- Attachment measures
Attachment measures refer to the various procedures used to assess attachment in children and adults.
Researchers have developed various ways of assessing attachment in children. A variety of methods allow children to be classified into four attachment styles: secure, anxious-ambivalent, anxious-avoidant, and disorganized/disoriented, or assess disorders of attachment. These classifications are also referred to as Secure (Group B); Anxious/Resistant (Group C); Avoidant (Group A) and Disorganized (Group D). Each organized style is further broken down into several sub-categories. A child classified with the disorganazed style will be given a "next best fit" organized classification as disorganized attachment is thought to represent a break-down of attachment strategy.
Attachment in adults is commonly measured using the Adult Attachment Interview and self-report questionnaires. Self-report questionnaires have identified two dimensions of attachment, one dimension dealing with anxiety about the relationship, and the other dimension dealing with avoidance in the relationship. These dimensions define four styles of adult attachment: secure, preoccupied, dismissive-avoidant, and fearful-avoidant.
Measuring attachment in children
Some methods are based on observation of infants and toddlers either in natural or 'arranged' situations. Other methods, suitable for older children, are based on asking children to complete Stem Stories, respond to pictures or to describe their relationships.
The Strange Situation
The Strange Situation procedure was formulated to observe attachment relationships between a caregiver and children between the age of nine and 18 months. It was developed by
Mary Ainsworth, a developmental psychologistAinsworth. Mary D. (1978) "Patterns of Attachment: A Psychological Study of the Strange Situation". Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. ISBN 0-89859-461-8.] Originally it was devised to enable children to be classified into the attachment styles known as "secure", "anxious-avoidant" and "anxious-ambivalent". As research accumulated and atypical patterns of attachment became more apparent it was further developed by Main and Solomon in 1986 and 1990 to include the new category of disorganized/disoriented attachment. Main,M. and Solomon,J. (1986) 'Discovery of an insecure disorganized/dioriented attachment pattern:procedures, findings and implications for the classification of behavior.' In t. Braxelton and M.Yogman (eds) "Affective development in infancy." Norwood, NJ: Ablex ] Main,m. and Solomon,J. (1990) 'Procedures for identifying infants as disorganized/disoriented during the Ainsworth Strange Situation' In M.Greenberg, D. Cicchetti and E. Cummings (eds) "Attachment in the preschool years: Theory, research and intervention." Chicago: University of Chicago Press. ]
In this procedure the child is observed playing for 20 minutes while caregivers and strangers enter and leave the room, recreating the flow of the familiar and unfamiliar presence in most children's lives. The situation varies in stressfulness and the child's responses are observed. The child experiences the following situations:
#Mother (or other familiar caregiver) and baby enter room.
#Mother sits quietly on a chair, responding if the infant seeks attention.
#A stranger enters, talks to the mother then gradually approaches infant with a toy. The mother leaves the room.
#The stranger leaves the infant playing unless he/she is inactive and then tries to interest the infant in toys. If the infant becomes distressed this episode is ended.
#Mother enters and waits to see how the infant greets her. The stranger leaves quietly and the mother waits until the baby settles, and then she leaves again.
#The infant is alone. This episode is curtailed if the infant appears to be distressed.
#The stranger comes back and repeats episode 3.
#The mother returns and the stranger goes. Reunion behaviour is noted and then the situation is ended.
Two aspects of the child's behaviour are observed:
* The amount of exploration (e.g. playing with new toys) the child engages in throughout, and
* The child's reactions to the departure and return of its caregiver.
