The Intergenerational Transmission of Attachment

Transmission of intergenerational attachment from parents to a child is an essential subject in which research has taken an interest in determining the extent in which a caregiver can be transmitted attachment to the infant. Parental caregiving is explained to be formed in parents’ representations of their experience in the attachment. Additionally, studies reveal attachments are often transmitted from generationally to another, as indicated by van-IJzendoorn and Bakermans-Kranenburg et al. (2019). Attachment in adults predicts the insecurity or security of infants’ attachment relationships with their parents, making it a crucial area of study in psychology dissertation help. Besides, while looking at intergenerational transmission of attachment, various previous research has appreciated the function of sensitive parenting, though a large gap in the topic is still unexplained. Furthermore, Hautamäki et al. (2010), reveal that some approaches accounted for attachment transmission across three generations. The attachment has been shown to be either secure or insecure. Secure attachment refers to a bond that ensures that a child understood, secure, and calm enough in the presence of the caregiver. It enables caregivers to be non-defensively open to the needs of a child and to act in a manner that gives a child a secure base and provides a haven, especially during periods of distress (Bowlby, 1988 & Ainsworth et al., 1978). The research confirmed that the attachment representations of caregivers to be specifically related to the attachment of children; therefore, this paper discusses the evidence supporting the transmission of attachment from one generation to another.

Studies reveal that every infant is expected to develop its first attachment with its caregiver, regardless of whether the caregiver is biological or non-biological (Sette et al. 2015). A study on adoption and foster care predicts intergenerational transmission (van Londen-Barentsen, 2002 and Smith, & Moe, 2014; Bernier & Dozier, 2003). Furthermore, a Meta-analysis study by Van den Dries et al. (2009) showed that the number of insecure attachment is higher in adopted and foster children compared to non-adopted children. According to Bick et al. (2013), the rate of uncertain bond in adopted and foster children is higher than that of the non-adopted children. The study indicate that caregivers have a direct impact on the security or insecurity of the infant. Besides, in another study, a meta-analysis by Verhage et al. (2016) reveal that caregivers who have autonomous attachment most likely form secure attachment link with their children. On the other hand, caregivers who have non-autonomous attachment have an insecure attachment. Also, individuals with unresolved attachment have been revealed to exhibit insecure attachment with their children (Van Horn & Lieberman, 2011). The study also reveal that secure attachments are mostly transmitted from generation to generation compared to insecure attachment.

The transmission gap is also an essential aspect of attachment passage. This gap refers to the unexplained attachment transmission. Studies reveal critical link between child and adult attachment (IJzendoorn et al., 1995). Parent sensitivity develops a secure attachment in a child. However, parental sensitivity only partly explains the link between children and adult attachment (Bakermans et al. 2003). Besides, sensitivity and responsiveness are the primary mediators in parenting behaviours responsible for intergenerational attachment transmission (Verhage et al. 2016). Much research has been carried out in this section to determine the link between parent attachment and infant attachment. Based on this topic, Bowlby (1969) suggests that the type of attachment acquired by infants is based on real encounters by caregivers. The sensitivity of responses is a significant issue in the transmission gap. Sensitive responses are the reactions of a caregiver that affect the general being of an infant (Verhage et al., 2016). In this case, if a response is negative, the attachment bond is negatively affected and, if the response is positive, the attachment is positively impacted. Positive reactions are thus said to be responsible for secure attachments, while adverse reactions are the cause of an insecure attachment bond. It has been established that there is no link between attachment and genetic relations (Verhage et al., 2016).

Another study with Wilson et al. (2003) discovered that Individuals who have a poor relationship with their caregivers during childhood tended to have a higher ambivalence measure. The review of the influence of ecological factors on the offspring's attachment quality focuses mainly on the parental variables like personality, health, marital quality, or divorce as well as the significance of grandparents, siblings, social support provided to parents, and the socio-economic status of the family members. For instance, revealed that western causation between attachment insecurity and exploration is questionable in Japan where attachment security leads rather than dependency, which is exhibited in western culture and which results in insecure attachment. Schmitt et al. (2004) found that even though most nations endorse the positive self and another attachment model more strongly, in some Asian countries, the model of others is more favourable than the model of self-parenting behaviours have a different impact on child attachment in various cultures. Moreover, Brody et al. (1998) revealed that parents adopt strict methods that involve the use of force in parenting to enhance self-regulation and freedom. This, they say, is a protective measure to their children as well as preventing them from being involved in antisocial behaviours. Ainsworth (1967), however, claims that a parent's harshness does not necessarily lead to the child getting insecure attachment.

who spend more time with their kids. The infant is, however, able to direct attachment to both parents in their unique way. This determines the child's overall behaviour when they approach ten years, as illustrated by Arnott et al. (2007). It is also significant to understand that the role of a father figure in an abode plays a crucial role in a child's intergenerational attachment transmission, especially when they are involved in the infants’ childrearing. Generally, a child would draw attachment to its parents as long as they spare some time with it. A father as a caregiver, therefore, has little impact when it comes to the conduction of bonds to the kid (Arnott et al., 2007). This further emphasizes that secure attachment intergenerational transmission if most common in this case since it is the mother who has more impact on transmitting attachment to the child.

