Search Results

Over the past two decades, we have been working to transform attachment theory into a general theory of adult personality and behavior in social relationships. This has required expanding the theory to address many new issues that have arisen in studies of adults. More emphasis has been placed on what Bowlby, the creator of attachment theory, called “behavioral systems.” In the present chapter we focus on the two behavioral systems that govern support seeking and support provision in relationships, the attachment and caregiving systems. The first of these, attachment, governs one person’s (e.g., an infant’s) reliance on another person (e.g., a parent) for protection and emotional support, especially when fear is aroused or help is needed. The second behavioral system, caregiving, is the motivational heart of a parent’s (or other adult’s) response to a child’s distress or need for support. It is the core of all empathic, compassionate reactions to other people’s needs. We begin by explaining the behavioral system construct in some detail and show how individual differences in a person’s attachment system affect the functioning of the caregiving system. We review examples from the attachment research literature, focusing on what attachment theorists call providing a “safe haven” for others in distress. We also describe the few studies that have addressed how individual differences in attachment affect what theorists call providing a “secure base” for others’ exploration and self-development. We then sketch some new studies of this important issue.

As originally conceived and still practiced today, attachment theory is limited in its ability to recognize and understand cross-cultural variations in human attachment systems, and it is restrictive in its inclusion of cross-species comparisons. This chapter argues that attachment must be reconceived to account for and include cross-cultural and cross-species perspectives. To provide a foundation for rethinking attachment, two universal functions of attachment systems are proposed: they provide (a) socially organized resources for the infant’s protection and psychobiological regulation and (b) a privileged entry point for social learning. Ways of understanding the nature of the cultural and ecological contexts that organize attachment systems are suggested, so that they can be recognized as culturally specific, normative behavior. Culturally valid methods for describing children’s attachment systems are also discussed. In conclusion, a wide range of research strategies are proposed to facilitate the extension and contextual validity of measures of attachment across cultures and species.

Science, and by extension society, requires a comprehensive theory of attachment to guide research and practice—one grounded in a contextualized conception of attachments and their development, which encompasses knowledge from diverse disciplines engaged in the study of human development. To improve on the current paradigm, this volume embraces the diversity of attachment systems across cultures and primate species, and assesses the core assumptions and methods of attachment theory. Resultant understanding is used to project an updated version of attachment theory—one that can be applied across cultures. Suggestions for more culturally sensitive research methods are proposed and ideas applicable to current practice and policies discussed. A reconceptualized theory of attachment is presented based on principles that are generalizable, valid, and reliable across diverse primates and diverse human cultures. In addition, the need to make adjustments in attachment philosophy is stressed, and strategies are discussed to communicate and work with researchers, policymakers, practitioners, and other stakeholders.

Attachment systems have universal features (the attachment-sensitive period in children and the stress-buffering roles of privileged caretakers), but with enormous diversity, not uniformity, in their contexts, practices, cultural meanings, and outcomes. First, many learning mechanisms have evolved for children to use to learn about safety and security in their environment and who can reduce distress, not only the attachment sensitive period. Second, exclusive attachment and care by a single maternal caregiver is unlikely to have been selected for in past environments. The likely alternative then and still today would be multiple, socially distributed care, including sibling caretaking. Third, the methods used to describe, measure, and assess attachment are very narrowly defined and bracket out context, meaning and diversity out where these should be foregrounded. Finally, there is an inevitable moral valence when using terms such as secure attachment, sensitive parenting, or attuned caregiving and behaviors. Parents are attuned to their cultural learning environment, their family system, and the kind of person they hope to shape, not only to that individual child at hand at a given moment. Children learn how to appropriately feel, show and receive security, trust and social competence in diverse ways around the world.