The secure pattern characterizes the infant who seeks and receives protection, reassurance, and comfort when stressed. Confident exploration is optimized because of the support and availability of the caregiver.”
Handbook of Attachment. Second Edition. p. 601
Category: Uncategorized
Secure
Couples Therapy
- We need to take couples therapy more seriously at a governmental level in terms of funding: “The treatment of couple distress simply has not been a priority of government funding over the last decade. It is perhaps the most important conclusion of this review that, given all we have come to know about the toxicity of relationship distress and the processes that engender such distress, funding priorities should be altered so that more large-scale quality research focused on marital therapy can be conducted.”
- The research shows that couple therapy positively impacts 70% of couples receiving treatment. The effectiveness rates of couple therapy is comparable to the effectiveness rates of individual therapies and vastly superior to control groups not receiving treatment. RESEARCH ON THE TREATMENT OF COUPLE DISTRESS – ProQuest
Internal Working Models
- Internal Working Models change based on new relational experience: “most also agree that IWMs change developmentally based on new relational experiences, a view nicely expressed by Theodore Waters, who stated that IWMs “contain multiple constructs that unfold in a particular developmental sequence, change in latent structure, and undergo extensive generalization and elaboration across development” (Waters, 2021, p. 82).” Taking perspective on attachment theory and research: nine fundamental questions (tandfonline.com)
- There is no clear consensus about what IWMs are and how they operate. Researchers perspectives on what Internal Working Models are is diverse: “To some, IWMs are relationship-specific and hierarchically organized; to others, they reflect a person’s entire relational experience. IWMs are primarily nonconscious to some, but to others they are associated with the development of consciously accessible social-cognitive skills.” Taking perspective on attachment theory and research: nine fundamental questions (tandfonline.com)
- Bowlby on internal working models of the world and internal models of the self and their complementary nature: “In the working model of the world that anyone builds, a key feature is his notion of who his attachment figures are, where they may be found, and how they may be expected to respond. Similarly, in the working model of the self that anyone builds a key feature is his notion of how acceptable or unacceptable he himself is in the eyes of his attachment figures. . . . Confidence that an attachment figure is . . . likely to be responsive can be seen to turn on two variables: (a) whether or not the attachment figure is judged to be the sort of person who in general responds to calls for support and protection; (b) whether or not the self is judged to be the sort of person towards whom . . . the attachment figure is likely to respond in a helpful way. Logically these variables are independent. In practice, they are apt to be confounded. As a result, the model of the attachment figure and the model of the self are likely to develop so as to be complementary and mutually confirming. “(pp. 203–204 Bowlby, J. (1973). Attachment and loss. Vol. 2: Separation: anxiety and anger.)
Narcissism and Narcissistic Personality Disorder
When healthy attachment is missing, the development of empathy and reflectivity is inhibited. This leads to developmental failures that promote dissociation and internationalization of an unavailable and punitive object where the defense can become aggression and violence. Negative experiences may then become the only way of relating to others.
Allcorn, Seth; Duncan, Carrie M. A Journey into the Heart of Darkness: Psychosocial Insights into Predatory Behavior. The Journal of PSychohistory; New York Vol. 50, Iss. 4 (Spring 2023).- Could be considered to be the case that narcissists are unwilling to have empathy as opposed to be lacking or unable to have empathy: ”This accumulation of evidence spurred the description of empathic dysfunction to change from the inability to recognize how others feel in the DSM–III classification, to the unwillingness to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others in DSM–IV (APA, 1994). ”
- Little to no impairment of cognitive empathy, but compromised affective empathy. Although the experimental research on empathy and narcissism is limited, generally, it indicates a stronger deficit in emotional rather than cognitive empathy: ”Although results are mixed, there is growing evidence that individuals with pathological narcissism or NPD display significant impairments in emotional empathy, but display little to no impairment in cognitive empathy (Ritter et al., 2011; Wai & Tiliopoulos, 2012; Watson et al., 1984). “
- Theme that NPD individuals perceive what others feel, but don’t have emotional empathy: “On the one hand, despite being able to perceive emotions in a manner similar to psychopathy, individuals with NPD may have compromised empathic functioning because of a deficit in emotional empathy (e.g., neurobiological evidence) and a deliberate attempt to avoid feeling vulnerable (e.g., self-report data). On the other hand, it is also possible that those with NPD, like individuals with BPD, experience intense emotions (e.g., anger, shame, fear; Cooper, 1998; Gramzow & Tangney, 1992) that impair their ability to attend and react to other’s emotions (i.e., deficient emotion tolerance and regulation). Ultimately, the examination of psychobiological, behavioral, and neural underpinnings of empathy provides a basis for future research that may identify the specific dysfunction(s) responsible for the potential disingenuous and indifferent inter- and intrapersonal behaviors of narcissistic individuals.”
