Types of Attachment

 

Secure Attachment

 

When a young child is securely attached to a parent or another familiar caregiver, they explore their surroundings freely and interact well with strangers when the caregiver is nearby. However, if the caregiver leaves, the child may become anxious, and they are usually happy when the caregiver returns. The extent to which a child explores or becomes stressed depends on their attachment status, temperament, and situational factors. A child’s attachment is greatly influenced by how sensitively the main caregiver responds to their needs. Parents who consistently respond to their child’s needs tend to raise securely attached children. These children trust that their parents will respond to their needs and communication.

 

In a classic study by Ainsworth and others in 1978, securely attached infants were classified as 'Group B' infants and were further divided into subgroups B1, B2, B3, and B4. These subgroups represent different types of responses to caregiver behavior. Although Ainsworth and her colleagues didn't officially label these subgroups, some people, including Ainsworth's students, gave them informal names. B1 was called 'secure-reserved,' B2 'secure-inhibited,' B3 'secure-balanced,' and B4 'secure-reactive.'

 

In academic publications, infants are usually classified as B1 or B2 without further subgrouping. However, in theoretical and commentary journals on attachment theory, the four terms mentioned above might be used. Secure attachment is the most common type of attachment across society.

 

Children with secure attachment explore the most actively when they know they can rely on a secure base (the caregiver) if needed. Being reassured by the caregiver’s help gives them confidence and teaches them how to handle similar problems in the future. Therefore, secure attachment is considered the most adaptive type of attachment. Some psychologists suggest that when a child can rely on their parents and the parents respond appropriately to the child's needs, the child develops a secure attachment. In infancy and early childhood, when parents take good care of and show interest in their child, the child is more likely to develop secure attachment.

 

 

Anxious-Ambivalent Attachment

 

Anxious-ambivalent attachment is sometimes called “resistant attachment.” Children with this attachment style explore less in strange situations and are wary of strangers even when their parent is present. If the caregiver leaves, the child may become very stressed. When the caregiver returns, the child often shows mixed feelings. This type of attachment is a response to inconsistent caregiving. The child's display of anger (ambivalent resistance) or helplessness (ambivalent passivity) upon the caregiver's return can be seen as a way to maintain the caregiver's availability by trying to control the relationship.

 

Subgroup C1 (ambivalent resistance) is noted for pronounced resistance behaviors, combining exploration with resistance to contact and interaction, often showing obvious anger. The angry demeanor is a characteristic behavior before separation.

 

Subgroup C2 (ambivalent passivity) is characterized by passivity. These children show limited exploration and do not actively engage in interaction. During reunions, they want to approach and contact their mother, but they signal rather than actively approach, protesting the abandonment without showing overt anger. C2 children do not appear as openly angry as C1 children. Research by McCarthy and Taylor in 1999 suggests that children with a history of abuse in infancy tend to develop ambivalent attachment, which can make it difficult for them to maintain close relationships as adults.

 

 

Anxious-Avoidant or Dismissive-Avoidant Attachment

 

Infants with anxious-avoidant attachment tend to avoid or ignore their caregiver. They show little emotion when the caregiver leaves or returns and rarely engage in exploration regardless of who is present. In the early 1970s, infants classified as anxious-avoidant (Group A) were not well understood. They showed no separation anxiety and often ignored the caregiver upon return (A1 subgroup) or alternated between ignoring and approaching the caregiver (A2 subgroup). Ainsworth and Bell theorized that the seemingly indifferent behavior of avoidant infants actually indicated stress, a hypothesis later supported by heart rate studies.

 

Infants are classified as anxious-avoidant when they distinctly avoid their mother upon her return, either by ignoring her or by displaying subtle avoidance behaviors like turning away or leaving. Some infants may welcome their mother back with just a look or a smile, but they do not approach her directly or engage in contact. Even after being comforted, these infants show little desire to maintain contact, often resisting hugs and appearing uncomfortable or squirming.

 

Ainsworth's notes suggest that avoidant infants avoid their caregiver in stressful situations because they have learned that their emotional needs are often unmet. They come to believe that expressing their needs will not affect their caregiver.

 

Ainsworth's student, Mary Main, suggested that avoidant behavior in the Strange Situation was a conditional strategy to maintain access to the caregiver, paradoxically allowing some form of approach under the assumption of rejection.

Main believed that avoidant behavior in infants, whose needs are not consistently met, served two functions: first, it allowed the infant to maintain conditional proximity to the caregiver, close enough for protection but far enough to avoid rejection; second, if avoidance became a cognitive pattern, the child might lose interest in the unmet need for closeness, avoiding emotional situations that could lead to disorganized distress and lack of self-control.

 

 

Disorganized/Disoriented Attachment

 

Ainsworth found issues with classifying all infant behaviors into three categories in her Baltimore study. She and her colleagues observed intense movements like bending over or placing hands behind the neck, which indicated stress, often occurring before crying in separation scenarios. These movements ceased when crying began, suggesting attempts to control distress.

 

In the early 1980s, Crittenden proposed the A/C group and new classifications (see below). Using records of behaviors that didn't fit the A, B, and C classifications, Ainsworth’s colleague Mary Main added a fourth category. In the Strange Situation, the attachment system is activated by caregiver departures and returns. When an infant’s behavior doesn't appear coordinated to achieve proximity or relationship with the caregiver, it indicates 'disorganization,' often due to fear or overwhelming emotions. Disorganized/disoriented behavior in the Strange Situation includes excessive fear, contradictory actions, sudden mood changes, asymmetrical movements, freezing, and overt dissociation.

 

Lyons-Ruth emphasized that "52% of disorganized infants constantly seek comfort from the caregiver without displaying clear ambivalent or avoidant behaviors," highlighting the need for broader awareness.

 

Researchers, clinicians, and policymakers are increasingly interested in disorganized attachment. However, the disorganized/disoriented (Group D) category has been criticized for being too broad. In 1990, Ainsworth supported the addition of Group D but stressed the need for further subcategories, fearing too many behaviors would be grouped together. Group D includes both passive individuals with minimal attachment behavior and those who use somewhat confused secure (Group B) strategies. Also included are infants who flee from caregivers at reunion and those who use avoidant (Group A) strategies initially but adopt ambivalent resistance (Group C) later.

 

Responding to these concerns, George and Solomon distinguished between different indices of disorganized/disoriented attachment, categorizing some as 'strategies of desperation' and others as attachment system overload due to fear or anger.

 

Crittenden saw some disorganized/disoriented behaviors as emergency strategies of avoidant or ambivalent/resistant attachment, maintaining the function of caregiving. Sroufe and colleagues noted that "disorganized attachment behaviors (simultaneous approach-avoidance, freezing) reflect degrees of access to the caregiver when faced with a frightening or ambiguous parent." They suggested that "assuming many 'disorganized' indices as organized patterns doesn't mean disorganized attachment should be dismissed, especially when threats exceed a child’s capacity to respond effectively." For example, "children in protective care often experience intrusions. In Strange Situation videos, children approach strangers when deprived of comfort despite experiencing rejection or neglect, but they lose muscle control and fall to the floor, overwhelmed by the fear of potential stranger danger."

 

Main and Hesse found that mothers of disorganized infants often experienced significant prenatal or postpartum trauma, leading to serious depression. In fact, 56% of mothers who lost a parent before graduating high school had disorganized children. Later research highlighted the importance of unresolved loss in disorganized attachment, especially when accompanied by preexisting trauma.