Critique of The Strange Situation
Professor Sir Michael Rutterdescribes the procedure in the following terms in 'The Clinical Implications of Attachment Concepts' from the Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, Volume 36 No 4, pp. 552-553,
"It is by no means free of limitations (see Lamb, Thompson, Gardener, Charnov & Estes, 1984) Lamb, Thompson, Gardener, Charnov & Estes,(1984). Security of Infantile attachment as assessed in the 'Strange Situation'; its study and biological interpretations. Behavioural and Brain Sciences, 7, 127-147 ] . To begin with, it is very dependent on brief separations and reunions having the same meaning for all children. This maybe a major constraint when applying the procedure in cultures, such as that in Japan (see Miyake et al,, 1985) Miyake, Chen, & Campos (1985). Infant temperament and mother's mode of interaction and attachment in Japan; an interim report; In I. Bretherton & E Waters (Eds), Growing points of attachment theory and research. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 50, Serial No 209, 276-297.] , where infants are rarely separated from their mothers in ordinary circumstances. Also, because older children have a cognitive capacity to maintain relationships when the older person is not present, separation may not provide the same stress for them. Modified procedures based on the Strange Situation have been developed for older preschool children (see Belsky et al., 1994; Greenberg et al., 1990) Belsky, J. & Cassidy, J. (1994). Attachment Theory and Evidence. In M. Rutter & D. Hay (Eds) Development Through Life; A Handbook For Clinicians (pp. 373-402). Oxford; Blackwell Scientific Publications. ] Greenberg, M. T., Cicchetti, D. & Cummings, M. (Eds), (1990). Attachment in the preschool years; theory research and intervention. Chicago; University of Chicago Press. ] but it is much more dubious whether the same approach can be used in middle childhood. Also, despite its manifest strengths, the procedure is based on just 20 minutes of behaviour. It can be scarcely expected to tap all the relevant qualities of a child's attachment relationships. Q-sort procedures based on much longer naturalistic observations in the home, and interviews with the mothers have developed in order to extend the data base (see Vaughn & Waters, 1990) Vaughn, B. E. & Waters, E. (1990). Attachment behaviour at home and in the laboratory. Child Development, 61, 1965-1973. ] . A further constraint is that the coding procedure results in discrete categories rather than continuously distributed dimensions. Not only is this likely to provide boundary problems, but also it is not at all obvious that discrete categories best represent the concepts that are inherent in attachment security. It seems much more likely that infants vary in their degree of security and there is need for a measurement systems that can quantify individual variation".
Ecological validity and universality of Strange Situation attachment classification distributions
With respect to the ecological validity of the Strange Situation, a meta-analysis of 2,000 infant-parent dyads, including several from studies with non-Western language and/or cultural bases found the global distribution of attachment categorizations to be A (21%), B (65%), and C (14%) van Ijzendoorn, M.H., & Kroonenberg, P.M. (1988). Cross-cultural patterns of attachment: A meta-analysis of the strange-situation. Child Development, 59, 147-156.] This global distribution was generally consistent with Ainsworth et al.'s (1978) original attachment classification distributions.
However, controversy has been raised over a few cultural differences in these rates of 'global' attachment classification distributions. In particular, two studies diverged from the global distributions of attachment classifications noted above. One study was conducted in North Germany Grossmann, K.E., Grossmann, K., Huber, F., & Wartner, U. (1981). German children's behavior toward their mothers at 12 months and their fathers at 18 months in Ainsworth's strange situation. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 4, 157-184.] in which more avoidant (A) infants were found than global norms would suggest, and the other in Sapporo, Japan Takahashi, K. (1986). Examining the Strange-Situation procedure with Japanese mothers and 12-month old infants. Developmental Psychology, 22, 265-270.] where more resistant (C) infants were found. Of these two studies, the Japanese findings have sparked the most controversy as to the meaning of individual differences in attachment behavior as originally identified by Ainsworth et al. (1978).
In a recent study conducted in Sapporo, Behrens, et al., 2007. Behrens, K. Y., Main, M., & Hesse, E. (2007). Mothers’ Attachment Status as Determined by the Adult Attachment Interview Predicts Their 6-Year-Olds’ Reunion Responses: A Study Conducted in Japan. Developmental Psychology, 43, 1553–1567.] found attachment distributions consistent with global norms using the six-year Main & Cassidy scoring system for attachment classification. Main, M., & Cassidy, J. (1988). Categories of response to reunion with the parent at age 6: Predictable from infant attachment classifications and stable over a 1-month period. Developmental Psychology, 24, 415-426.] In addition to these findings supporting the global distributions of attachment classifications in Sapporo, Behrens et al. also discuss the Japanese concept of
amaeand its relevance to questions concerning whether the insecure-resistant (C) style of interaction may be engendered in Japanese infants as a result of the cultural practice of amae.
