Open main menu
Home
Random
Recent changes
Special pages
Community portal
Preferences
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Incubator escapee wiki
Search
User menu
Talk
Dark mode
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Editing
Attachment theory
(section)
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
===Dismissive-avoidant attachment=== An infant with a dismissive-avoidant pattern of attachment will avoid or ignore the caregiver—showing little emotion when the caregiver departs or returns. The infant will not explore very much regardless of who is there. Infants classified as dismissive-avoidant (A) represented a puzzle in the early 1970s. They did not exhibit distress on separation, and either ignored the caregiver on their return (A1 subtype) or showed some tendency to approach together with some tendency to ignore or turn away from the caregiver (A2 subtype). Ainsworth and Bell theorized that the apparently unruffled behaviour of the avoidant infants was in fact a mask for distress, a hypothesis later evidenced through studies of the heart-rate of avoidant infants.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Ainsworth MD, Bell SM | s2cid = 3942480 | title = Attachment, exploration, and separation: illustrated by the behavior of one-year-olds in a strange situation | url = https://archive.org/details/sim_child-development_1970-03_41_1/page/49 | journal = Child Development | volume = 41 | issue = 1 | pages = 49–67 | date = March 1970 | pmid = 5490680 | doi = 10.2307/1127388 | jstor = 1127388 }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Sroufe A, Waters E |year=1977 |title=Attachment as an Organizational Construct | url = https://archive.org/details/sim_child-development_1977-12_48_4/page/1184 |journal=Child Development |volume=48 |issue=4 |pages=1184–1199 |citeseerx=10.1.1.598.3872 |doi=10.1111/j.1467-8624.1977.tb03922.x}}</ref> Infants are depicted as dismissive-avoidant when there is: {{blockquote|... conspicuous avoidance of the mother in the reunion episodes which is likely to consist of ignoring her altogether, although there may be some pointed looking away, turning away, or moving away ... If there is a greeting when the mother enters, it tends to be a mere look or a smile ... Either the baby does not approach his mother upon reunion, or they approach in "abortive" fashions with the baby going past the mother, or it tends to only occur after much coaxing ... If picked up, the baby shows little or no contact-maintaining behavior<!-- This is within a quote, might be the original spelling -->; he tends not to cuddle in; he looks away and he may squirm to get down.<ref name="Ainsworth, M.D.S, Blehar, M. C., Waters, E., & Wall, S." />}} Ainsworth's narrative records showed that infants avoided the caregiver in the stressful Strange Situation Procedure when they had a history of experiencing rebuff of attachment behaviour. The infant's needs were frequently not met and the infant had come to believe that communication of emotional needs had no influence on the caregiver. Ainsworth's student [[Mary Main]] theorized that avoidant behaviour in the Strange Situation Procedure should be regarded as "a conditional strategy, which paradoxically permits whatever proximity is possible under conditions of maternal rejection" by de-emphasising attachment needs.<ref>{{cite journal | vauthors = Main M |year=1979 |title=The "ultimate" causation of some infant attachment phenomena | url = https://archive.org/details/sim_behavioral-and-brain-sciences_1979-12_2_4/page/640 |journal=Behavioral and Brain Sciences |volume=2 |issue=4 |pages=640–643 |doi=10.1017/s0140525x00064992|s2cid=144105265 }}</ref> Main proposed that avoidance has two functions for an infant whose caregiver is consistently unresponsive to their needs. Firstly, avoidant behaviour allows the infant to maintain a conditional proximity with the caregiver: close enough to maintain protection, but distant enough to avoid rebuff. Secondly, the cognitive processes organizing avoidant behaviour could help direct attention away from the unfulfilled desire for closeness with the caregiver—avoiding a situation in which the child is overwhelmed with emotion ("disorganized distress"), and therefore unable to maintain control of themselves and achieve even conditional proximity.<ref>{{cite book | vauthors = Main M | date = 1977 | chapter = Analysis of a peculiar form of reunion behaviour seen in some day-care children. | veditors = Webb R | title = Social Development in Childhood | url = https://archive.org/details/socialdevelopmen00hyma | pages = [https://archive.org/details/socialdevelopmen00hyma/page/33 33]–78 | location = Baltimore | publisher = Johns Hopkins | isbn = 978-0-8018-1946-9 }}</ref>
Edit summary
(Briefly describe your changes)
By publishing changes, you agree to the
Terms of Use
, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the
CC BY-SA 4.0 License
and the
GFDL
. You agree that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient attribution under the Creative Commons license.
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)