- Narcissists show empathy for their own interests: ”On the one hand, narcissistic people may be able to appropriately empathize when feeling in control, that is when their self-esteem is enhanced and when displaying empathy is in their best self-interest (Ronningstam, 2009). On the other hand, opportunities for self-enhancement or situations that may expose compromised emotion tolerance can result in self-serving empathic disengagement. To the extent that empathic processing can vary and fluctuate across and even within narcissistic individuals, it may be useful to consider the unique characterizations of grandiose and vulnerable narcissism.”
- People with NPD in their grandiose state may, like psychopathic individuals, possess the cognitive capacity to utilize empathy but have a motivation-based desire to disengage from empathic processing
- ”Ultimately, the self-serving focus of grandiose narcissistic individuals may influence fluctuations in empathy ranging from engagement to disengagement that respectively align with whether or not empathy is in service of their goal or interferes with attaining their goal.”
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4415495/
You won’t see the Narcissist in the therapeutic milieu – they don’t think there is anything wrong with them. When they do get into therapeutic situations with a couples counselor, they try to snow them (the therapist). They want to make themselves look good, even if they are cheating. They are never going to understand there is something wrong with them.
Susan Elliott, Author of Getting Past Your Breakup
Narcissists crave approval from other people, which is why their outside life looks the way it does, which is many times successful and all together.Changing our patterns
The neurotic who is cured has really become another man, though at bottom, of course, he has remained the same; that is to say, he has become what he might have become at best under the most favorable conditions. But that is a very great deal.
Freud, S. (1916–1917) Introductory Lectures on Psycho-Analysis.The above quote, read in the language of attachment theory, could refer to earned security.
- Bowlby hypothesized change can occur through new relationships: “Bowlby also hypothesized that change in attachment patterns can occur in later life through the influence of new attachment relationships and the development of formal operational thought. This combination of events allows the individual to reflect on and reinterpret the meaning of past and present experiences (Bowlby, 1973, 1980, 1988) – something that can happen in an individual’s self-analysis, within a couple relationship (such as marriage), or as a consequence of psychotherapy.” https://www.researchgate.net/publication/284307006_Measurement_of_individual_differences_in_adolescent_and_adult_attachment
- Volitional Change in Adult Attachment: Can People Who Want to Become Less Anxious and Avoidant Move Closer Towards Realizing Those Goals? NATHAN W. HUDSON, WILLIAM J. CHOPIK and DANIEL A. BRILEY
- There are differing opinions on the importance and weight of our early attachment figures and how this influences our developing attachment orientations/internal working models: [researchers] differed in their thinking about the development of attachment relationships across life and the significance of early relationships. Their views ranged from those emphasizing the formative influence of infant-caregiver attachment, to those emphasizing the continued malleability of attachment security in response to life stress, psychotherapy, and the influence of later relationships, to the view that people acquire and maintain multiple representations of relationships over time that shape their overarching attachment orientation in adulthood. Full article: Taking perspective on attachment theory and research: nine fundamental questions (tandfonline.com)
Avoidant
- Infants can turn away and move away in a cold manner, but their hearts are pumping hot: Avoidant infants who turn or move away from their parents on reunion in the Strange Situation, exhibit physiological arousal (elevated heart rate) rather than inhibition (Biobehavioral organization in securely and insecurely attached infants).
