Editing Attachment theory (section)

== Empirical research and theoretical developments ==
[[John Bowlby]] initially conceptualized attachment as an [[Evolutionary systems|evolutionary system]] that would ensure infant survival. [[Mary Ainsworth]] provided empirical testing through observational studies such as the [[Strange situation|Strange Situation]] Experiment. 

During the Strange Situation experiment, four participants partake in a series of eight "episodes" of experiences. These participants are a mother, a baby, a stranger and an observer. 

# The mother, accompanied by the observer, carries the baby into the room and the observer leaves. 
# The mother puts the baby down in a specified location, then sits quietly in her chair until the baby solicites her attention.
# The stranger enters, sits quietly for one minute, then converses with the mother for one minute, and then gradually approaches the baby. The mother then leaves the room.
# If the baby is playing with its toys, the stranger merely observes. If the baby is not playing with its toys, the stranger tries to interest the baby in the toys. If the baby is distressed, the stranger tries to comfort the baby.
# The mother enters, and pauses in the doorway so that the baby can respond to her presence. The stranger then leaves. After the baby begins to play with its toys again, the mother leaves again and says, "bye-bye".
# the baby is left alone for three minutes, unless the baby is so distressed it has to be comforted.
# The stranger enters and repeats the same behavior from the fourth episode.
# The mother returns, the stranger leaves, and the mother reunites with her baby. 

These eight episodes were observed through an adjoining room, and the baby's responses were categorized into different types of attachment behaviours.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Ainsworth |first=Mary D. Salter |last2=Bell |first2=Silvia M. |date=1970 |title=Attachment, Exploration, and Separation: Illustrated by the Behavior of One-Year-Olds in a Strange Situation |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/1127388?read-now=1&seq=6#page_scan_tab_contents |journal=Child Development |volume=41 |issue=1 |pages=49–67 |doi=10.2307/1127388 |issn=0009-3920|url-access=subscription }}</ref> 

Bretherton (1992) then followed this theoretical development, highlighting Bowlby's interdisciplinary framework. He relied on the concepts of ethology, psychoanalysis, and cognitive science. Ainsworth introduced the systematic classification of attachment styles contingent upon infant caregivers' interactive experiences.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Bretherton |first=Inge |date=September 1992 |title=The origins of attachment theory: John Bowlby and Mary Ainsworth. |url=https://doi.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0012-1649.28.5.759 |journal=Developmental Psychology |language=en |volume=28 |issue=5 |pages=759–775 |doi=10.1037/0012-1649.28.5.759 |issn=1939-0599|url-access=subscription }}</ref>

Building on this foundation, Main and Solomon (1990) extended the original attachment classification to identify a disorganized/disoriented attachment style. They observed infants displaying contradictory or confused behaviors when reunited with a caregiver.<ref name=":0" /> This further complicated the understanding of attachment patterning and has informed [[clinical practice]] and developmental research.

Empirical studies have further classified how early attachment is formed and passed on across generations. Beebe et al. (2010) studied four-month-old mother interactions using microanalytic methods. They determined that coordinated gazes and vocal affect predicted attachment security at twelve months using the Strange Situation Procedure.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Beebe |first=Beatrice |last2=Jaffe |first2=Joseph |last3=Markese |first3=Sara |last4=Buck |first4=Karen |last5=Chen |first5=Henian |last6=Cohen |first6=Patricia |last7=Bahrick |first7=Lorraine |last8=Howard |first8=Andrews |last9=Stanley |first9=Feldstein |date=2010-01-01 |title=The origins of 12-month attachment: A microanalysis of 4-month mother–infant interaction |url=https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/14616730903338985 |journal=Attachment & Human Development |volume=12 |issue=1-2 |pages=3–141 |doi=10.1080/14616730903338985 |issn=1461-6734 |pmc=3763737 |pmid=20390524}}</ref> Similarly, Steele et al. (1996) found intergenerational continuity regarding parents' attachment classifications and those of infants. <ref>{{Cite journal |last=Steele |first=Howard |last2=Steele |first2=Miriam |last3=Fonagy |first3=Peter |date=1996 |title=Associations among Attachment Classifications of Mothers, Fathers, and Their Infants |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/1131831?origin=crossref |journal=Child Development |volume=67 |issue=2 |pages=541–555 |doi=10.2307/1131831 |issn=0009-3920|url-access=subscription }}</ref>

Another one of the most influential studies supporting the principle of attachment theory was conducted by Harry Harlow. Harlow’s research with rhesus monkeys demonstrated the critical importance of caregiving and emotional comfort in creating attachment. In these experiments, infant monkeys were separated from their biological mothers and given the choice between two inanimate surrogate mothers: one made of wire and wood and one made of foam and cloth. In addition, the monkeys were assigned one of two conditions: one condition where the wire mother provided milk while the cloth mother had no food to offer, and the other condition where the cloth mother provided food while the wire mother did not. In both conditions, the infant monkeys overwhelmingly preferred the cloth mother, clinging to it for comfort and security even though it did not provide nourishment.<ref>[https://www.psychologicalscience.org/publications/observer/obsonline/harlows-classic-studies-revealed-the-importance-of-maternal-contact.html "Harlow’s Classic Studies Revealed the Importance of Maternal Contact"]</ref> The infant monkeys' preference highlighted the importance of comfort, warmth, and emotional security over mere sustenance. Harlow’s work provided strong support for Bowlby’s claim that the need for affection and emotional security is a fundamental aspect of earlier development, also influencing later social and emotional outcomes. Clearly, children need more than just food and shelter; they require emotional attunement and a reliable source of comfort to develop a sense of security. This introduces the importance of having a “secure base.” A secure base allows children to confidently explore their environment, knowing that they have a supportive caregiver to return to when distressed. This level of responsiveness, as well as warmth and responsiveness, is critical for successful relationships and attachment.<ref>Bowlby, J. (1988). ''A Secure Base''. New York: Basic Books.</ref>

The attachment theory has also been extended into the adult relationship domain. Adult romantic attachment has been reviewed by Fraley and Shaver (2000), who advocated that attachment behaviors are observed in infancy. Seeking proximity and secure base responses were also present in adult romantic relationships<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Fraley |first=R. Chris |last2=Shaver |first2=Phillip R. |date=2000-06-01 |title=Adult Romantic Attachment: Theoretical Developments, Emerging Controversies, and Unanswered Questions |url=https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1037/1089-2680.4.2.132 |journal=Review of General Psychology |language=EN |volume=4 |issue=2 |pages=132–154 |doi=10.1037/1089-2680.4.2.132 |issn=1089-2680}}</ref> This review illustrates how the attachment framework can be applied across the lifespan and highlights ongoing debates about [[Continuity of Care Document|continuity]], measurements, and individual differences.

Together, both the theoretical advances and empirical studies underscore the importance of early relational experiences. It also supports the broader application of attachment theory in various contexts across developmental stages and relationships.