Attachment theory is a theory (or group of theories) about the psychological

tendency to seek closeness to another person, to feel secure when that person is
present, and to feel anxious when that person is absent.
Attachment theory has its origins in the observation of and experiments with animals.
A famous series of experiments on infant monkeys by Harlow and Harlow
demonstrated that attachment is not a simple reaction to internal drives such as
hunger. [1] In these experiments, young monkeys were separated from their mother
shortly after birth. They were offered two dolls to serve as surrogates to the mother.
The first doll had a body of wire mesh. The second doll had a body of terry cloth and
foam rubber. Both dolls could provide food by attaching a milk bottle to their chests.
The experiment was designed to see if the monkeys would cling to the doll providing
the soft contact of cloth or to the doll providing the source of food. It turned out that
the monkeys would cling to the soft-clothed doll, irrespective of whether it provided
food. The monkeys also explored more when the soft-cloth doll was near. Apparently,
the doll provided them with a sense of security. However, the passive doll was not an
adequate alternative for a real mother. Infant monkeys which were raised without
contact with other monkeys showed abnormal behavior in social situations. They
were either very fearful of other monkeys or responded with unprovoked aggression
when they encountered other monkeys. They also showed abnormal sexual
responses. Female monkeys who were raised in isolation often neglected or abused
their infants. This abnormal behaviour is thought to demonstrate that a bond with the
mother is necessary for further social development.
Much of the early research on attachment in humans was done by John Bowlby and
his associates. [2] [3] [4] [5] These early studies focused on attachment between
children and caregivers. Attachment theory was later extended to adult romantic
relationships by Cindy Hazen and Phillip Shaver. [6] [7] [8]
Basic attachment theory
Attachment of children to caregivers
Attachment theory has led to a new understanding of child development. Children
develop different styles of attachment based on experiences and interactions with
their caregivers. Four different attachment styles have been identified in children:
secure, anxious-ambivalent, anxious-avoidant, and disorganized. Attachment theory
has become the dominant theory used today in the study of infant and toddler
behavior and in the fields of infant mental health, treatment of children, and related
fields.
Attachment in adult romantic relationships

Attachment theory was extended to adult romantic relationships in the late 1980s.
Four attachment styles have been identified in adults: secure, anxious-preoccupied,
dismissive-avoidant, and fearful-avoidant. Investigators have explored the
organization and the stability of mental working models that underlie these
attachment styles. They have also explored how attachment impacts relationship
outcomes and how attachment functions in relationship dynamics (e.g., affect
regulation, support, intimacy, jealousy).
Attachment measures
Researchers have developed various ways of assessing attachment in children,
including the Strange Situation and story-based approaches such as Attachment
Story Completion Test. These methods allow children to be classified into four
attachment styles: secure, axnious-ambivalent, anxious-avoidant, and disordered.
Attachment in adults is commonly measured using the Adult Attachment Interview
and self-report questionnaires. Self-report questionnaires have identified two
dimensions of attachment, one dealing with anxiety about the relationship, and the
other dealing with avoidance in the relationship. These dimensions define four styles
of adult attachment: secure, preoccupied, dismissive-avoidant, and fearful-avoidant.
Attachment theory in clinical practice
Attachment disorder
Attachment disorder refers to the failure to form normal attachments with caregivers
during childhood. This can have adverse effects throughout the lifespan. Clinicians
have identified several signs of attachment problems. Attachment problems can be
resolved at older ages through appropriate therapeutic interventions. Reputable
interventions include Theraplay and Dyadic Developmental Psychotherapy.
Reactive attachment disorder
Reactive Attachment Disorder, sometimes called "RAD", is a psychiatric diagnosis
(DSM-IV 313.89, ICD-10 F94.1/2). The essential feature of Reactive Attachment
Disorder is markedly disturbed and developmentally inappropriate social relatedness
in most contexts that begins before age 5 years and is associated with grossy
pathological care.
Dyadic developmental psychotherapy
Dyadic developmental psychotherapy is an evidence-based treatment approach for
the treatment of attachment disorder and reactive attachment disorder. Children who
have experienced pervasive and extensive trauma, neglect, loss, and/or other
dysregulating experiences can benefit from this treatment. Dyadic Developmental
Psychotherapy is based on principles derived from attachment theory.

