11.4
Theory of Romantic Attachment in Adulthood
Attachment is a long-standing connection or bond with others. While Attachment Theory was conceived in developmental psychology to describe infant-car…
Building off of John Bowlby’s Theory of Attachment—the central premise that our early attachments with our parental figures shape our relationships for the rest of our lives— researchers Cindy Hazan and Phillip Shaver examined his ideas in the context of adult romantic relationships. More specifically, they noted parallels between infant-caregiver relationships and adult romantic relationships, such as both feel safe when the other is nearby and responsive but insecure when the other is inaccessible.
Given these and many other similarities, the researchers argued that adult romantic relationships could also be attachment processes. In their original study, they created a questionnaire to measure attachment styles—differences that best described individuals’ attitudes towards others in close relationships. The types—secure, avoidant, and anxious-resistant—were essentially the adult analogues of what Mary Ainsworth identified in her research with infants.
With this three-category measure, they found that 60% of adults classified themselves as secure, 20% were avoidant, and about 20% were anxious-resistant. However, rather than being of a certain attachment type, other researchers added that adult attachment patterns could be more accurately represented in terms of dimensions. That is, most of the variation in reports falls within two fundamental dimensions—anxiety and avoidance—and the levels can vary from high to low.
In one variable, attachment-related anxiety, people who score highly are more likely to worry about whether their partners are available and attentive, whereas those who score on the low end are more secure in the perceived responsiveness of their partners.
In the other variable, attachment-related avoidance, individuals on the low end are comfortable with intimacy and interdependence, whereas those on the high end find others aversive to some degree; they prefer not to rely or open up to them.
If an individual scores low in both of these dimensions, they would not be anxious about rejection or abandonment and instead seek closeness and support from their romantic partner. With this pattern of security, they are also more likely to experience numerous positive outcomes in relationships, like a great amount of satisfaction and longevity with their partner. In addition, the couple is more likely to count on each other for support when one side is distressed.
Now, what about the the source and degree of overlap between attachment orientations in adulthood? On the one hand, adults who are secure in their romantic relationships are more likely to recall their childhood relationships with their parental attachment figures as being affectionate and accepting. Yet, according to research, there is a modest degree of overlap between how secure people feel with different relationships, like their parents or friends, and how secure they feel with their romantic partners. Thus, there’s room for change across different types of relationships. Regardless, the attachment system may continue to influence behavior, thoughts, and feelings in adulthood.
View the full transcript and gain access to JoVE Core videos
Q1: How do infant-caregiver attachments relate to adult romantic relationships?
Researchers Hazan and Shaver identified key parallels between infant-caregiver and adult romantic relationships. Both involve feeling safe when the other is nearby and responsive, and both create insecurity when the other is inaccessible. These similarities led researchers to propose that adult romantic relationships function as attachment processes, with the same three attachment styles—secure, avoidant, and anxious-resistant—observed in infants appearing in adults.
Q2: What are the two fundamental dimensions of adult attachment patterns?
Adult attachment patterns are represented along two dimensions: attachment-related anxiety and attachment-related avoidance. Anxiety reflects worry about partner availability and attentiveness, ranging from high worry to secure confidence. Avoidance reflects comfort with intimacy and interdependence, ranging from high discomfort to low avoidance. These dimensions vary independently, creating different attachment profiles beyond the three categorical types.
Q3: What characterizes a secure attachment pattern in romantic relationships?
Secure attachment involves scoring low on both anxiety and avoidance dimensions. Securely attached individuals do not worry about rejection or abandonment and actively seek closeness and support from their romantic partners. They experience numerous positive relationship outcomes, including high satisfaction, relationship longevity, and mutual support during distress. Secure adults typically recall their childhood relationships with parents as affectionate and accepting.
Q4: How do attachment-related anxiety and avoidance differ in romantic partners?
High attachment-related anxiety manifests as worry about partner availability and responsiveness. High attachment-related avoidance manifests as discomfort with intimacy and reluctance to rely on or open up to partners. Low anxiety indicates confidence in partner responsiveness, while low avoidance indicates comfort with closeness. These dimensions operate independently, so individuals can be high or low on either dimension.
Q5: Can attachment orientations change across different types of relationships?
Yes, there is modest overlap between attachment security across different relationships. Adults who feel secure with romantic partners may not feel equally secure with parents or friends, and vice versa. This suggests attachment patterns are not fixed across all relationships and there is room for change depending on the specific relationship context and the responsiveness of different attachment figures.
Q6: What percentage of adults identified as each attachment style in Hazan and Shaver's original research?
In their original questionnaire study, Hazan and Shaver found that 60% of adults classified themselves as secure, 20% were avoidant, and approximately 20% were anxious-resistant. These percentages mirror the distribution of attachment styles observed in infants by Mary Ainsworth, suggesting that attachment patterns remain relatively stable from childhood into adulthood.
Q7: How does the dimensional model of attachment improve upon the categorical approach?
The dimensional model represents adult attachment using two independent axes—anxiety and avoidance—rather than three fixed categories. This approach captures greater variation in attachment patterns and allows for more nuanced understanding of individual differences. Most variation in attachment reports falls within these two fundamental dimensions, with levels varying from high to low, providing a more flexible framework than categorical classification. Understanding these dimensions helps explain why relationship formation and maintenance depend on individual attachment profiles.