Attachment measurement: discrete or continuous?
Regarding the issue of whether the breadth of infant attachment functioning can be captured by a categorical classification scheme, it should be noted that continuous measures of attachment security have been developed which have demonstrated adequate psychometric properties. These have been used either individually or in conjunction with discrete attachment classifications in many published reports [see Richters et al., 1998; Richters, J. E., Waters, E., & Vaughn, B. E. (1988). Empirical classification of infant-mother relationships from interactive behavior and crying during reunion. Child Development, 59, 512-522. ] van Ijzendoorn et al., 1990). van Ijzendoorn, M. H., & Kroonenberg, P. M. (1990). Cross-cultural consistency of coding the strange situation. Infant Behavior and Development, 13, 469-485. ] ] The original Richter’s et al. (1998) scale is strongly related to secure versus insecure classifications, correctly predicting about 90% of cases van Ijzendoorn, M. H., & Kroonenberg, P. M. (1990). Cross-cultural consistency of coding the strange situation. Infant Behavior and Development, 13, 469-485. ] . Readers further interested in the categorical versus continuous nature of attachment classifications (and the debate surrounding this issue) should consult the paper by Fraley and Spieker Fraley, C. R., & Spieker, S. J. (2003). Are Infant Attachment Patterns Continuously or Categorically Distributed? A Taxometric Analysis of Strange Situation Behavior. Developmental Psychology, 39, 387-404.] and the rejoinders in the same issue by many prominent attachment researchers including J. Cassidy, A. Sroufe, E. Waters & T. Beauchaine, and M. Cummings.
Developing methods for older toddlers and children
The Strange Situation is not designed for children older than about 18 months, and there is an ongoing effort to develop assessment methods that are suitable for older toddlers and preschoolers. The methods in development are intended as research measures, not as diagnostic techniques for individual children. As such, these techniques need to be "lean" enough to carry out fairly quickly. They also need to include ways of guarding against "coder drift", the tendency of evaluators to change their criteria as they assess more and more children over long periods of time. Effective training of evaluators is essential, as some items to be assessed are somewhat subjective (e.g., child is "suddenly aggressive toward mother for no reason"). Andreason, C., & West, J. (2007). Measuring socioemotional functioning in a national birth cohort study. Infant Mental Health Journal, 28(6), 627-646.]
Preschool strange situation
A version of the Strange Situation procedure designed for an older age group of between 3 and 4 years by Cassidy, Marvin and the MacArthur Working group.
This method, devised by Waters and Deane in 1985, utilises Q-Sort methodology. It is based on a set period of observation of children aged 1 - 5 in a number of environments. It consists of nearly 100 items intended to cover the spectrum of attachment related behaviors including secure base and exploratory behaviors, affective response and social cognition. It can rate a child along a continuum from secure to insecure but does not classify the type of insecurity. Waters Waters,E. and deane,K (1985) 'Defining and assessing individual differences in attachment relationships: Q-methodology and the organization of behavior in infancy and early childhood.' In I.Bretherton and E. Waters (eds) "Growing pains of attachment theory and research: Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Devlopment 50," Serial No. 209 (1-2), 41-65 ] The current version is Attachment Q-set Version 3.0, 1987.
Main & Cassidy attachment classification system
This system, devised in 1988, analyses the reunion of child and parent after a 1 hour separation. It is aimed at 6 year olds and classifies their attachment status. Main, M. & Cassidy, J. (1988) "Categories of response to reunion with the parent at age 6: predictable from infant attachment classifications and stable over a 1-month period. "Developmental Psychology 24," 415-426.]
