L19 - Attachment II

Question 1

Describe Fraley et al.’s study on attachment from infancy to adulthood (2013).

do caregiving experiences in childhood predict adult attachment style?

Answer 1

Method: longitudinal study of 707 Ps from childhood to age 18
- assessed quality of caregiving experiences at various points in childhood:
– maternal sensitivity
– maternal depression
– father absence
- assessed adult attachment style at age 18
- assessed self-reported quality of best friendship at various points in childhood

Results:
- less supportive parenting, family instability, and lower quality friendship in childhood/adolescence predicted attachment insecurity in adulthood
- avoidance at age 18 predicted by:
– lower maternal sensitivity (-0.16)
– not consistently living with father (0.17)
– lower quality best friendship (-0.13)
- anxiety at age 18 predicted by:
– higher maternal depression (0.10)
– lower quality of best friendship (-0.11)

evidence that there’s an association between childhood caregiving experiences and attachment in adulthood

average correlation of 0.15 between childhood caregiving experiences and adult attachment style
- suggests that some people exhibit incongruent patterns

the size of effect of friendship experiences is similar to the size of the effect of caregiving experiences

Question 2

foundation are important, but…

Answer 2

we are shaped by early caregiving experiences, but these foundations aren’t fate

friendships in childhood are just as important as experiences with caregivers
- provide opportunities for internal working models that were created in response to caregiving experiences to be tested and to have expectations either reinforced or disconfirmed

Question 3

What is the role of internal working models in attachment?

how stable are attachment models in adulthood?

Answer 3

internal working models contribute to the stability of attachment styles over time

Confirmation bias
- people are likely to interpret ambiguous social information in ways that are consistent with their internal working model
- e.g., insecurely attached individuals are more likely to interpret ambuguous relationship info as threatening

Selection effect
- people tend to select partners that are consistent with their internal working models

Question 4

Describe Baldwin & Fehr’s study on stability in adult attachment (1995).

Answer 4

Method: assess people’s attachment style at 2 time points a few weeks apart

Results
- at Time 2, 70% of people classified with same attachmnet style as Time 1
- BUT 30% classified with a different attachment style

suggests that attachment is less stable than would be theoretically predicted

who is changing?
- secure: 12% with different attachment at T2
- avoidant: 33% with different attachment at T2
- anxious: 55% with different attachment at T2

Question 5

Describe Fraley et al.’s study on life events and changes to attachment (2021).

Answer 5

method: longitudinal study of about 4000 people (between (6-40 months)

at multiple time points, reported on:
- life events experienced since last time point
- attachment avoidance and anxiety

results: many life events lead to temporary changes in attachment avoidance or anxiety
- events associated with increased attachment insecurity (less attahcment security)
– getting into an argument with partner
– being physically apart from partner
– being sick
- event associated with decreased attachment insecurity (more attachment security):
– dating someone new
– partner did something special for the person
– work promotion
– going on vacation

Question 6

How enduring are changes to attachment style?

Answer 6

in general, people revert back to their typical level of attachment security
- reflects operation of stable internal working models

BUT, about 25% of events lead to a more enduring change in attachment
- “my partner and I broke up”
- “I became engaged to get married”
- “I founf out that I or my partner was pregnant”
- “A close friend or family member passed away”
- “I started school or college/university”

internal working models can also be altered by new experiences

Question 7

How can we increase attachment security?

Answer 7

age
- people become less anxiously attached as they get older
- less clear results for avoidance

wanting to become more securely attached is associated with increases in attachment security for a 4-month period

fostering more secure mental models
- Anxiously attached: foster a secure model of self by learning to rely on others less for validation and learning to feel capable and valued in personal domains
- avoidantly attached: foster a secure model of others by challenging self to depend on others and self-disclose more

psychotherpay is associated with increased attachment security

Question 8

Describe Baldwin et al.’s study on multiple attachment styles (1996).

do we have different attachment styles with different people?

Answer 8

Method
- listed 10 most impactful relationships
- rated attachment style in each specific relationship
- assessed general attachment style
– how you are in relationships generally?

Results
- general: secure
– relationship specific: secure - 70%, avoidant - 22%, anxious - 8%
- general: avoidant
– relationship specific: secure - 57%, avoidant - 30%, anxious - 12%
- general: anxious
– relationship specific: secure - 60%, avoidant - 21%, anxious - 19%

everyone has relationships characterized by each of the 3 attachment styles

regardless of general attachment style, the majority of a person’s relationships are secure

general attachment style is related to the prevalence of your relationships fitting a specific attachment style relative to other people

people who show a general avoidant attachment style have more avoidant relationships than the securely or anxiously attached people do

people who show a general anxious attachment style have more anxiously attached relationships than the securely or avoidantly attached people do

Question 9

What are the implications of multiple attachment styles?

Answer 9

everybody has relationships that are characterized by all 3 attachment styles
- helps explain within person fluctuations in attachment

suggests that these fluctuations in attachment style may be a function of which attachment model is cognitively accessible at a given moment
- i.e., different relationship partners or events prime different attachment styles

Question 10

Describe Tamarha & Lydon’s contextual activation of attachment study (1998).

does priming a specific attachment model affect coping with stress?

Answer 10

Method: recruited female students
- experimental manipulation:
– primed warm/supportive relationship
– primed critical/judgmental relationship
– no prime
- imagined themselves with unplanned pregnancy
- assessed
– coping strategy
– general attachment style

Results:
- people primed with warm/supportive relationship were more likely to seek emotional support than control
- people primed with critical/judgmental relationship were less likely to engage in growth-oriented coping than control
- coping responses unrelated to general attachment style

shows that attachment styles can be primed and influence behaivour in theoretically consistent ways

Question 11

Explain how stability of attachment works in specific relationships

Answer 11

stability of attachment is moderated by relationship length
- attachment style is more stable in longer relationships
– more entrenched patterns
- implies that people will have more stable attachment styles with their parents and other people they’ve known for a long time than with romantic partners or newer friends

Question 12

Attachment at any given moment is determined by what?

(putting it all together slide)

Answer 12

1. Chronic attachment style (trait)
   – influenced by caregiver experiences
   – pasrt important relationships, like childhood friendships
   – some major life events
   – age
2. State level of attachment
   – current and recent life events
   – most recent interaction with attachment figure (priming)
   – relationship length