Theraplay
Theraplay is a play therapy which has the intention of helping parents and children
build better attachment relationships through attachment-based play. It was
developed in 1967 by the Psychological Services staff of a Head Start program in
Chicago. Theraplay is based on model of healthy parent-infant attachment and
interactions.
Attachment in children deals with the theory of attachment between children and
their caregivers. Attachment theory has led to a new understanding of child
development. Children develop different styles of attachment based on experiences
and interactions with their caregivers. Four different attachment styles have been
identified in children: secure, anxious-ambivalent, anxious-avoidant, and
disorganized. Attachment theory has become the dominant theory used today in the
study of infant and toddler behavior and in the fields of infant mental health,
treatment of children, and related fields.
Attachment Theory and Children
Attachment theory led not only to increased attention to attachments as a
psychosocial process, it also led to a new understanding of child development.
Freudian theory suggested that as libidinal drives fixed on different objects, former
attachments would be broken; failure to break an attachment effectively would
constitute a sort of trauma that could lead to later mental illness. Attachment theory,
however, suggested that growing children did not break former attachments, but
rather (1) learned to become more active (or sovereign) within previously established
attachments, and (2) added new attachments, which did not necessarily require a
break with (and are not necessarily substitutes for) previous attachments.
Attachment theory assumes that humans are social beings; they do not just use
other people to satisfy their drives. In this way, attachment theory is similar to object
relations theory.
Attachment styles in children
On the basis of their behaviours, the children can be categorized into four groups.
Each of these groups reflects a different kind of attachment relationship with the
mother. (It should be noted that Bowlby believed that mothers were the primary
attachment figure in childrens lives, but subsequent research has confirmed that
children form attachments to both their mothers and their fathers.
The most researched method for assessing an infant or toddlers style of attachment
with a care giver is the Strange Situation Protocol, developed by Mary Ainsworth
(see Patterns of Attachment).

Bowlby, like many of his colleagues at the time, infused the gender norms of the day
into otherwise "unbiased" scientific research.) Modern studies use a variety of
standardized interviews, questionnaires, and tests to identify attachment styles. See
also: Allomother theory [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] The most commonly used procedures for
children are the Strange Situation Protocol and various narrative approaches and
structured observational methods. [6] A frequently used method of assessing
attachment styles in adults is the Adult Attachment Interview developed by Mary
Main and Erik Hesse. [7] Attachment styles in adults can also be assessed using a
questionnaire developed by Shaver and colleagues. All of these methods can be
used to classify people into the classic attachment styles described below.
Readers curious about their own attachment style can take the questionnaire
developed by Shaver and colleagues at http://www.web-research-design.net/cgibin/crq/crq.pl.
Secure attachment
A child who is securely attached to its mother will explore freely while the mother is
present, will engage with strangers, will be visibly upset when the mother departs,
and happy to see the mother return.
Securely attached children are best able to explore when they have the knowledge
of a secure base to return to in times of need (also known as "rapprochement",
meaning in French "bring together"). When assistance is given, this bolsters the
sense of security and also, assuming the mothers assistance is helpful, educates
the child in how to cope with the same problem in the future. Therefore, secure
attachment can be seen as the most adaptive attachment style. According to some
psychological researchers, a child becomes securely attached when the mother is
available and able to meet the needs of the child in a responsive and appropriate
manner. Others have pointed out that there are also other determinants of the childs
attachment, and that behavior of the parent may in turn be influenced by the childs
behavior.
Anxious-ambivalent insecure attachment
A child with an anxious-resistant attachment style is anxious of exploration and of
strangers, even when the mother is present. When the mother departs, the child is
extremely distressed. The child will be ambivalent when she returns seeking to
remain close to the mother but resentful, and also resistant when the mother initiates
attention.
According to some psychological researchers, this style develops from a mothering
style which is engaged but on the mothers own terms. That is, sometimes the childs