Preschool Assessment of Attachment (PAA)
The PAA was devised by P.Crittenden for the purpose of assessing patterns of attachment in 18-month to 5 year old children. Like the SSP it involves an observation which is then coded. The classifications include all the SSP categories plus patterns that develop during the second year of life. The three basic strategies for negotiating interpersonal relationships are modified to fit preschoolers and the patterns are renamed "secure/balanced", or Type B, "defended", or Type A and "coercive" or Type C. It is also intended to be able to distinguish the unendangered from the endangered compulsive and obsessive subpatterns that may have implications for emotional and behavioral development.cite journal |author=Crittenden PM |title= Quality of attachment in the preschool years|journal= Development and Psychopathology |volume= 4 |pages= 209–41|year= 1992 |url= http://www.patcrittenden.com/Preschool-assesment.html|accessdate= 2008-01-06]
Disturbances of Attachment Interview (DAI)
More recent research uses the Disturbances of Attachment Interview or "DAI" developed by Smyke and Zeanah, (1999). This is a semi-structured interview designed to be administered by clinicians to caregivers. It covers 12 items, namely having a discriminated, preferred adult, seeking comfort when distressed, responding to comfort when offered, social and emotional reciprocity, emotional regulation, checking back after venturing away from the care giver, reticence with unfamiliar adults, willingness to go off with relative strangers, self endangering behavior, excessive clinging, vigilance/hypercompliance and role reversal. This method is designed to pick up not only
reactive attachment disorderbut also Zeannah et al's (1993) suggested new alternative categories of disorders of attachment. Smyke,A. and Zeanah,C. (1999)'Disturbances of Attachment Interview'. Available on the "Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry" website at www.jaacap.com ]
With older toddlers, children, and teens, three different techniques to determine their state of mind with respect to attachment are used. The first is the Story Stem in which children are asked to complete and describe stories having been given the 'stem' or beginning. The second method asks children to respond to pictures. The third involves asking children actual questions about their attachment relationships.
Narrative story stem techniques
This method uses dolls and narrative to enact a story. The dolls represent family members. The interviewer enacts the beginning of the story and then hands the dolls over for the child to complete it with varying degrees of prompting and encouragement. These techniques are designed to access the childs internal working models of their attachment relationships. Methods include the MacArthur Story Stem Battery (MSSB) developed in 1990 for children between the age of 3 to 8 years; the Story Stem Assessment Profile (SSAP) developed in 1990 for children aged 4 - 8; the Manchester Child Attachment Story Task (MCAST) developed in 2000 for children aged 4.5 - 8.5 and the Attachment Story Completion Test. Results are usually videod and coded.
Picture response techniques
Like the stem stories, these techniques are designed to access the childs internal working models of attachment relationships. The child is shown attachment related pictures and asked to respond. Methods include the Separation Anxiety Test (SAT) developed in 1972 for children aged between 11 and 17. Revised versions have been produced for 4 - 7 year olds.
Direct interview techniques
Child Attachment Interview (CAI)
This is a semi-structured interview designed by Target et al (2003) for children aged 7 to 11. It is based on the Adult Attachment Interview, adapted for children by focussing on representations of relationships with parents and attachment related events. Scores are based on both verbal and non-verbal communications.Target,M., Fonagy,P. and Schmueli-Goetz,Y. (2003) 'Attachment representations in school-age children: the development of the Child Attachment Interview (CAI).' "Journal of Child Psychotherapy 29," 2, 171-186]
Attachment Interview for Childhood and Adolescence (AICA)
This again is a version of the Adult Attachment Interview (AAI) rendered age appropriate for adolescents. The classifications of "dismissing, secure, preoccupied" and "unresolved" are the same as under the AAI described below.
