to make an older child much more clinging. (Bowlby, 1969/1982, page 260)

When children perceive a rival competing for a caregiver's attention, they typically attempt to increase proximity and secure the caregiver's focus. These behaviors signify the activation of the attachment system. Concurrently, the presence of a rival also elicits jealousy in children, particularly well-documented in the context of sibling rivalry. Contemporary research demonstrates that rivals can induce jealousy even in very young infants, with studies identifying this response in those as young as six months old. Thus, both attachment and jealousy in children can be activated by the presence of a rival.

In adults, attachment and jealousy can similarly be activated by shared perceptual cues. Specifically, the perceived absence of an attachment figure, particularly when believed to be engaged with a rival, can trigger both a heightened desire for proximity and feelings of jealousy. Conversely, the direct presence of a rival can also intensify the need for attachment and provoke jealousy.

Variations in attachment styles significantly impact both the incidence and manifestation of jealous behaviors. Individuals characterized by anxious-preoccupied or fearful-avoidant attachment styles report more frequent experiences of jealousy and perceive rivals as more threatening compared to those with secure attachment styles. Furthermore, distinct attachment styles are associated with diverse expressions of jealousy, with one study observing that:

Individuals with secure attachment reported experiencing anger more intensely than other emotions and demonstrated a higher propensity to express it, particularly towards their attachment figures. Conversely, participants with anxious attachment, despite experiencing anger with comparable intensity and expressing it through irritability at similar rates to others, were less inclined to directly confront their attachment figures. This reluctance may stem from feelings of inferiority and fear, which are notably characteristic of anxiously attached individuals and are hypothesized to suppress direct expressions of anger. In both studies, avoidantly attached individuals reported experiencing sadness with greater intensity compared to securely attached individuals. Furthermore, avoidant individuals exhibited a greater tendency to engage in self-esteem maintenance efforts and, potentially as a result, were less likely to foster closer proximity to their attachment figures. (Sharpsteen & Kirkpatrick, 1997, p. 637)

Subsequent research has substantiated that individuals exhibiting distinct attachment styles perceive and articulate jealousy through qualitatively varied mechanisms. Consequently, attachment significantly influences jealous interactions by modulating both the frequency and the specific modalities through which individuals manifest jealousy.

Post-Relationship Dynamics

Following the termination of significant romantic relationships, individuals typically experience separation anxiety and a period of grieving. Grief constitutes a process culminating in the acceptance of loss, generally enabling individuals to progress. Throughout this process, diverse coping strategies are employed. Securely attached individuals commonly seek social support, which is recognized as a highly effective coping mechanism. Conversely, avoidantly attached individuals often devalue the former relationship and engage in social withdrawal. Anxiously attached individuals are more prone to utilize emotionally focused coping strategies and exhibit heightened attention to their experienced distress. Post-relationship dissolution, securely attached individuals generally report fewer negative overall emotional experiences compared to their insecurely attached counterparts.

Both anxious and avoidant attachment styles have been identified as predictors of interpersonal electronic surveillance (IES), commonly referred to as "Facebook stalking." This behavior exhibits a positive correlation with relationship commitment, which itself correlates with attachment styles (positively for anxious attachment and negatively for avoidant attachment). Consequently, online surveillance of former romantic partners is intimately linked to attachment dynamics. Nevertheless, IES and psychological distress can operate within a feedback loop, where heightened surveillance exacerbates distress, and vice versa. Although employed as a coping mechanism for distress, IES can paradoxically intensify distress among anxiously attached individuals.

Committed relationship

• Committed relationship
• Dynamic-maturational model of attachment and adaptation
• Counterdependency
• Human bonding
• Emotionally focused therapy
• Jean Piaget
• Traumatic bonding
• Monogamy
• Pair bonding
• Attachment parenting
• Term of endearment

References

Bibliography

Levine, A., & Heller, R. (2010, December 29). "What Attachment Theory Can Teach about Love and Relationships – The Surprising Secrets to Finding the Right Partner for a Healthy Relationship." *Scientific American*.

• Levine, A, & Heller, R. "What Attachment Theory Can Teach about Love and Relationships – The surprising secrets to finding the right partner for a healthy relationship" Scientific American, December 29, 2010