Bowlby's Theory Grown up: The Role of Attachment in Adult Love Relationships
Author(s): Judith A. Crowell and Everett Waters
Source: Psychological Inquiry , 1994, Vol. 5, No. 1 (1994), pp. 31-34
Published by: Taylor & Francis, Ltd.
Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/1449078
REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/1449078?seq=1&cid=pdf-
reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms
Taylor & Francis, Ltd. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Psychological Inquiry
This content downloaded from
212.252.92.106 on Wed, 02 Oct 2024 07:13:27 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
COMMENTARIES
Bowlby's Theory Grown Up: The Role of Attachment in Adult Love
Relationships
Judith A. Crowell and Everett Waters
State University of New York Stony Brook
Among John Bowlby's many contributions to the Transition From Parent-Child to
social and behavioral sciences can be added credit for Adult-Adult Attachment Relationship
preserving Freud's provocative insight that the early
attachment relationship with a primary caregiver is a Hazan and Shaver present an intriguing model
prototype for later love relationships (Waters, Kondo-
of how a developing individual transfers his or her
Ikemura, Posada, & Richters, 1991). It is this insight,
attachment behavior from parents to peers. They
perhaps more than any other, that makes attachment suggest that the core elements of the infant attach-
theory immediately relevant to the study of adult-adult ment relationship are successively incorporated
love relationships. into peer relationships across adolescence and
The attachment tie consists of one individual's (a) young adult life. Proximity-seeking behavior is
use of another as a "secure base" from which to hypothesized to be the first element to transfer to
explore and master the environment in times of peers, followed by comfort seeking and support
safety and (b) use of that individual as a "safe haven" seeking (i.e., seeking a safe haven), and lastly
in times of stress or danger. Disruption or loss of thefollowed by the use of a specific other as a secure
attachment bond is accompanied by grief and mourn- base. The progression they outline is a logical and
ing in the individual who has been left, whether it be intriguing one-certainly consistent with attach-
child or attachment figure. The similarity between ment theory. However, the phases are discussed
the grief responses of infants and adults has been theonly briefly, and there seems a need for expanded
primary piece of evidence for the attachment behav- descriptions of the behaviors involved and a more
ioral system being an important and powerful com- complete rationale for the sequential aspects of the
ponent of relationships throughout life. Work in the hypothesis and how they may be informed by par-
area of close relationships in adult life has the poten- ent-infant attachment behavior.
tial to clarify or identify other key elements of at- For example, Hazan and Shaver cite evidence for
tachment behavior-providing important insights physical-proximity seeking being an important early
into the expression, meaning, and significance of element of adult-adult relationships. They note that
attachment across the life span and allowing for the need for proximity tends to diminish with time in
improved understanding of love relationships in the relationship and that this is an important behav-
adult life. Hazan and Shaver's discussion of the po- ioral change in need of explanation. In fact, a similar
tential usefulness of attachment theory in the study process occurs between infants and parents. In in-
of adult relationships is therefore both timely and fancy and early childhood, the need for close physi-
stimulating. cal proximity diminishes because the infant has an
Hazan and Shaver present a brief but comprehens- increasing capacity to comprehend, predict, and in-
ive review of attachment theory as developed by fluence the attachment figure's behavior (assuming
Bowlby (1969) and as supported by studies of in- that the infant has had an available, responsive at-
fancy. They then move on to discuss "attachment tachment figure). This appears to be due to the devel-
beyond infancy"-particularly emphasizing the tran- opment of skills in the motor, affective, linguistic,
sition from infant attachment to the reciprocal adult- and representational domains, which theoretically
adult attachment bond. Aspects of adult-adult lead to the infant's capacity to form cognitive, emo-
relationships that benefit from an attachment-theory
tional models of the relationship. This internal
perspective are reviewed. From Hazan and Shaver's knowledge or working model of the availability and
extensive integration of attachment theory with the potential support of the caregiver and the child's
research on adult love relationships, we have se- growing abilities in a variety of domains both con-
lected several discussion points that seem particu- tribute powerfully to the child's feelings of security
larly interesting or important. and diminish the need for physical contact as the sole
31
This content downloaded from
212.252.92.106 on Wed, 02 Oct 2024 07:13:27 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
COMMENTARIES
means of feeling secure. Although the reduction of this
you think and feel, I will actively support your indepen-
need is based in large part on maturation in the infant,
dent actions, I trust you and you can trust me to be here
we can speculate that increasing predictability of the need me, et cetera." As in the infant-parent
if you
adult partner's behavior, availability, and goalsrelationship,
would demonstration of such a commitment
also contribute to relaxing the need for close physical
probably requires many little examples (Waters et al.,
contact and monitoring. In other words, the individual
1991) that occur frequently, repeatedly, and across a
is able to incorporate the partner's behavior intovariety
his orof situations. Thus, availability at times of sig-
her working model of relationships and thus can feel stress is only one aspect of this commitment.