Existing measures have not necessarily been developed to a useful level. "Behavioral observation is a natural starting point for assessing attachment disorders because behavioral descriptions... have been central to the development of the concept... despite the fact that observations have figured prominently... no established observational protocol has been established" O'Connor, T., & Zeanah, C.H. (2003)."Attachment disorders: Assessment strategies and treatment approaches." Attachment & Human Development, 5(3):223-244, p. 229 ]
Also, questionable measures of attachment in school-age children have been presented. For example, a protocol for establishing attachment status was described by Sheperis and his colleagues Sheperis, C.J.,Doggett, R.A., Hoda, N.E., Blanchard, T., Renfro-Michael, E.L., Holdiness, S.H., & Schlagheck, R. (2003). "The development of an assessment protocol for Reactive Attachment Disorder."Journal of Mental Health Counseling, 25(4):291-310] . Unfortunately, this protocol was validated against another technique, the Randolph Attachment Disorder Questionnaire, that was itself poorly validated and that is based on a nonconventional view of attachment.
=Measuring attachment in adults= Main|Attachment in adults|Attachment theory The two main ways of measuring attachment in adults include the Adult Attachment Interview (AAI) and self-report questionnaires. = Medindo apego em adultos = ((principal | Atalho em adultos | Atalho teoria)) As duas principais formas de medição de penhora em adultos incluem a Adult Attachment Interview (AAI) e de auto-relato questionários. The AAI and the self-report questionnaires were created with somewhat different aims in mind. A IAA e da auto-relato questionários foram criados com um pouco diferentes objectivos em mente. Shaver and Fraley note:
"If you are a novice in this research area, what is most important for you to know is that self-report measures of romantic attachment and the AAI were initially developed completely independently and for quite different purposes. One asks about a person's feelings and behaviors in the context of romantic or other close relationships; the other is used to make inferences about the defenses associated with an adult's current state of mind regarding childhood relationships with parents. In principle, these might have been substantially associated, but in fact they seem to be only moderately related--at least as currently assessed. One kind of measure receives its construct validity mostly from studies of romantic relationships, the other from prediction of a person's child's behavior in Ainsworth's Strange Situation. Correlations of the two kinds of measures with other variables are likely to differ, although a few studies have found the AAI to be related to marital relationship quality and a few have found self-report romantic attachment measures to be related to parenting."Shaver e Fraley nota:
"Se você for um iniciante nesta área de investigação, o que é mais importante para você saber é que as medidas de auto-relato romântico e apego ao IAA foram inicialmente desenvolvidas de forma independente e para fins muito diversos. Uma pergunta sobre uma pessoa de sentimentos e comportamentos no contexto de romântico ou outras relações íntimas; a outra é utilizada para fazer inferências sobre as defesas associados a um adulto do actual estado de espírito em relação infância relacionamento com os pais. Em princípio, estes poderiam ter sido substancialmente associados, mas, na verdade, elas parecem estar relacionadas apenas moderadamente - pelo menos no momento avaliado. Um tipo de medida beneficia principalmente a sua validade construir a partir de estudos de relacionamento romântico, o outro de predição de uma pessoa do comportamento da criança na estranha situação de Ainsworth. Correlações dos dois tipos de medidas com outras variáveis são susceptíveis de variar, embora alguns estudos tenham encontrado o que pode estar relacionado com IAA qualidade do relacionamento conjugal e alguns têm encontrado auto-relato romântico apego medidas a serem ligados à parentalidade. "(Shaver & Fraley, 2004) Shaver, PA & Fraley, RC (2004). (Shaver & Fraley, 2004) Shaver, PA & Fraley, RC (2004). Self-report measures of adult attachment. Escalas de auto-avaliação do adulto penhora. Online article. Online artigo. Retrieved June 20, 2006, from http://www.psych.uiuc.edu/~rcfraley/measures/measures.html .] The AAI and the self-report questionnaires offer distinct, but equally valid, perspectives on adult attachment. Retirado 20 de junho de 2006, a