Fraley & Shaver
The sources contain information about a study by R. Chris Fraley and Phillip R. Shaver regarding adult romantic attachment. This study reviews the theory of romantic attachment as it was originally formulated by Hazan and Shaver in 1987 and how it has evolved over more than a decade. The study also discusses five issues related to the theory that need further clarification:
- The nature of attachment relationships.
- The evolution and function of attachment in adulthood.
- Models of individual differences in attachment.
- Continuity and change in attachment security.
- The integration of attachment, sex, and caregiving.
Here are some of the key points and findings from the Fraley and Shaver study:
- Attachment Theory: The study is rooted in attachment theory, which was initially developed to understand the bonds between infants and caregivers. Hazan and Shaver extended this theory to romantic relationships, proposing that adult romantic love is an attachment process.
- Three Attachment Styles: Hazan and Shaver initially proposed three adult attachment styles, mirroring those seen in infants: secure, anxious-ambivalent, and avoidant. These styles describe how individuals think, feel, and behave in romantic relationships.
- Ethological Approach: The study uses an ethological framework which broadens the questions asked about attachment, including questions about function and evolution, not just causation and development.
- Individual Differences: The study emphasises that individuals differ in how they experience and behave in relationships. The three-category model has been influential in accounting for the variability in relational behaviour.
- Attachment Relationships: The study examines what constitutes an attachment relationship, suggesting that not all romantic relationships are attachment relationships. Attachment relationships are marked by proximity maintenance, safe haven, and secure base.
- Safe Haven: The study notes that some individuals may be inclined to use their partners as a safe haven but not act on that inclination, which may lead to inaccurate conclusions about attachment dynamics.
- Attachment Hierarchies: The study raises questions about how attachment hierarchies are reorganised after the end of a relationship.
- Monogamy: The study suggests that monogamy may have evolved to solve the problem of paternity certainty.
- Four-Category Model: Bartholomew’s four-category model of attachment is presented, which splits the avoidant category into fearful-avoidance and dismissing-avoidance.
- Two-Dimensional Model: The study argues for a dimensional approach to understanding attachment, proposing that individual differences can be organised within a two-dimensional space: anxiety and avoidance.
- Attachment System Components: Instead of the “model of self and model of others” framework, Fraley and Shaver propose an alternative conceptualisation of the two dimensions as reflecting variability in the functioning of two fundamental subsystems or components of the attachment behavioural system.
- Continuity: The study addresses the question of continuity between infant and adult attachment styles and the degree to which early experiences shape adult romantic attachment patterns.
- Integration of Systems: The study notes that romantic love involves the integration of attachment, caregiving, and sex, although most research has focused on attachment.
- Revised Theory: The study concludes that a revised theory of adult romantic attachment should consider that not all couple relationships are attachment relationships, it should address the evolution of attachment in adult relationships, and should use a two-dimensional scheme to describe individual differences in attachment.
In summary, Fraley and Shaver’s study provides a comprehensive review of romantic attachment theory, highlighting its evolution, strengths, limitations, and areas for future research. The study argues that not all romantic relationships are attachment relationships and suggests a two-dimensional model of individual differences in attachment.
James Marcia
James Marcia expanded on Erik Erikson’s work on identity development during adolescence. According to Marcia, the presence or absence of a sense of commitment (to life goals and values) and a sense of crisis (active questioning and exploration) can combine to produce four different identity statuses. These statuses represent different ways in which adolescents deal with identity formation.
Here’s a breakdown of Marcia’s four identity statuses:
- Identity diffusion: This status is characterised by a lack of commitment to an ideology and a state of rudderless apathy. Individuals in this status have not explored different options or made firm decisions about their beliefs, values, or goals.
- Identity foreclosure: This status involves a premature commitment to visions, values and roles, typically those prescribed by one’s parents. Individuals in this status have made commitments without exploring different possibilities and tend to be conformist and not very open to new experiences.
- Identity moratorium: This status involves delaying commitment to explore alternative ideologies and careers. Individuals in this status are actively questioning and experimenting with different options, but have not yet made firm commitments.
- Identity achievement: This status represents arriving at a sense of self and direction after some consideration of alternative possibilities. Individuals in this status have explored different options and have made clear commitments about their beliefs, values and goals. This status is associated with higher self-esteem, conscientiousness, security, achievement motivation, and capacity for intimacy.
Marcia’s theory suggests that individuals progress through these statuses as they develop a sense of identity during adolescence. However, research indicates that people tend to reach identity achievement at later ages than originally envisioned by Marcia.
In summary, Marcia’s work focuses on how adolescents navigate the process of identity formation, and he proposed four distinct statuses based on exploration and commitment.
Temperament
The sources provide considerable information about temperament, especially in infancy and childhood. Here’s a breakdown of what the text says about temperament:
- Definition: Temperament refers to an individual’s characteristic mood, activity level, and emotional reactivity. It’s considered a basic aspect of personality that is apparent early in life.
- Early Manifestation: Infants display consistent differences in emotional tone, tempo of activity, and sensitivity to environmental stimuli from very early in life. Some babies seem cheerful, while others appear sluggish or irritable.
- Longitudinal Study: Alexander Thomas and Stella Chess conducted a major longitudinal study on temperament. This research tracked individuals over time, revealing key insights into the stability and variability of temperament.
- In a longitudinal design, investigators observe the same group of participants repeatedly over a period of time.
- This is contrasted with a cross-sectional approach, which compares different age groups at a single point in time.
- Longitudinal designs tend to be more sensitive to developmental changes, but they can be affected by participants dropping out. Cross-sectional studies may be affected by cohort effects where differences between age groups are due to their different historical contexts.
- Temperament Styles: Thomas and Chess identified three basic styles of temperament that are apparent in most children:
- Easy children (about 40%): Tend to be happy, regular in sleeping and eating, adaptable, and not easily upset.
- Slow-to-warm-up children (about 15%): Tend to be less cheery, less regular in their routines, slower to adapt to change, wary of new experiences, and have moderate emotional reactivity.
- Difficult children (about 10%): Tend to be glum, erratic in sleeping and eating, resistant to change, and relatively irritable.
- The remaining 35% of children show mixtures of these three temperaments.
- Stability of Temperament: A child’s temperament at three months was found to be a fairly good predictor of their temperament at age ten. Although some changes can occur, temperament tends to be generally stable over time. Infants categorised as “difficult” were more likely to develop emotional problems requiring counselling than other children.
- Influence of Heredity: Individual differences in temperament are influenced to a considerable degree by heredity. However, temperament is not unchangeable.
- Cultural Differences: There appear to be some modest cultural differences in the prevalence of specific temperamental styles. For example, an inhibited temperament is seen more often among Chinese children compared to North American children, although it’s unclear whether this is due to genetics, cultural practices, or both.
- Interaction of Heredity and Environment: The development of temperament is affected by both heredity and environment.
- Children with different temperaments will elicit different reactions from different parents, depending on the parents’ personalities and expectations.
- A temperamentally difficult child may elicit negative reactions from parents, which in turn may make the child more difficult, creating a reciprocal cycle between genetics and experience.
- Multifactorial Causation: The development of temperament is an example of multifactorial causation, which is one of the themes of human development identified in the sources.
In summary, temperament is a key aspect of early personality that shows stability over time, influenced by both heredity and environment, with some cultural variations in the expression of different temperamental styles. The study of temperament illustrates the importance of considering multifactorial causes in human development, and that genetic and environmental factors interact with one another.