- Avoidants idealize parents, but can’t recall relevant memories – a suppression of realizations that would cause anxiety: “Idealization is coded when respondents provide glowing adjectives about their relationships with parents in childhood, but are unable or unwilling to recall relevant memories. This is consistent with Bowlby’s notion that defensive exclusion (??), followed by partial or complete deactivation of the systems mediating attachment, results in conflicting conscious and unconscious working models of self with attachment figures. Dismissiveness is coded when the respondents recall negative attachment episodes while answering direct questions about separation, rejection and other untoward situations, but render them emotionally “harmless” by discounting their affective importance and influence. We hypothesize that what are being regulated or supressed in such cases are affective components of otherwise relatively accessible working models that might create anxiety if they became full conscious. (Handbook of Attachment Theory. Second Edition. P. 117)
- Need independence: Individuals scoring high in avoidance attachment may be described as those who need more independence and emotional distance from their partners to feel comfortable. (Avoidant Attachment, Withdrawal-Aggression Conflict Pattern, and Relationship Satisfaction: A Mediational Dyadic Model)
- Withdrawal: Avoidants exhibit both fewer approach behaviours and more withdrawal behaviours. Avoidant attachment and hemispheric lateralisation of the processing of attachment- and emotion-related words
- Disengage positive emotions: “They [avoidants] can disengage from positive emotions with effective cognitive resources and were harder to get rid of negative emotions with insufficient resource.” Attention Bias of Avoidant Individuals to Attachment Emotion Pictures
- Avoidance dimension associated with lower inclination to be involved in long-term relationships: “Jackson and Kirkpatrick (2007) argued that avoidance dimension was specifically associated with a lower inclination to be involved in long-term relationship due to their inner motivation to avoid intimacy and perceive close relationships as less gratifying, which led them fly when affective comfort ability diminishes. An indication of this could be grasped in stronger links of avoidance dimension of attachment, as compared to anxiety, with relationship dissatisfaction (Brassard et al., 2009; Molero et al., 2017). Avoidantly attached individuals’ partners, instead, may not perceive the relationship quality as worsened because they have become acquainted with their relational dynamics; thus, avoidant individuals’ relationships are shorter because they themselves put an end to it (Jang et al., 2002).”Avoidant Attachment, Withdrawal-Aggression Conflict Pattern, and Relationship Satisfaction: A Mediational Dyadic Model
- Withdrawal elicits negative emotional reactions from the other partner: “…results show that withdrawal deployed by one individual may elicit a negative emotional reaction in his/her partner (Miga et al., 2010; Feeney and Karantzas, 2017), which, in turn, would explain the demand/aggression response since withdrawal is understood as a defensive strategy of depreciative nature (Creasey and Ladd, 2004).” Avoidant Attachment, Withdrawal-Aggression Conflict Pattern, and Relationship Satisfaction: A Mediational Dyadic Model
- Avoidant withdrawal causes partner demand and then leads to both members perceiving the relationship as of diminished quality: “An unexplored but relevant question to the topic under study regards how highly avoidant individuals’ use of withdrawal conflict strategies is associated with the behavior displayed by their partners (i.e., demand strategy). Instances from the clinical work with couples point out to the relationship between actor’s withdrawal and partner’s demand strategy; specifically, Johnson (2004) observed that individuals’ withdrawal and/or silence during conflict (stonewalling), as response instances of conflict withdrawal, provoked their partners’ response of excessive criticism and demand/aggression. Indeed, conflict withdrawal is perceived by his/her partner as more harmful (Overall et al., 2013; Prager et al., 2019) and may cause him/her increased frustration (Johnson, 2004; Feeney and Karantzas, 2017). Consequently, his/her partner may react in a more aggressive way, which would lead both members to perceive the relationship as of a diminished quality. Eventually, this situation would bring both partners’ needs to be unmet, causing relational distress (Gottman, 1994). Avoidant Attachment, Withdrawal-Aggression Conflict Pattern, and Relationship Satisfaction: A Mediational Dyadic Model
- Conflict-resolution strategies, specifically withdrawal, may be the missing puzzle piece to grasp the mechanisms underlying highly avoidant individuals’ (and their partners’) low relationship satisfaction. Avoidant Attachment, Withdrawal-Aggression Conflict Pattern, and Relationship Satisfaction: A Mediational Dyadic Model