nificant
safe and secure in the relationship when not in contact
We suggest that ordinary circumstances are probably
with the partner. more difficult to negotiate than extraordinary ones, as
In the discussion regarding safe-haven behavior and
they require the trust that develops because the partner
secure-base behavior, Hazan and Shaver do not make has shown active support and promotion of his or her
clear distinctions between these two elements of attach- loved one's activities (exploration) and sustained and
ment, and, clearly, definition is important if one is flexible availability, sensitivity, and responsivity.
hypothesizing that one precedes and promotes the
other. In infancy, the two phenomena are so closely
Reciprocity
linked that it is not feasible to suggest that one precedes
the other; safe-haven seeking is the attachment re-
sponse of the infant under stress, and secure-base be- Within any theory of adult-adult relationships, we
havior occurs when life is "ordinary." Both types of must include the notion that an individual must learn
attachment behaviors develop in the context of the to be a caregiver (to another adult, to their own child)
relationship with the parent. Why, then, as Hazan and as well as a support seeker. Hazan and Shaver sepa-
Shaver propose (and we agree), would the expression rate functioning as a caregiver from attachment be-
of "ordinary" behavioral patterns (secure base) devel- havior. This is an interesting distinction, but it is not
opmentally follow "emergency" behavior (safe-haven clear if it is meaningful and useful or not. In many
seeking) in older individuals? ways, it is less confusing to separate these constructs,
Attachment theory postulates that the experience of but it then becomes difficult to understand the con-
distress, illness, danger, or extreme novelty provokes cept and evolution of reciprocity-a particularly im-
an individual to seek another because of an inborn need portant aspect of attachment relationships, especially
to seek safety. If the stress is great enough, "any port adult attachment relationships. We know that grief
will do in a storm," although familiar and responsive and mourning reactions are at least as powerful when
people are preferred to unfamiliar, unresponsive people an attachment figure loses a child as in the reverse
if a choice is available (Waters et al., 1991). It can be situation. The real or perceived failure of the attach-
hypothesized that, in the early stages of a relationship, ment figure to protect the child effectively is ex-
seeking the partner may be reflexive initially (i.e., he tremely painful, and, if grief and mourning are the
or she is there and is relatively familiar). In addition, hallmark of an attachment relationship, then clearly
from the perspective of the partner, perhaps it is easier attachment is not a one-way street.