needs are ignored until some other activity is completed and that attention is
sometimes given to the child more through the needs of the parent than from the
childs initiation.
Anxious-avoidant insecure attachment
A child with an anxious-avoidant attachment style will avoid or ignore the mother
showing little emotion when the mother departs or returns. The child will not explore
very much regardless of who is there. Strangers will not be treated much differently
from the mother. There is not much emotional range displayed regardless of who is
in the room or if it is empty.
This style of attachment develops from a mothering style which is more disengaged.
The childs needs are frequently not met and the child comes to believe that
communication of needs has no influence on the mother.
Disorganized attachment
A fourth category termed disorganized attachment is actually the lack of a coherent
style or pattern for coping. While ambivalent and avoidant styles are not totally
effective, they are strategies for dealing with the world. Children with disorganized
attachment experienced their caregivers as either frightened and frightening. Human
interactions are experienced as erratic, thus children cannot form a coherent
interactive template. If the child uses the caregiver as a mirror to understand the self,
the disorganized child is looking into a mirror broken into a thousand pieces. It is
more severe than learned helplessness as it is the model of the self rather than of a
situation.
This was not one of Ainsworths initial three categories, but identified by Mary Main in
subsequent research.
Attachment and Therapy
Attachment theory has become the dominant theory used today in the study of infant
and toddler behavior and in the fields of infant mental health, treatment of children,
and related fields. Several evidence-based and effective treatments are based on
attachment theory including Theraplay and Dyadic Developmental Psychotherapy. In
fact nearly all treatments for children with trauma and attachment difficulties are
based on attachment theory today. [8] [9] Nearly all mainstream programs for the
prevention and treatment of disorders of attachment attachment disorder use
attachment theory. For example, the Circle of Security Program, (Dr. Robert Marvin,
University of VA) is one such early intervention program with demonstrated
effectiveness. Dr. Marvin and Dr. Siegel (University of California) both also endorse
Dyadic Developmental Psychotherapy Other promising treatment methods include

the Circle of Security Program of Dr. Robert Marvin at the University of Virginia,
Developmental, Individual-difference, Relationship-based therapy (DIR or Floor
Time) by Stanley Greenspan.
Dyadic developmental psychotherapy is an evidence-based treatment(1) approach
for the treatment of attachment disorder and reactive attachment disorder. The
treatment is based on sound clinical principles and uses methods, techniques, and
approaches that have strong empirical evidence, such as relationship and
unconditional positive regard. Children who have experienced pervasive and
extensive trauma, neglect, loss, and/or other dysregulating experiences can benefit
from this treatment. Dyadic Developmental Psychotherapy is based on principles
derived from Attachment Theory and Research; see the work of Bowlby. The
treatment meets the standards of the American Professional Society on Child Abuse,
The American Academy of Child Psychiatry, American Psychological Association,
American Psychiatric Association, National Association of Social Workers, and
various other groups standards for the evaluation and treatment of children and
adolescents. This is a non-coercive treatment.
Various organizations have adopted standards against the use of coercive
interventions: APSAC, the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry,
the American Psychological Association, the American Psychiatric Association, the
[[National Association of Social Workers]]. All of the aforementioned organizations
have adopted formal statements (in some cases practice parameters) opposing the
coercive treatments. Recognized professional organizations have been unanimous
in recommending against the use of coercive treatments. Circle of Security,
Theraplay, Dyadic Developmental Psychotherapy, and others being non-coercive
approaches, meet these standards as evidenced by the support of Dyadic
Developmental Psychotherapy by Dr. Daniel Siegel of the University of California at
LA medical school and author of The Developing Mind, among many other articles
and books and Dr. Robert Marvin of the University of Virginia Attachment Clinic.

