Attachment Theory Explained- How Your Early Relationship with Your Parents Influenced Your Personality

Have you ever wondered how your childhood has affected your personality? Psychology, going all the way back to Freud, has placed a large emphasis on how our childhood and the relationships we form with our caregivers can affect our interpersonal relationships for the rest of our lives. John Bowlby was a British psychoanalyst in the mid 20th century with a strong interest in child development. Bowlby’s research led him to discover one of the most influential developmental concepts in all of psychology- Attachment Theory.

The idea behind attachment theory is that the caregiver’s response to their infant’s distress will affect how that child will respond to stressful situations in the future.

Before we go any further, it’s important to clarify what we mean we talk about attachment. A caregiver has many roles in regards to childcare. Some of these responsibilities include playing, feeding, teaching, and disciplining their child. Attachment is when a primary caregiver facilitates a secure and safe environment for their child from which they can explore, and during times of distress, return to as a haven of safety and as a source of comfort (Benoit 2004).

A description of how attachment theory has been studied will help clarify exactly what it is. Attachment theory is typically studied using what is called “The Strange Situation Technique”. This laboratory task was developed by Mary Ainsworth, a student of Bowlby, in the 1970s to study the development of attachment styles in infants. Its name is based on the fact that the test is being conducted in a context that is unfamiliar to the child and is therefore likely to “heighten the child’s need for his or her parent” (Ainsworth 1979). The Strange Situation is usually done with infants anywhere from 9–20 months old and the procedure goes as such:

1. Mother, baby, and experimenter together in a room (less than a minute)
2. Mother and baby alone
3. Stranger joins mother and child
4. Mother leaves baby alone with stranger
5. Mother returns and stranger leaves
6. Mother leaves child completely alone
7. Stranger returns
8. Mother returns child for good (reunion)

When the caretaker exits the room, the experimenters begin measuring search behaviors such as following the caretaker to the door or going to the caretaker’s empty chair and staring at it. They also check to see whether the child continues to play and explore the room upon the caretaker’s exit. Affect behaviors such as crying and smiling are also noted. What the experimenters are most interested in the last step, the reunion. The experimenters measure proximity and contact seeking behavior, contact maintaining, proximity and interaction avoiding, proximity and interaction resisting upon the caretaker’s return.

The information recorded by experimenters upon the caretakers departure and eventual return is used to label each child under two dimensions: secure/insecure & organized/disorganized. The results amount to one of four attachment styles:

Secure attachment

You can tell an infant has a secure attachment with their caregiver because they seek proximity and maintain contact with their caregiver, while also being comfortable expressing negative emotion in their presence. These children are comfortable being consoled and comforted by their caretaker because the caretaker responds to their distress with love and sensitivity. The infant’s response to their distress is considered to be “organized” as well as secure, because the infant knows exactly what to do under unfamiliar and scary circumstances. The infant immediately seeks the safe and secure proximity of their caretaker. Being “organized” simply means the child has been conditioned to respond to distress in a predictive manner.

Insecure-avoidant attachment

In insecure-avoidant attachment is evident when the infant reacts to their caretaker’s return by avoiding them and minimizing display of negative emotion around them. This attachment style develops when a caretaker consistently responds to their child’s distress by rejecting, ignoring, or ridiculing the child. It’s called “insecure” because this pattern of behavior increases the risk for developing adjustment problems in the infant. Adjustment problems are basically defined by emotionally volatile and maladaptive responses to negative stimuli. Adjustment Disorder is defined as a “stress response syndrome” where people have a hard time managing or adjusting to particular sources of stress. Children with this attachment style don’t seem to care whether their caregiver is present or not.

Insecure-resistant attachment

You can tell a child has this attachment style when they display extremely exaggerated, negative behavior in hopes of attracting the attention of their volatile, inconsistent caregiver. This attachment style is similar to the Insecure-avoidant type because it is also insecure, meaning the child’s response to distress is maladaptive and associated to increased risk of social and emotional maladjustment. It’s also classified as organized, meaning the child’s behavior is somewhat predictable, as opposed to children with disorganized attachment. What makes this attachment different from the insecure-avoidant type is that insecure-resistant attachment style is characterized by exaggerated expressions of the need for attachment. While avoidant infants don’t mind the presence or absence of their caretaker, resistant infants are preoccupied with receiving the attention of their caregivers. They will halt all play and exploratory behavior in the desperate hope for attention.

Insecure Disorganized Attachment

This attachment style seems to be very different from the others and is also a good predictor of serious psychopathology and maladjustment in children who have it. This attachment style develops when a child is exposed to a parent who displays very atypical behaviors including, but not limited to, sexual, disassociated, frightened, or frightening behaviors. There is even evidence to suggest that parents who display these types of behavior have a history of trauma or unresolved mourning. This extremely odd and often freighting display of behavior from a caretaker leaves the child in a tough dilemma: “their safety haven is also their source of fear and distress”, explains Dr. Benoit. The child will thus display misdirected behaviors, simultaneous displays of contradictory behaviors, stilling, freezing, and sometimes even fear of the caregiver. Their ability to regulate emotions and interpret other people’s behaviors is severely compromised.

Attachment theory interests me so much because it has stood the test of time. There is countless research to support that the Situation Task and its findings are both valid and reliable. It also does merit in being able to predict how one’s childhood can affect their future relationships. Some studies do show a moderate correlation between one’s childhood attachment style and their behavior in their romantic relationships later on. Retroactive studies that ask people to fill out questionnaires about their current social relationships while also answering questions about their attachment with their primary caregivers growing up have shown that there is definitely a relationship between the two.

Attachment theory has helped me better understand how my childhood could have affected my social relationships. It has also helped me make sense of the people around me and how they may have developed many of their responses to distress. This theory can be helpful in describing why attachment relationships are so important, can help you make sense of some of your characteristics and others around you, and it can also help you become a better future caretaker by showing you what to do and what not to do when responding to your child’s distress. Many of the concepts involved in responding to another’s distress can be applied to mature relationships as well. For example, a common tenet of the organized attachment types is a display of consistency of behavior from caretakers, which seems to be positively correlated to more adaptive coping mechanisms from the children. This consistency of behavior in response to stress is a concept we can all learn to apply when behaving in a social manner, so that others know what to expect from us when chaos breaks loose. We can be the rock that holds its ground in a tsunami.

As reliable as the research on attachment is, it’s important to remember that a child has an attachment relationship to every caregiver in their lives. So a child could have a different attachment style with her mom than she would with her dad, and then a completely different one with her nanny. I note this because Bowlby believed the only attachment style a child has is the one they develop with their mother. The research does not indicate this is the case and I don’t see how it could be. Remembering that every attachment relationship with our caregivers mattered as infants is important because it allows for more variability in our outcomes as individuals.

With that being said, which category do you fall under?