- The consequence of avoidant withdraw/deactivation is a demand/aggression resolution-strategy from the impacted partner: Furthermore, it is not only that avoidant individuals’ biased interpretation makes them feel uncomfortable in situations of high intimacy, which leads to the avoidance behavior (Collins and Read, 1990),but also, they perceive that their partners are unable to adequately respond to their (avoidant people’s) needs, which in turn exerts a negative effect in their relationship satisfaction levels (Collins, 1996). Therefore, a partner’s perceived behaviors would be the response to one’s own behavior (Collins, 1996), the demand/aggression resolution-strategy being the consequence of one’s withdrawal of conflict. Avoidant individuals’ perception of a pressure to engage and getting close to their partner would lead them to using emotion regulation techniques of deactivation, which translates into avoiding the conflict to a higher extent, as shown in Bretaña et al. (2019, 2020) studies on perception of partners. Nevertheless, despite its demonstrated relevance in understanding conflict resolution and relationship satisfaction, the avoidant dimension of attachment has not received enough attention as a key variable, as claimed by Bretaña et al. (2020). Moreover, to the best of our knowledge, the dyadic analysis of both partners’ interrelated links between avoidance attachment orientation and negative conflict strategies has not been conducted so far. Avoidant Attachment, Withdrawal-Aggression Conflict Pattern, and Relationship Satisfaction: A Mediational Dyadic Model
- It is possible for an individual to deactivate attachment, even as he activates other behavioral systems (caregiving behavioral system, the affiliative system, the sexual system, and the exploratory system). Activation of other behavioral systems may be used in order to deactivate attachment: “In considering individuals who are avoidant of attachment, it is helpful to keep in mind these different behavioral systems. Doing so allows us to explain why individuals who are avoidant in one domain of experience may appear so very different in another, why, for example, those who avoid attachment may very well be socially active, sexually passionate, or intellectually deep. In other words, deactivation of attachment does not necessarily mean deactivation of the other behavioral systems. In fact, in therapy we often see passionate, socially engaged, or otherwise deep individuals who will go to great lengths to avoid discussing or thinking about their personal, relational lives.
Thus, it is possible for an individual to deactivate attachment, even as he activates other behavioral systems. Taking the issue one step further, we can see that activation of other behavioral systems may actually be used in order to deactivate attachment. That is, the individual may make attempts to substitute another behavioral system for attachment. Consider, for example, the client who avoids the development of meaningful intimate relationships by throwing himself into work (exploratory system) over the course of many years. The primary purpose of such diversion is the avoidance of painful attachment-related memories and the feelings arising from the prospect of intimacy, but on the surface, such diversion has the advantage of social acceptability, achievement, and success, all of which tend to eclipse the avoidance.” (Robert T. Muller. Trauma and the Avoidant client. 2010.) - Avoidants have poor memory collection of adverse childhood experiences/trauma. If present, there is a minimization of negative attachment-related experiences. Deactivation forms as a relationship preserving strategy: “By deactivating attachment, the client shifts attention away from memories of potentially painful relationship episodes with caregivers (George & West, 2001, 2004), thereby avoiding possible threat to the relationship or to the individual’s view of the relationship. In Bowlby’s (1988) view, this was “avoidance in the service of proximity.” Because attachment behavior has as its aim the maintenance of proximity, the function of this avoidance is to disable feelings and ideas that threaten the real or perceived relationship…”
“…forgetting certain kinds of betrayal experiences can be necessary for the individual’s adaptation within a traumatic or emotionally damaging environment. Thus, early on, when Sandra was asked to recount her childhood experiences with her parents, she had great difficulty with the task, stating that she “couldn’t remember a thing from way back then,” a position that was consistent with her general tendency to deactivate attachment. Such instances of inability to recall childhood events are quite common for individuals who are avoidant of attachment (D. Pederson, personal communication, June 2005), with large blocks of time often unaccounted.”(Trauma and the Avoidant Client) - Avoidants may seek therapy less than preoccupied clients: “While private consulting rooms and National Health Service psychological therapy services (especially the higher intensity provision under the Increasing Access to Psychological Therapies programme) attract preoccupied clients and those with unresolved trauma, dismissing individuals are not necessarily beating their way to our consulting room doors. There are a number of reasons for this, including the tendency to minimise distress.I have already explored why disdain or contempt are used as defences against a certain kind of intimacy that exists in the consulting room. Avoidant individuals experience depression, anxiety, loss, stress,and all of the life struggles that therapy can be helpful for, but the highly defended individual looks for other options. In general, self help is more acceptable and in keeping with the injunction to be self-sufficient. There are many resources available on the internet, as well as apps and books that address symptom relief and promote well being(see also Cundy, 2015).”