References
Harlow, H. F. & Harlow, M. K. (1969) "Effects of various mother-infant

relationships on rhesus monkey behaviors". In B. M. Foss (Ed.) Determinants of

infant behavior (Vol. 4). London: Methuen.
Bowlby, J. (1969) Attachment , Vol. 1 of Attachment and loss. London:

Hogarth Press. New York: Basic Books; Harmondsworth: Penguin (1971).

Bowlby, J. (1973) , Separation: Anxiety & Anger. Vol. 2 of Attachment and loss
London: Hogarth Press; New York: Basic Books; Harmondsworth: Penguin (1975).

Bowlby, J. (1980) Loss: Sadness & Depression, in Vol. 3 of Attachment and

loss, London: Hogarth Press. New York: Basic Books; Harmondsworth: Penguin
(1981).
Bretherton, I. (1992). The Origins of Attachment Theory: John Bowlby and

Mary Ainsworth. Developmental Psychology, 28, 759-775.

Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. (1987). Romantic love conceptualized as an

attachmenpt rocess. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 511-524.

Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. R. (1990). Love and work: An attachment theoretical

perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 270-280.

Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. R. (1994). Attachment as an organizational

framework for research on close relationships. Psychological Inquiry, 5, 1-22.

Bartholomew, K., & Horowitz, L. M. (1991). Attachment styles among young

adults: A test of a four-category model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,

61, 226-244.
Bartholomew, K., & Shaver, P. R. (1998). Measures of attachment: Do they

converge? In J. A. Simpson & W. S. Rholes (Eds.), Attachment theory and close

relationships (pp. 25-45). New York: Guilford Press.
Brennan, K. A., Clark, C. L., & Shaver, P. R. (1998). Self-report measurement

of adult romantic attachment: An integrative overview. In J. A. Simpson & W. S.

Rholes (Eds.), Attachment theory and close relationships (pp. 46-76). New York:
Guilford Press.
Crowell, J. A., & Treboux, D. (1995). A review of adult attachment measures:

Implications for theory and research. Social Development, 4, 294-327.

Fraley, R. C., Waller, N. G., & Brennan, K. A. (2000). An item-response theory

analysis of self-report measures of adult attachment. Journal of Personality and

Social Psycology, 78, 350-365.
Ainsworth, M., Blehar, M., Waters, E., & Wall, S., (1978). Patterns of

Attachment. Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc., Hillsdale, NJ., 1978.

Hesse, E., (1999). The Adult Attachment Interview in Jude Cassidy & Phillip

Shaver (Eds.) Handbook of Attachment: Theory, Research, and Clinical Applications.

Guilford Press, NY pp. 395-433.
Arthur Becker-Weidman & Deborah Shell, MA, Eds., (2005). Creating

Capacity For Attachment, Wood N Barnes, Oklahoma City:OK

Becker-Weidman, A., (2006). Treatment for Children with Trauma-Attachment

Disorders: Dyadic Developmental Psychotherapy, Child and Adolescent Social Work

Journal. Vol. 13 #1, April 2006.
Recommended Reading
Becker-Weidman, A., & Shell, D., (Eds). (2005) Creating Capacity for
Attachment Wood N Barnes, Oklahoma City, OK. ISBN 1885473729

Cassidy, J., & Shaver, P., (Eds). (1999) Handbook of Attachment: Theory,

Research, and Clinical Applications. Guilford Press, NY.

Greenberg, MT, Cicchetti, D., & Cummings, EM., (Eds) (1990) Attachment in

the Preschool Years: Theory, Research and Intervention University of Chicago,

Chicago.
Greenspan, S. (1993) Infancy and Early Childhood. Madison, CT: International

Universities Press. ISBN 0823626334.

Holmes, J. (1993) John Bowlby and Attachment Theory. Routledge. ISBN

0415077303.
Holmes, J. (2001) The Search for the Secure Base: Attachment Theory and

Psychotherapy. London: Brunner-Routledge. ISBN 1583911529.

