In addition to Ainsworth’s categorical attachment classifications, the ‘Berkeley Adult Attachment Interview’ coincides with examining behaviour although the primary targets in this case are adults (George, Kaplan & Main 1985). The methodological framework behind the AAI involves interviewing techniques by means of obtaining information regarding early attachment experiences and current opinions on attachments. Based upon responses, adults are then assigned to either one of four categories; Secure-autonomous, Dismissing, Preoccupied or unresolved.
Summary
The study under review is based on a twenty year longitudinal study aimed in assessing potential changes in attachment relationships from infancy to adulthood when exposed to ‘negative life events’ e.g. parental divorce, and to stimulate further research. The researches have based their investigation on Bowlby’s theory of attachment, employing Ainsworth’s ‘Strange Situation’ in addition to utilising Berkeley’s AAI. The present findings show that changes in attachments from infancy to adulthood occur when ‘negative life events’ have been experienced. Further analysis would examine both the stability of attachment in other populations and the mechanisms involved in change.
Evaluation
As the paper hypothesised, changes in attachment patterns correlate directly with experiencing negative life events. As shown, a relationship between experiencing negative life events and changing attachment security is evident however causality is not necessarily negatively skewed; results indicate that possibilities to prevail initial behaviour patterns is probable. This conclusion is supported by Sroufe (1988) who stated that a stable relationship with a supportive partner can have the ability to reverse attachment patterns from insecure to secure. Although the paper shows a significant result, the sample size may not entirely represent a significant enough population. 32 out of the 50 had experienced no NLE, therefore these result can not be included, leaving only the 18 remaining being relevant to the hypothesis. However, it must be noted at this point, middle-class participants where used in the study, this enabled the full co-operation and overall general interest of participants to be re-contacted, in addition, representing a large segment of the population. The maintenance of sample sizes in longitudinal study has its difficulties but overcome relatively due these factors.
Again, as the paper essentially lacked participating figures, the embodying of two divergent forms of interpreting and presenting results was therefore manifested. It was noted firstly that 64% were assigned to corresponding classifications in infancy to adulthood, meaning, classification remained constant over time, secondly, 72% received the same classification using the secure-insecure dichotomy and lastly, 36% changing classification. One might suggest the motive for presenting two interpretations would intensify findings however phrasing and arrangement of these results could have been made clearer.
The measuring of negative life events involved two methods, checklist and AAI. The underlining assumption assumes responses given between alternative measures correspond with one another in an attempt to verify answers, but this was not entirely the case. It was noted that 8 were classified ‘one or more’ by checklist but ‘none’ by AAI and again, 2 classified ‘one or more’ by AAI but ‘none’ by checklist, this displaying a measurement error. The reliability of results between the alternative measures was found to be problematic as disagreements between the two findings arouse. Clearly faults had arisen during this process and again resulting in the removal of more results however valuing the mythological attempts to validate responses should be given appraisal.
Another point to mention in relation to the AAI is the number of classifications utilised by the study. The Original casting of the AAI consists of four attachment classification, the current paper only accommodates three of the four classifications, abolishing the ‘unresolved’ classification. One might insinuate that this classification may not have any relevance to the study and thus would serve no purpose however clarifying such a reason has not even been attempted.
Both the strange situation and AAI relies on observational methods as a means of assessing relationship patterns within a given setting, however behaviour observed at a given time may not entirely represent a person typical behaviour therefore reliability of data can be questioned. This was point was highlighted within the paper, attributing a 10% measurement error to both these methods. Although the ‘strange situation’ and AAI has been extensively criticised, it is the most widely used technique for measuring the quality of attachments.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the paper under review illustrates stability and change of attachment organisations from infancy to late adolescence/early adulthood in addition to providing information about the relationship between negative life events and changes in attachment classification. The utilisation of the SSP and AAI enabled attachment classifications to be measured and further analysed for relationship changes however flawed methodological errors generates doubt regarding reliability of data. Further research would suggest implementing several other additional measures for validating attachment behaviours, increasing sample sizes and focus attention on either the lower or upper class population.
References
Ainsworth, M.D.S., Blehar, M.C., Waters, E., & Wall, S. (1978). Patterns of attachment: A psychological study of the strange situation. Hillsdale, NJ:Erlbaum.
Ainsworth, M.D.S., & Eichberg, C. (1991). Effects on infant-mother attachment of
mother’s unresolved loss of an attachment figure, or other traumatic experience. In
C.M. Parkes, J. Stevenson-Hinde, & P. Marris. Attachment across the life cycle.
London: Routledge.
Bowlby, J. (1973). Attachment and loss: Separation, anxiety and anger. New York: Basic Books.
Bowlby, J. (1980). Attachment and loss: Vol. 3. Loss: Sadness and depression. New York: Basic Books.
George, C., Kaplan, N., & Main, M. (1985). An adult attachment interview: Interview
protocol. Unpublished manuscript, University of California at Berkeley.
Sroufe, L.A. (1988). The role of infant-caregiver attachment in development. In J.
Belsky, & T. Nezworski (Eds.), Clinical implications of attachment. Hillsdale, NJ:
Erlbaum.
Rutter, M. (1989). Isle of Wight revisited: Twenty-five years of child psychiatric
epidemiology. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry,
28, 633-653.
Rutter, M. (1990). Psychosocial resilience and protective mechanisms. In J. Wolf, A.S. Masten, D. Cicchetti, K.H. Neuchterlein, & S. Weintraub (Eds.), Risk and protective factors in the development of psychopathology. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Word Count: 1072.
