Читать книгу Developmental Psychopathology - Группа авторов - Страница 102

John Bowlby originally put forth the idea that early in development, the emotional and physical needs of a baby, and whether those needs are consistently met by caregivers, inform the development of an internal working model (Bowlby, 1969, 1973)—a template we carry with us to make sense of ourselves and others. Attachment security emerges when the child’s needs are consistently met; his or her internal working model is one of him‐ or herself as worthy of care and others as reliable caregivers (Bretherton & Munholland, 2008). Attachment insecurity, on the other hand, is characterized by an internal working model of the self as unworthy of care and others as unreliable caregivers. Attachment behavior differs depending upon the caregiver’s behavior (see Figure 4.1) and development (see Figure 4.2).

FIGURE 4.1 Control Systems Model of the Attachment Behavioral System.

Source: Fraley and Speiker (2003a). Reproduced with permissions of American Psychological Association.

FIGURE 4.2 Ways in Which Attachment Manifests Behaviorally Across Development.

Source: Fraley and Speiker (2003a). Reproduced with permissions of American Psychological Association.

Mary Ainsworth, a student of John Bowlby, made a major contribution to attachment theory by developing the Strange Situation Paradigm (Ainsworth, Blehar, Waters, & Wall, 1978). In this paradigm, an infant (ages 12–20 months) and caregiver are together in an unfamiliar playroom and guided through separations and reunions. You can watch the Strange Situation in videos created by researchers (https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=QTsewNrHUHU). By using this procedure, Ainsworth discovered four patterns of behavior, known as attachment styles (Ainsworth et al., 1978). A child with a secure attachment will use the caregiver as a safe base to explore but return to when distressed. This pattern of behaviors is thought to arise from consistent, sensitive caregiving. A child with an anxious‐resistant (or ambivalent) insecure attachment may demonstrate clingy behavior but will reject the attachment figure when they try to engage. This behavior is likely a response to unpredictable caregiving; the behavior of the child may be a strategy for maintaining the attention of the caregiver (e.g., Crittenden, 1999). A child with an anxious‐avoidant insecure attachment tends to be independent and ignore the caregiver during both separations and reunifications. This behavior is thought to emerge as a self‐protective strategy when attachment behavior has been rejected by the caregiver in the past. The fourth category, called disorganized attachment, refers to children that cannot be classified into one of the aforementioned categories. Behaviors commonly observed in this group are contradictory; incongruent with affect; stereotypic, jerky; and freezing (Main & Solomon, 1990). Disorganized attachments often emerge in the context of a caregiver who is at times frightening and also frightened (Main & Hesse, 1992).

This foundational work in attachment theory was later extended to attachment in older children and adults. Across development, our attachments become less about physical proximity and more about emotional availability. Therefore, Mary Main and her colleagues (George, Kaplan, & Main, 1985) developed the Adult Attachment Interview, which focuses on how individuals talk about their early childhood experiences (you can find a full interview at http://www.psychology.sunysb.edu/attachment/measures/content/aai_interview.pdf ). Critically, the interview bases attachment styles on the way in which caregiving experiences are described. Respondents are assigned to four groups that mirror those identified in the Strange Situation Paradigm. An autonomous (i.e., securely attached) adult is one who values attachment relationships and talks about caregiving experiences in a way that is balanced, coherent, and open. A preoccupied adult will dominate the interview with excessive attention towards caregivers and anger. A dismissing adult, on the other hand, will tend to de‐emphasize the impact of caregiving experiences. Finally, a disorganized adult’s interview will contain evidence of prior difficult caregiving experiences (like abuse or loss) that are unresolved in adulthood. Extensions of this interview have now been developed and used with school‐age children (Shmueli‐Goetz, Target, Fonagy, & Datta, 2008) and adolescents (Venta, Shmueli‐Goetz, & Sharp, 2014).

While most early research has focused on categorical attachment styles (e.g., secure), more recent research measuring attachment with self‐report questionnaires demonstrated that people’s attachment may vary continuously (Brennan, Clark, & Shaver, 1998; Fraley & Waller, 1998). In the continuous model (Figure 4.3), people are assumed to vary regarding avoidance and anxiety. The combination of an individual’s location on each dimension maps on to the categorical notion of attachment styles (Fraley, Hudson, Heffernan, & Segal, 2015). Whether attachment is categorical or dimensional remains quite controversial.

FIGURE 4.3 Two‐Dimensional Model of Attachment.

Source: Fraley et al. (2015). Reproduced with permissions of American Psychological Association.