and less meaningful to support an individual in an Reciprocity certainly seems relevant in the most
isolated crisis than it is to be there for him or her day advanced stage of the parent-child attachment relation-
in, day out-as being a secure base implies. ship-the "goal-corrected partnership" (Bowlby,
Hazan and Shaver suggest that the transition from 1969)-if not before. The goal-corrected partnership
safe-haven behavior to secure-base behavior happens between parent and child is when the child is able to
because of the partner's proven responsiveness in times take the parent's goals into account even when the
of stress. Time and explicit commitment are considered attachment system is activated, possibly starting
necessary as well. We suggest that, as in the infant-par- around 3 to 4 years of age (Marvin, 1977). This phase
ent relationship, the partner plays a vital role here. Just is the least well characterized by Bowlby and the least
as the parent actively supports exploration and reas- studied, but it is likely to be relevant for the develop-
sures the infant that he or she is alert and available ment of the attachment system in peer relationships. It
should the need arise, so too the partner must actively involves the development of working models of the
teach the other that he or she can be used as a secure relationship-the cognitive, emotional constructs that
base from which the individual can explore. Therefore, are used to anticipate the actions of the partner and the
commitment in secure-base terms is unlikely to be self in attachment situations and thus allow for a certain
"hearts and flowers" responsiveness or "I want to marry amount of security, self-comforting, and support
you"; rather, we suggest it may be more like "I'm here, through the emotional knowledge of what the attach-
I will be here, I'm interested in what you do and what ment figure would do if present. Sroufe and Fleeson
32
This content downloaded from
212.252.92.106 on Wed, 02 Oct 2024 07:13:27 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
COM MENTARIES
(1986) discussed the evidence that the child internalizes
tionships (Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991; George,
the whole relationship, not just the "child role," and Kaplan, & Main, 1984) and peer relationships
thus has foreknowledge of the "parent role," the attach- (Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991), self-report ques-
ment-figure role, long before it may be put to serious tionnaires (Collins & Read, 1990), and self-placement
use in a relationship. The successful development of the into a style (Hazan & Shaver, 1987). Although there is
goal-corrected partnership is likely to be a precursor for an assumption in much of the research that an
reciprocity in more mature relationships. individual's adult attachment style develops from the
Reciprocity within the relationship, or the behav- relationship the individual has with his or her own
ior of each partner as an attachment figure and not parent, the association between early relationships with
just as a comfort seeker, may be important within parents and subsequent self-reports about and behavior
unsuccessful relationships. Hazan and Shaver sug- in love relationships has rarely been studied. Hazan and
gest that early negative relationship experiences may Shaver's summary of the research does not address this
lead one to have minimal expectations within a rela- problem, and it is difficult to identify from their discus-
tionship, but the same early relationships may also sion which assessments involve relationships in the
affect actual behavior in both seeking and providing family of origin and which are assessments of current
care within the relationship. Failure of a relationship thinking and behavior that may be influenced as much
or maintenance of an unsatisfying one may reside not as by or more by experiences with peers than by expe-
only in the individual's need for security/proximity riences with parents. The methods and assessments in
but also within a partner's struggle to nurture or many cases have not been compared with one another,
provide care that cannot be used (failure to be an so it is not clear that they measure the similar constructs
effective attachment figure). that are claimed.
Although it seems that the reciprocal nature of the In the research on adult relationships, it appears that
attachment relationship is key in understanding adult- concepts from attachment theory are used with increas-
adult relationships, at present it remains a theoretical ing frequency but often without clear definition. Com-
and empirical question whether we should combine plex constructs as working models or what
attachment behavior and caregiving behavior into one attachment-specific behavior might look like in adu
behavioral system, or whether they are separate but are often only vaguely described. In many instances,
related systems. We do not know if secure attachment the behaviors or characteristics assessed seem to en-
in the parent-child relationship allows for an individualcompass more than just attachment-related behavior or
to be equally good at being a secure base and giving constructs, extending to broad issues such as problem
help as in asking for help and using a secure base in an solving, substance abuse, self-esteem, and so forth.
adult love relationship. Thus, the considerable confusion in the field both meth-
odologically and theoretically is not helpful in clarify-
ing either attachment theory or the nature of adult love
Individual Differences
relationships.
The discussion of individual differences in attach-
Conclusion
ment styles is the most difficult part of the target
article. As Hazan and Shaver state, it is not helpful
to focus solely on individual differences, allowing Many researchers have enthusiastically drawn on
adult attachment to become "a theory of three (or attachment theory to inform their work, but, as can be
maybe four) types of" adults. Nevertheless, this ap- seen from Hazan and Shaver's review of the literature,
pears to be the focus of much of the research to date there is often little common ground between studies in
in adult attachment. a practical or theoretical sense. We suggest some direc-
The labeling of adult attachment styles is based on tions for future research in this section so that the link
infant attachment patterns that are hypothesized to de- between attachment theory and adult love relationships
velop within the context of differing patterns of parent- can be truly profitable.
ing behavior and that were originally identified in the
Strange Situation laboratory procedure (Ainsworth, 1. As noted earlier, the discriminant and convergent
Blehar, Waters, & Wall, 1978). The adult attachment validity of the various popular measures of adult attach-
styles are commonly labeled secure, preoccupied or ment needs to be determined, as do the relations be-
anxious/ambivalent, and dismissing or anxious/avoid- tween the measures.
ant. Unfortunately, the research in adult attachment has 2. The strong theoretical connection between par-
used several different methods to assess adult attach- ent-child attachment relationships and adult-adult love
ment styles, ranging from interviews about early rela- relationships must be explored.
