3.4 Types of Attachment and Cultural Variations in Attachment: AQA Psychology A level Revision

Types of attachment

There are three types of attachment: secure, insecure-avoidant and insecure-resistant.

Secure attachment

This was found to be the most common attachment type in the Strange Situation experiment conducted by Ainsworth and is the most common attachment type globally.

Secure attachment (Type B): Between 66-70% of infants are classified as secure. The infants were happy exploring the room and playing, using the PrimaryCare Giver(PCG) as a safe base . They were distressed when left by the PCG, so they demonstrated separation anxiety. The infant avoided the stranger and so showed the stranger's anxiety. On reunion with the PCG, they were happy that any upset disappeared very quickly.

Insecure-avoidant attachment

The second most common attachment type in Ainsworth's experiment, but this does vary in follow-up studies). However, it is never the dominant attachment type in any culture where the strange situation has been used.

Insecure attachment: Avoidant (Type A): 18-20% of infants were found to be insecure-avoidant. The infants were happy to explore the room and play but did not refer to the PCG as they did this. They showed no sign of distress when left by the PCG: There was no separation anxiety, and the infant treated the stranger as they would the PCG, ignoring them, and so showed no stranger anxiety. On reunion with the PCG, they tended to ignore them and carried on with what they were doing.

Insecure resistant attachment

This was the least common of the three attachment types identified by Ainsworth. Again, this varies culturally, but it has yet to be the dominant attachment style in any culture studied so far.

Insecure attachment: Resistant (Type C): Around 10-12% of infants were classified as insecure resistant and sometimes referred to as Insecure Attachment Ambivalent. The infants did not explore the room and were reluctant to leave the PCG's side in case they were left. They were distressed when left by the PCG and demonstrated separation anxiety. The infant avoided the stranger, and so showed stranger anxiety. They resisted the PCG's attempt to calm them, often arching their back to move away from them, even though they were upset when left and clearly wanted the PCG to return.

Cultural variations in attachment

One of the biggest criticisms aimed at Ainsworth's original study was that it was ethnocentric, only using a US sample. Over the next few decades, the Strange Situation was replicated across other countries, and the data were examined to see just how much of Ainsworth's work could be applied to other countries and cultures.

The largest, and arguably most famous, was conducted by a Dutch psychologist, Van IJzendoorn.

Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg: Cultural difference in attachment

Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg(1988) conducted a meta-analysis of strange situation experiments that other researchers had conducted across the globe. A meta-analysis is when you take the work of several other researchers and combine their data/findings to come to conclusions of your own. The use of meta-analysis here was an advantage as it meant that Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg did not have the time and costs associated with travel, as well as cultural and language barriers.

Strengths of the Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg experiment.

The method is quicker and cheaper than alternatives. Meta-analysis allows the researchers to obtain data from countries where language and cultural barriers may have been an issue, i.e. China and Japan. The study is reliable as it can easily be replicated. As the research has a large sample from various places, it is representative and, therefore, generalised.

Limitations of the Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg experiment.

It is hard to check the validity of some of the studies as the researchers cannot know if the data was collected scientifically. There are a lot of countries, as well as continents, missing, including Africa and a lot of Asia. So, can we really generalise to all cultures?

There is an imbalance of studies used: There are so many for the US that those results are the mean for the whole study. The Chinese study only had 25 infants, so we used a tiny sample representing around 20% of the global population.

Takahashi found that Japanese infants were often seen as Type C as their PCG rarely left them, and so the strange situation was terrifying for them. This raises the question: If the strange situation is not valid in Japan due to child-rearing differences, is it valid elsewhere?