AQA A Level Psychology复习笔记3.4.2 Types of Attachment: Secure, Insecure-avoidant and Insecure-resistant

• There are three types of attachment: secure, insecure-avoidant and insecure resistant

Secure attachment

• This was found to be the most common attachment type in the Strange Situation experiment conducted by Ainsworth and has been found to be the most common attachment type globally.

Secure attachment (Type B)

• Between 66-70% of infants are classified as secure
• The infants were happy to explore the room and play, using the Primary Care Giver (PCG) as a safe base
• They were distressed when left by the PCG so demonstrated separation anxiety
• The infant avoided the stranger and so showed stranger anxiety
• On reunion with the PCG, they were happy and any upset disappeared very quickly

Insecure-avoidant attachment

• This was found to be the second most common attachment type in Ainsworth's experiment but this does vary in follow-up studies. (See Culture and Attachment)
• However, it is never the dominant attachment type in any culture where the strange situation has been used.

Insecure attachment: Avoidant (Type A)

• 18-20% of infants were found to be insecure avoidant
• The infants were happy to explore the room and play but did not refer to the PCG as they did this
• They showed no sign of distress when left by the PCG: There was no separation anxiety
• The infant treated the stranger as they would the PCG, ignoring them, and so showed no stranger anxiety
• On reunion with the PCG, they tended to ignore them and carried on with what they were doing

Insecure resistant attachment

• This was found to be the least common of the three attachment types identified by Ainsworth
• Again, this varies culturally, but it is never the dominant attachment style in any culture studied so far

Insecure attachment: Resistant (Type C)

• Around 10-12% of infants were classified as insecure resistant
• Sometimes referred to as Insecure Attachment Ambivalent
• The infants did not explore the room and were reluctant to leave the PCG's side, in case they were left
• They were distressed when left by the PCG so demonstrated separation anxiety
• The infant avoided the stranger and so showed stranger anxiety
• On reunion with the PCG, they were not able to be calmed down and protested at the PCG as comfort was offered
• They resisted the PCG's attempt to calm them, often arching their back to move away from them, even though they were upset when left and clearly wanted the PCG to return

The comparison between the three types of Attachment- a quick guide

Why does an Infant have the Attachment type it has?

What are the implications of this?

The question still remains, why does an infant develop the attachment type it does?

What happens in those early months of development to cause this?

Psychologists have argued that this is the result of the relationship (dyad) between the PCG-Infant.

This also has implications for later relationships.

Evaluation of Attachment Types

• Other researchers around the world have found very similar to Ainsworth in terms of attachment types
• There is strong evidence for the impact attachment types have on later relationships: Bowlby's Continuity Theory, Hazan and Shaver's Love Quiz, and Sroufe's study of institutionalised women are just a few

However:

• Is it too reductionist to assume that the whole population fits into one of the three attachment styles?
• Main et al (1986) found a fourth type of infant who did not fit into the criteria for the existing three types
• These infants often froze in the strange situation or displayed completely random behaviours that the existing categories from Ainsworth did not cover
• Main categorised them as Type D: Disorganised and it was found that these were children who had suffered some form of abuse in early infancy
• The fact that a 4th category was found some 16 years after the original raises issues about what else may have been missed