(page 91, from Attachment and the Defence against Intimacy by Linda Cundy)
- Avoidant individuals do not provide caregiving behavior when relationship partners are distressed or upset: “Although there may be negative effects of avoidant individuals’ chronic reliance on deactivating and distancing strategies, these effects may not always be apparent, especially in the short-term. More readily apparent are the negative effects of these strategies on the avoidant person’s close relationships and relationship partners. Avoidant individuals’ tendencies to distance themselves from others, affirm their independence, and suppress negative emotion may lead relationship partners to become dissatisfied and relationship quality to deteriorate. For instance, as discussed earlier, a growing body of research suggests that avoidance is negatively related to caregiving behavior, particularly when relationship partners are distressed or upset (B. Feeney & Collins, 2001; Fraley & Shaver, 1998; Simpson et al., 1992). Perhaps as a way to distance themselves from expressions of negative emotion and others’ distress, avoidant individuals seem to be unresponsive precisely when their partners most need their support.“(Avoidant Attachment: Exploration of an Oxymoron. Robin S. Edelstein and Phillip R. Shaver.)
- Avoidant individuals use work as a defensive strategy: “Moreover, avoidant behavior may preclude even the initial formation of close relationships. Avoidant individuals prefer to work alone (Hazan & Shaver, 1990), use work or other solitary activities to avoid social interactions (Hazan & Shaver, 1990; Mikulincer, 1997), and find themselves attracted to potential relationship partners who do not reciprocate their feelings (Aron, Aron, & Allen, 1998). After completing tasks (e.g., self-disclosure exercises) designed to foster closeness in previously unacquainted dyads, avoidant individuals report feeling less close to their partners than do nonavoidant individuals (Aron, Melinat, Aron, Vallone, & Bator, 1997).”
(Avoidant Attachment: Exploration of an Oxymoron. Robin S. Edelstein and Phillip R. Shaver.) - Avoidants must use suppressive strategies to regulate their internal emotional states: “In addition, attachment avoidance is associated with a preferential use of (expressive) suppression to regulate emotions (Mikulincer and Shaver, 2007), allowing the individual to keep the attachment system in a low activation state and to prevent others of perceiving their internal emotional states (Vrticka et al., 2012a).” (Neuroscience of human social interactions and adult attachment style)
- Avoidant individuals can have more favorable views of consensual non-monogamy and reported a stronger willingness to engage in such relationships in the future. “Among individuals who had never engaged in CNM, avoidance was robustly linked to more positive attitudes and greater willingness to engage in CNM. However, avoidant individuals were less likely to engage in CNM than in monogamous relationships. Understanding attachment in multiple partner relationships can provide new avenues for exploring the complexities of relationships.” (Attached to monogamy? Avoidance predicts willingness to engage (but not actual engagement) in consensual non-monogamy)
- Avoidant individuals’ distance if their partners appear upset and seek less support when they are anxious themselves: “When fear/anxiety is experimentally induced, for example, highly avoidant individuals who are more distressed seek less comfort/support from their romantic partners, and their highly avoidant partners (who are engaged in a different, non-stressful task) offer less comfort/support if their romantic partners appear more upset [20,21]. “
Jeffry A. Simpson. Adult Attachment, Stress, and Romantic Relationships. 2018
To read
- Physical Distance Between Romantic Partners as a Marker for Attachment in Couples: A Proof of Concept Study
- Support seeking and support giving within couples in an anxiety-provoking situation: The role of attachment styles.
