Analysis Of John Bowlby's Attachment Theory

Attachment theory has undergone formidable research by psychologists in effort to understand various aspects of human behavior and how they extend to future relationships and activities. As far as the human relationship is concerned, John Bowlby, a 1960's psychologist, comprehensively studied human attachments. Bowlby believed that when it came to adult human affection bonds, the relationship with the person's mother determined the quality and ability of one to form such bonds. This paper seeks to shed light on Bowlby's theories regarding the understanding of how relationships are formed. Understanding Bowlby's attachment theory will help afford the opportunity to make predictions on what determines a potential partner in a relationship,

how the relationship is formed, how it is maintained, what makes it substantial, and why, as well as the way, relationships are dissolved. Attachment theory will help explain some of the reasons that individuals come and go from our lives.
Bowlby, published an article entitled “forty-four juvenile thieves: their personality and home-based life”, which indicated a robust affiliation between early maternal parenting and succeeding felony charges among boys. It stated that maternal separation at an early age, specifically, through the first 3 years of life, would put kids in jeopardy of developing mental illness (Bowlby, 1980). His attachment theory highlights that human infants can survive only if they get a grownup who is enthusiastic to guard and care for them. Attachment theory stipulates that by around six months of life, normal newborns selectively direct their behavior to a single person with whom they seek proximity and from whom they vehemently object being separated (Schaffer, 1964). This person is basically the one who normally responds to a child's distress signals such as crying, fidgeting and making grimacing facial expressions. According to Bowlby, attachment is an essential part of humanoid conduct, beginning from the cradle and ending with the grave. In short, humans are predisposed to form close relations, especially with their immediate caretaker, usually the mother. Basic human elementary needs include the need for security, which is one of the most formidable needs that must be satisfied within the mother child relationship. The behavioral systems that Bowlby states are developed as a byproduct of the mother child relationship helps us to understand the dynamics of future teenage and adult relationships. If the mother child relationship is interrupted during the critical first two years of a child's life, the affect may be so critical that the child will suffer long- term intellectual, social, and emotional problems. Attachment theory states that human beings have basic intrinsic needs that must be satisfied by the development of a close mother/child relationship in order to later develop strong emotional relationships and achieve sexual gratification. In accordance with the theory that people are attracted to people who display certain social cues, that are most familiar because they are similar to those displayed by the attachment figure throughout infancy and childhood.
Hazan and Shaver also made observations towards adult romantic relationships, stating that adult relationships are characterized by the same dynamics as previously mentioned.

Seemingly, adults tend to be safe and more protected when their companion is close, emotionally available and receptive (Hazan and Shaver, 1990). Hazan and Shaver stipulate that one’s partner can be a safe base from which one can venture out and explore more comfortably or engage in. Hazan and Shaver argued that a partner will use their companion as a source of safety or comfort when they feel sick or distraught. "The replicas of attachment proceed to give guidance and form one’s relationship through their lives (Feldman Barrett, 2000)". Their theory envisages that, as people engage in new relationships daily, they tend to rely on their prior relationships to determine in what way others are most likely to act and feel towards them. Such simulations are used to build the goals and purposes of their future partners. In other words, the care received in early childhood, will affect how persons behave in their future mature relationships, especially as they relate to romantic relationships. In Hazan and Shaver’s point of view, passionate relationships are a product of a joint working of behavior schemes including, attachment, caregiving, and sex. In short, secure people are more likely to be poised in exploring new relationships, since they are more likely to be firmly attached to their parents. Further, Hazan and Shavers studies show that ambivalent attachment are more likely to be formed by individuals who are obsessively preoccupied with a romantic companions responsiveness. According to Hazan and Shaver, "such individuals tend to experience a high rate of relationship dissolution, they also get jealous, anxious and live in fear while still in relationships (Collins, 1990)". Those that have experienced avoidant attachment are more likely to display pessimistic views regarding relationships

and have relatively higher rates of relationship dissolutions.
Basically, as far as attachment theory is concerned, I tend to concur with the sentiments of the above- named psychologists Bowlby, Hazan and Shavers. Going back to my personal experience, my brother and I, we were born consecutively within a span of 6 years. We had very different childhood experiences in that during my early years, namely from the time of my birth till I was three years old, my mother was at home as my primary caretaker as opposed to my brother’s childhood, who was separated from our mother at an early age, namely three weeks old, since she had to go to work every day. He was forced to go to day-care when he was only six months old because our regular babysitter who had been caring for my brother since he was three weeks old abruptly quit to move away with her boyfriend. Consequently, this meant schooling began very early for him. In contrast, my experience was different since our mother had resigned her job shortly after I was being born. I spent most of my childhood with my mother, experiencing a very minimal separation from her. When we bring this into my early adulthood, my experiences have helped me secure good, solid relationships, that have stable. Concentrating on the observable cues of my relationships, I have always aligned myself with those that have exhibited similar cues I received throughout my childhood relationship, which are affectionate caring, warm, and emotionally available people. There have been concurrent overlaps of my teenage and young adult relationships, especially as it relates to security. I like to associate with tranquil people, especially in regards to romantic relationships. My brother on the other hand, has had a more difficult time developing friendships and relationships. He is too young to have developed romantic relationships, however, he views friends as unnecessary acquaintances, who he has to tolerate, rather than take the time, or make the effort ,to develop relationships with. He has been through many friendship breakups, for various reasons, some of which include his asserting his own feelings, without regard to his friends needs and feelings. He is very fearful of abandonment and rejection, which probably has led to his heightened vigilance to be emotionally unavailable and has contributed to his non-attachment with others.
In my relationship decision making, I select partners with the belief that they are able to themselves attach and have similar attachment- related expectations. I tend to have more confidence and trust towards responses from others, which is based on my own expectations and assurances of self- felt security. I look back with great fondness on my childhood and the imprints it has left on me, how it has affected my current relationships, especially the close attachments I've developed with others as a result of the close relationship and attachment I have with my mother. The patterns of relationship formation clearly stipulate how adults who were not deprived from their mothers at an early age tend to have healthier and more sustainable adult relationships, unlike those who were separated at an early age.
Clearly, attachment theory has strong roots in nurture as it is dependent upon the mother child relationships as opposed to genetics, nature. For example, had attachment been dependent on nature, then my brother and I's childhood experience, especially as they relate to my mothers availability during our early years would be irrelevant, or certainly, far less significant. My brothers insecurity and inability to form meaningful friendships would probably be different had he been afforded the opportunity to maintain an uninterrupted care giver relationship with my mother during his early years. Further evidence which proves the point that attachment is more likely to be a result of nurture as opposed to nature, is that my brother and I share many of the same physical features. We look alike and have very similar physical attributes, suggesting we are likely to share a great percentage of our genetics. If attachment is nature driven, then we should behave similarly. Clearly that is not the case. I guess Bowlby's attachment theory has a lot of merit.