partir de http://www.psych.uiuc.edu/ ~ rcfraley / Medidas / measures.html. Ref> blockquote> A IAA e da auto-relato oferecem questionários distintos, mas igualmente válidos , Perspectivas sobre a penhora adulto. It's therefore worthwhile to become familiar with both approaches. =Adult Attachment Interview (AAI)= Developed by Mary Main and her colleagues, this is a semi-structured interview that takes about one hour to administer. É, por isso, valia a pena se familiarizar com as duas abordagens. = Adult Attachment Interview (AAI) = Mari Desenvolvido pela principal e os seus colegas, esta é uma entrevista semi-estruturada que leva cerca de uma hora de administrar. It involves about twenty questions and has extensive research validation to support it. Envolve cerca de vinte perguntas e tem vasta investigação validação para apoiá-la. A good description can be found in Chapter 19 of Attachment Theory, Research and Clinical Applications, edited by J. Cassidy and PR Shaver, Guilford Press, NY, 1999. Uma boa descrição pode ser encontrada no capítulo 19 da Teoria Penhora, da Investigação e da Clínica Applications, editado por J. Cassidy e PR Shaver, Guilford Press, NY, 1999. The chapter title is "The Adult Attachment Interview: Historical and Current Perspectives," and is written by E. Hesse. Some of the strongest external validation of the measures involves its demonstrated ability to predict interviewees' children's classifications in the Strange Situation. O capítulo título é "O Adult Attachment Entrevista: Perspectivas históricas e atuais", e é escrito por E. Hesse. Alguns dos mais fortes validação externa das medidas envolve a sua capacidade demonstrada para a previsão dos entrevistados infantis classificações na estranha situação. The measure also has shows to have some overlap with attachment constructs measured by the less time-intensive measures of the peer/romantic attachment tradition (Hazan & Shaver, Bartholomew), as reported by Shaver, PR, Belsky, J., & Brennan, KA (2000).Shaver, PR, Belsky, J., & Brennan, KA (2000). A medida também tem demonstra ter alguma sobreposição com penhora construtos medidos pelo menos tempo com utilização intensiva de medidas de pares / tradição romântica apego (Hazan & Shaver, Bartolomeu), conforme relatado por Shaver, PR, Belsky, J., & Brennan, KA (2000). Shaver, PR, Belsky, J., & Brennan, KA (2000). The adult attachment interview and self-reports of romantic attachment: Associations across domains and methods. O apego adulto entrevista e auto-relatos de penhora romântico: Associações entre domínios e métodos. Personal Relationships, 7, 25-43.] However, there are important differences in what is measured by the AAI--rather than being a measure of romantic attachment, it taps primarily into a person's state of mind regarding their attachment in their family of origin (nuclear family). =Self-report questionnaires= Hazan and Shaver created the first questionnaire to measure attachment in adults. Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. (1987). Personal Relationships, 7, 25-43. Ref> No entanto, existem diferenças importantes em relação ao que é medido pelo IAA - em vez de ser uma medida de penhora romântico, ela torneiras principalmente em um estado de espírito da pessoa em relação à sua fixação no sua família de origem (família nuclear). = = questionários de auto-relatório Hazan Shaver e criaram o primeiro questionário para medir o apego em adultos. Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. (1987). Romantic love conceptualized as an attachmenpt process. Amor romântico attachmenpt conceituada como um processo. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 511-524.] Their questionnaire was designed to classify adults into the three attachment styles identified by Ainsworth. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 511-524. Ref> A sua questionário foi concebido para classificar os adultos em três estilos penhora identificada por Ainsworth. The questionnaire consisted of three sets of statements, each set of statements describing an attachment style:
* Secure - I find it relatively easy to get close to others and am comfortable depending on them and having them depend on me.O questionário consistiu de três conjuntos de declarações, cada conjunto de declarações descrevendo uma penhora estilo:
* Seguro - Acho que é relativamente fácil de chegar perto demais e estou confortável, em função delas, e com elas dependem de mim.I don't often worry about being abandoned or about someone getting too close to me. * Avoidant - I am somewhat uncomfortable being close to others; I find it difficult to trust them completely, difficult to allow myself to depend on them. Não se preocupe se muitas vezes a ser abandonados ou prestes a ficar muito alguém perto de mim. Evitativo * - Estou um pouco desconfortável estar perto de outras pessoas; tenho dificuldade em confiar-los completamente, de difícil permitir-me-ei ao dependem delas. I am nervous when anyone gets too close, and often, love partners want me to be more intimate than I feel comfortable being. *Anxious/Ambivalent - I find that others are reluctant to get as close as I would like. Estou nervoso quando alguém chega perto demais, e, muitas vezes, o amor parceiros querem que eu seja mais íntimo do que me sinto confortável estar. Preocupados * / Ambivalente - Acho que os outros são reticentes a chegar tão perto quanto eu gostaria. I often worry that my partner doesn't really love me or won't want to stay with me. Eu muitas vezes se preocupe que o meu parceiro não me ama realmente ou não vão querer ficar comigo. I want to merge completely with another person, and this desire sometimes scares people away. People participating in their study were asked to choose which set of statements best described their feelings. Eu quero fundir completamente com outra pessoa, e esse desejo às vezes assusta as pessoas. Blockquote> As pessoas que participam em seu estudo foram convidados a escolher o que melhor descreveu conjunto de afirmações seus sentimentos. The chosen set of statements indicated their attachment style. O conjunto seleccionado de declarações indicaram o seu apego estilo. Later versions of this questionnaire presented scales so people could rate how well each set of statements described their feelings. One important advance in the development of attachment questionnaires was the addition of a fourth style of attachment. Versões posteriores deste questionário apresentado escalas para que as pessoas poderiam taxa de quão bem cada conjunto de declarações descreveu seus sentimentos. Um avanço importante no desenvolvimento da penhora questionários foi a adição de um quarto estilo de penhora. Bartholomew and Horowitz presented a model that identified four categories or styles of adult attachment. Bartholomew, K. & Horowitz, LM (1991). Attachment styles among young adults: A test of a four-category model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 226-244.] Their model was based on the idea attachment styles reflected people's thoughts about their partners and thought about themselves. Specifically, attachment styles depended on whether or not people judge their partners to be generally accessible and responsive to requests for support, and whether or not people judge themselves to be the kind of individuals towards which others want to respond and lend help. They proposed four categories based on positive or negative thoughts about partners and on positive or negative thoughts about self.
Attachment in children
Attachment in adults
Reactive attachment disorder
Object relations theory
* Cassidy, J., & Shaver, P., (Eds). (1999) "Handbook of Attachment: Theory, Research, and Clinical Applications". Guilford Press, NY.
* Greenberg, MT, Cicchetti, D., & Cummings, EM., (Eds) (1990) "Attachment in the Preschool Years: Theory, Research and Intervention" University of Chicago, Chicago.
* Greenspan, S. (1993) "Infancy and Early Childhood". Madison, CT: International Universities Press. ISBN 0-8236-2633-4.
* Holmes, J. (1993) "John Bowlby and Attachment Theory". Routledge. ISBN 0-415-07730-3.
* Holmes, J. (2001) "The Search for the Secure Base: Attachment Theory and Psychotherapy". London: Brunner-Routledge. ISBN 1-58391-152-9.
* Karen R (1998) "Becoming Attached: First Relationships and How They Shape Our Capacity to Love". Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-511501-5.
* Parkes, CM, Stevenson-Hinde, J., Marris, P., (Eds.) (1991) "Attachment Across The Life Cycle" Routledge. NY. ISBN 0-415-05651-9
* Siegler R., DeLoache, J. & Eisenberg, N. (2003) "How Children develop". New York: Worth. ISBN 1-57259-249-4.
* [http://www.aican.org/ AICAN - Australian Intercountry Adoption Network]
* [http://www.helpguide.org/mental/relationship_advice_adult_attachment.htm Relationship Advice: How Understanding Adult Attachment Can Help]
* [http://www.web-research-design.net/cgi-bin/crq/crq.pl Attachment Questionnaire]
* [http://www.richardatkins.co.uk/atws/page/55.html Articles on attachment measures including 11 self-report measures with scoring instructions]
Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.