33
This content downloaded from
212.252.92.106 on Wed, 02 Oct 2024 07:13:27 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
COMMENTARIES
3. We do not have clear descriptions of attach- Note
ment behaviors in older children, adolescents, and
adults. Hazan and Shaver are probably very wise in Judith A. Crowell and Everett Waters, Department
confining their focus to proximity seeking, safe- of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Putnam Hall,
haven seeking, and secure-base behavior, but how South Campus, State University of New York, Stony
can these behaviors be recognized and measured in Brook, NY 11794.
adolescents and adults? And what is the role of the
partner in their manifestation? References
4. We have many questions regarding the mean-
ing of attachment behavior across the life span and Ainsworth, M. D. S., Blehar, M., Waters, E., & Wall, S. (1978).
Patterns of attachment: A psychological study of the Strange
the relation between expressed attachment behavior
Situation. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
and emotional, cognitive constructs concerning at- Bartholomew, K., & Horowitz, L. (1991). Attachment styles among
tachment relationships. For example, what is the young adults: A test of a four-category model. Journal of Per-
association between attachment behaviors and work- sonality and Social Psychology, 61, 226-244.
Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment. New York: Basic.
ing models of attachment relationships and adults'
Collins, N., & Read, S. (1990). Adult attachment, working models,
abilities to comfort themselves or to be attachment and relationship quality in dating couples. Journal of Personal-
figures? Many adults show attachment behaviors to- ity and Social Psychology, 58, 644-663.
ward parents, siblings, and close friends. Must at- George, C., Kaplan, N., & Main, M. (1984). Adult Attachment
Interview. Berkeley: University of California.
tachment behavior always transfer to an adult love
Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. (1987). Romantic love conceptualized as an
partner? What is the role of culture? Does adult-adult attachment process.Journal of Personality and Social Psychol-
attachment behavior have an ethological or adaptive ogy, 52, 511-524.
role in childrearing? Marvin, R. (1977). An ethological-cognitive model for the attenua-
tion of mother-child attachment behavior. In T. Alloway, L.
Krames, & P. Pliner (Eds.), Advances in the study of communi-
Hazan and Shaver's efforts to pull together the cation and affect: The development of social attachment (pp.
25-60). New York: Plenum.
wide-ranging research in adult relationships using
Sroufe, L. A., & Fleeson, J. (Eds.). (1986). Attachment and the
attachment theory as an organizational framework
construction of relationships. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
are exciting and potentially very useful. We thank Associates, Inc.
them for providing a thoughtful and provocative Waters, E., Kondo-lkemura, K, Posada, G., & Richters, J. (1991).
essay that we hope will provide important ground- Learning to Love: Mechanisms and milestones. In M. Gunnar
& L. A. Sroufe (Eds.), Self processes and development: The
work for future research in attachment and adult love
Minnesota Symposium on Child Psychology (pp. 217-255).
relationships. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Attaching Meaning to Attachment
Steve Duck
University of Iowa
No one could disagree that Hazan and Shaver are ing machines that happen to be in the same room and
right to argue that the field of close personal relation- are able to read each other's printouts.
ships sorely needs better theories. We need to move Hazan and Shaver point to some of the right objec-
away from limited attempts to explain something as tives. The question is whether they meet them, and my
complex as relationship by reference to the internal answer is "no." This is partly because the range of
crankings of one of the partner's cognitions, without literature considered is quite narrow-no sociology or
reference to the importance of social process, the inter- reference to the effects of social structure on relation-
action of two minds through symbol and speech, or the ships; none of the theory of communication; no discus-
communication between the two that both embodies sion of family systems theory; only fleeting reference
these other things and at the same time can modify to the large and growing literature on childhood peer
them. Even worse, we need to move away from models rejection or the effects of direct parental intervention in
that implicitly treat relationships as the simultaneous, children's social behavior; no real discussion of gender
but relatively independent, crankings of two calculat- effects on relationships; and no analysis of the literature
34
This content downloaded from
212.252.92.106 on Wed, 02 Oct 2024 07:13:27 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