- Working Models of Attachment, Support Giving, and Support Seeking in a Stressful Situation
Anxious
Individuals scoring high in anxiety attachment would be characterized by an excessive preoccupation and fear of being abandoned by their partner. Frontiers | Avoidant Attachment, Withdrawal-Aggression Conflict Pattern, and Relationship Satisfaction: A Mediational Dyadic Model (frontiersin.org)
- The anxiety dimension concerns the extent to which the attachment system is activated by environmental and interpersonal stressors. Anxious infants and adults are overly concerned with fears of abandonment and rejection, and as a result tend to be especially vigilant regarding the whereabouts of attachment figures (Ainsworth et al., 1978; J. Feeney, 1998). Adults high on the anxiety dimension are more easily distressed by brief separations from attachment figures (J. Feeney & Noller, 1992; Fraley & Shaver, 1998) and often do not feel that their needs for closeness are satisfied by relationship partners (Hazan & Shaver, 1987).
- The second dimension, anxiety, assesses the degree to which individuals worry about being underappreciated or abandoned by their romantic partners. Highly anxious individuals are heavily invested in their relationships, and they yearn to get closer to their partners emotionally to feel more secure. Anxious individuals harbor negative self-views and guarded but hopeful views of their romantic partners [13,14]. These conflicted perceptions lead anxious individuals to question their worth, worry about losing their partners, and remain vigilant to signs their partners might be pulling away from them [15]. Thus, they are motivated to increase their deficient sense of felt security [12], which leads them to act in ways that sometimes smother or drive their partners away [16]. Because anxious persons do not know whether they can count on their partners, their working models amplify distress, making them feel even less secure. Accordingly, anxious people tend to use emotion-focused/hyperactivating coping strategies when distressed [6], which sustain or escalate their concerns/worries and often keeps their attachment systems chronically activated [17].
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4845754/#!po=14.7059
Excessive Reassurance Seeking
Definitions
- Excessive reassurance seeking (ERS) behavior is defined as “the relatively stable tendency to excessively and persistently seek assurances from others that one is lovable and worthy, regardless of whether such assurance has already been provided” (Joiner, Metalsky, Katz, & Beach, 1999, p. 270).
Ideas
- DEPRESSED SEEK REASSURANCE BUT DOUBT WHAT THEY RECEIVE: Coyne (1976) proposed an interpersonal theory of depression, postulating that mildly depressed people tend to seek reassurance from others to assuage feelings of guilt and low self-esteem. Others initially provide such support, but the depressed person often doubts the authenticity of the support and repeatedly seeks assurance. As a result, the depressive people are rejected by others, which worsens their symptoms. 1.
- INDIVIDUALS USE ERS TO MANAGE DISTRESS AND DOUBTS OF LOVABILITY: From an attachment framework, then, ERS behaviour can be conceptualized as a strategy that individuals may use to manage distress and assuage any doubts about their lovability, worthiness (i.e., self-esteem), future prospects, and safety (i.e., anxiety). Indeed, research supports the notion of ERS as a coping strategy in response to interpersonal threats, stress, or anxiety. 2I
- Research has repeatedly shown an association between attachment anxiety and higher levels of overall and daily ERS (Abela et al., 2005; Davila, 2001; Evraire & Dozois, 2014; Evraire et al., 2014; Katz, Petracca, & Rabinowitz, 2009; Shaver et al., 2005).
- individuals who engage in ERS do so because of an IWM reflecting a fear of abandonment/rejection or insecurity in relationships. 2
- ERS DECREASES TRUST AND INCREASES FEARS: Furthermore, it is clear that although individuals likely engage in ERS to assuage relationship insecurities, ERS seems to decrease levels of trust and likely increase fears about the relationship. As such, clinical interventions targeted towards ERS can focus on this theme with the hopes of helping individuals develop more effective strategies for decreasing their relationship insecurities.
- INCOMPATIBILITY OF ANXIOUS AND AVOIDANT: Knowing that individuals with an avoidant attachment style down-regulate attachment feelings and behaviors by distancing themselves from their partners, it makes intuitive sense that having a partner constantly asking for reassurance would be aversive to avoidant individuals, given that seeking reassurance is incongruent with their own strategy of coping with distress. 2
- ANXIOUS INDIVIDUALS HAVE TROUBLE STOPPING ERS, EVEN AFTER RECEIVING REASSURANCE: For instance, despite their solicitation of and openness to feedback, individuals with an anxious attachment style often do not believe the reassurance they receive from close others and thus continue to engage in ERS (Evraire & Dozois, 2014).
Resources