Karen R (1998) Becoming Attached: First Relationships and How They Shape

Our Capacity to Love. Oxford University Press. ISBN 0195115015.

Parkes, CM, Stevenson-Hinde, J., Marris, P., (Eds.) (1991) Attachment Across

The Life Cycle Routledge. NY. ISBN 0415056519

Siegler R., DeLoache, J. & Eisenberg, N. (2003) How Children develop. New

York: Worth. ISBN 1572592494.

Sturt, SM (Ed) (2006). New Developments in Child Abuse Research Nove,

NY. ISBN 159454980X Attachment & Human Development. This is a professional

peer-reviewed journal. Infant Mental Health. This is a professional peer-reviewed
journal.
Zeanah, C., (1993) Handbook of Infant Mental Health. Guilford, NY.
Bausch, Karl Heinz (2002) Treating Attachment Disorders NY: Guilford Press.
This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material
from the Wikipedia article "Attachment Theory" and Wikipedia article "Attachment in
Children".

Mary Ainsworth and Attachment Theory

By Richard Brodie
Mary Ainsworth is best known for her elaboration on the work of John Bowlby and Attachment Theory.
Ainsworth, who collaborated with Bowlby in the joint publication of their work, Child Care and the Birth
of Love (1965), developed a procedure for observing and assessing the quality of attachment in
relationships between a caregiver and child. She called this procedure the Strange Situation.
The above clip is an example of the Strange Situation.

In this procedure the child is observed playing for twenty minutes while caregivers and strangers enter
and leave the room, recreating the flow of the familiar and unfamiliar persons in the lives of most children.
The arranged sequence of events is as follows:
1.
Caregiver and infant are introduced to the experimental room.
2.
3.

Caregiver and infant are left alone. Caregiver does not participate while infant plays and explores.
Stranger enters, converses with parent, then approaches infant. Caregiver leaves
inconspicuously.

4.

First separation episode: Stranger's adjusts his behavior to that of the infant.

5.

First reunion episode: Caregiver greets and comforts the infant, then leaves again.

6.

Second separation episode: Infant is left alone.

7.

Continuation of second separation episode: Stranger enters and again adjusts his behavior to that
of the infant.

8.

Second reunion episode: Parent enters, greets infant, and picks up infant; stranger leaves
inconspicuously.

Two aspects of the child's behavior are observed:

The amount of exploration (e.g. playing with new toys) the child engages in during the time period.

The child's reactions to the departure and return of his caregiver.

On the basis of their behavior, children are categorized into three groups:
Successful outcomes are defined as

secure attachment;
Unsuccessful outcomes are defined as

anxious-ambivalent insecure attachment, and

anxious-avoidant insecure attachment.

Secure Attachment: A child who is securely attached to its caregiver will explore freely while the caregiver
is present, will engage with strangers, will be visibly upset when the caregiver departs, and happy to see

the caregiver return.

The child will not engage with the stranger if the caregiver is not in the room.

Anxious-Ambivalent Insecure Attachment: A child with an anxious-resistant attachment style is anxious

of exploration and of strangers, even when the caregiver is present. When the caregiver departs, the child
is extremely distressed. The child will be ambivalent when she returns and will seek to remain close to the
caregiver, but will be resentful, and also resistant when the caregiver initiates attention.

Anxious-Avoidant Insecure Attachment: A child with an anxious-avoidant attachment style will avoid or
ignore the caregiver and show little emotion when the caregiver departs or returns. The child will not
explore very much, regardless of who is there. Strangers will not be treated very differently from the
caregiver. There is not much emotional range displayed regardless of who is in the room or if it is empty.

Ainsworths Strange Situation Procedure has been criticized more in its suggested application than in its
validity. For example, many critics feel the twenty-minute timeframe for the procedure is too short, and that
too many variables can come into play, such as the caregivers and infants moods at the time, the role that
cultural variation can play, etc. But support for Ainsworths basic
concept remains intact.