Attachment theory

Safe haven6

Under threat, people seek closeness to an attachment figure, trusting that a safe haven is there if danger appears.

Secure base2

Knowing that person is available, the child feels free to explore and comes back when needed.

Internal working models3

From many interactions children form expectations about whether others will respond and whether they themselves are worth responding to.

Sensitive, responsive care1

Secure attachment forms when caregivers are sensitive, responsive and consistently present, especially from six months to two years.

Separation distress is normal1

Anxiety or grief at losing an attachment figure is seen as a normal, adaptive response.

The procedure2

A 21-minute lab observation of children aged 9–30 months as the parent and a stranger leave and return.

Secure (B)2

Explores freely with the parent there, is upset when they leave, and is comforted on their return.

Avoidant (A)2

Shows little emotion at separation or reunion; heart-rate studies suggest the calm masks distress.

Anxious-ambivalent (C)2

Distressed even before separation, clingy and hard to comfort; linked to unpredictably responsive care.

Disorganised (D)2

Added later by Mary Main: contradictory, fearful or frozen behaviour toward the caregiver.

Secure3

Comfortable with both closeness and independence; handles conflict without feeling overwhelmed.

Anxious-preoccupied3

Seeks intimacy and reassurance but fears others do not want to be close.

Dismissive-avoidant3

Values independence, suppresses emotion and pulls away when things get close.

Fearful-avoidant3

Wants closeness and fears it; the least common style.

Styles can change3

About 70–80% keep the same style over time; 20–30% change, sometimes within weeks or months.

Secure toddler2

Plays with the new toys while the parent is there, engages with the stranger, may be visibly upset when the parent leaves and is happy to see them return.

Avoidant toddler2

On reunion ignores the parent or looks, turns or moves away; if picked up, does not cuddle in, looks away and may squirm to get down.

Ambivalent toddler2

Distressed even before the parent leaves; on return both seeks and resists contact with an angry quality, or signals passively and protests at being put down.

Disorganised toddler2

Contradictory or fearful behaviour toward the parent: freezing, jerky or misdirected movements, even running to hide when the parent appears.

Secure adult3

For example, when a partner is slow to answer a message, a securely attached adult does not need reassurance; if there is a conflict, they talk it through without feeling overwhelmed.

Anxious-preoccupied adult3

Delayed replies set off worry and a feeling of rejection; even in a stable relationship they keep worrying about where it stands and seek approval.

Dismissive-avoidant adult3

For example, when a partner wants to talk about moving in together, a dismissive-avoidant adult changes the subject and grows distant, leaving the partner unsure why.

Fearful-avoidant adult3

Pushes and pulls: seeks closeness, then wants distance; many stay in the dating stage longer and may shut down when the relationship becomes serious.

A partner as secure base3

A romantic relationship can work as a secure base that helps a person face the surprises, opportunities and challenges of life.

Dominant and influential1

It has become a dominant approach to early social development and shaped therapy and childcare policy.

Weak long-term prediction1

In a Minnesota study, infant attachment security explained about 5% of social competence at 19 once background was accounted for.

Little stability across decades1

A meta-analysis found no significant stability when attachment was measured more than 15 years apart.

Measurement and culture2

Strange Situation results shift with family circumstances, and brief separations may not mean the same in every culture, such as Japan.

Mother-centred1

Critics say it overemphasises the mother and underplays genes, culture and the wider family.