Different types of measures have also been employed to determine the rate of intergenerational attachment transmission. For instant, Cowan et al. (2009) reveal that most participants of the study have secure attachments. Women were the most securely attached, a total of 77% being recorded. Since most caregivers in society are women and that attachment can be transmitted from a caregiver to an infant, it follows that the most likely attachment transmitted to the child is secure attachment. A study by Van-IJzendoorn and Bakermans-Kranenburg (2019) revealed that a Benoit and Parker (1994) conducted a survey which revealed a significant intergenerational relationship between mothers’ and grandmothers’ AAI classifications. The study discovered that there was a 75% correspondence between grandmothers’ and mothers’ attachment relationships. Besides, the study also found an 80% correspondence between infant and maternal attachment. Similarly, the scholars discovered critical transmission across three generations. This was indicated by the ability most grandmother mother (65%)- child triads, to show attachment patterns. The study also discovered that the concordance was more excellent for autonomous-secure pairs than insecure pairs, creating a discontinuity in uncertain relationships. This view seems to indicate a replication across generations while insecurity lowers the possibility of transmission. The study, therefore, supports the transmission of attachment from generation to generation.

To assess the transmission of attachment from one generation to another, Adult Attachment Interview (AAI) is used. The method is an hour-long semi-structured interview created to determine adults’ state of mind concerning attachment. Sette et al. (2015) reveal that AAI is a valid method. At the time of the interview, participants are asked to describe their attachment-related childhood experiences. The method is extensively tested in the domain of developmental psychology. Also, Bakermans-Kranenburg & Van IJzendoorn (1993) reveal that AAI is a promising tool for explaining the infant attachment development to adults since it contains a semi-structured interview, which is particularly vital and reliable. As per the study, validity and reliability have been tested repeatedly and across different interviewers and proved positive. However, Verhage et al. (2015) reveal the method generates evidence for secure transmission and significance for insecure types. However, it lacks evidence for unresolved issues, which is linked to the fact that the method is not sensitive enough to variations in insecure styles. The study also indicates the method as imprecise in measurements. Verhage et al. (2015 also seem to reveal that the process is over or under-representing certain groups in research samples. This indicates that regardless of the method being a useful instrument for explaining infants' attachment development, it also has many limitations. Besides, the technique is not based majorly on the reported situation in childhood; rather, it is based on the thoughtfulness and ability of adults to describe childhood experiences and their effects. Therefore, AAI does not assess the ideal childhood attachment security (Bakermans-Kranenburg & Van IJzendoorn (1993). The study also reveals that the method is also depicted to lack the ability to assess individual perception of their parents' current assistance in period of stress since it is often classified as secure even when the parents died or even when parents treated their children inadequately. Instead, it assesses the current state of mind. This, therefore, indicate some degree of the unreliability of the method.

Also, studies by Hautamäki et al. (2010) which utilized mothers and maternal grandmothers as participants discovered intergenerational attachment transmission. The study found that there was a 59% correspondence between grandmothers as well as mothers’ attachment representations. There was a concordance across some generations (3), though it was lower compared to that observed in the study by Benoit and Parker (1994). Furthermore, Hautamäki et al. (2010) discovered that 47% of the total study participants (32 grandmother–mother-infant triads) had corresponding attachment categories. There was continuity across three generations, which includes secure, avoidant as well as alternations. In contrast, the study did not reveal any attachment in the insecure attachment. To confirm the intergenerational transmission, Lyons-Ruth and Jacobvitz (2016), show that, a survey by Sagi-Schwartz et al. (2003) examined the intergenerational transmission of U states from mother to adult daughter in Holocaust survivors and women who had no holocaust background as control. The study revealed that holocaust survivors were mostly categorized as U. The U state, however, was not linked to the traumatic events though there was an established relationship between the mothers and daughters. Therefore, these studies confirm the existence of transmission of attachment from one generation to another.

Attachment transmission from parents to a child has been revealed to be a subject of debate by many scholars. The attachment has been shown to be either insecure or secure. Secure attachment gives a child comfort while in the presence of the caregiver. However, as per previous studies, intergenerational transmission of attachments has been proved, especially with secure attachments. However, with insecure attachment, there is a lack of intergenerational transmission of the attachments. The common method of assessing the transmission of attachment from one generation to another is Adult Attachment Interview (AAI). The, method has been revealed to be reliable and valid hence the results achieved are useful in concluding a study. The tool is promising tool for explaining the infant attachment development to adults and has been used over the years repeatedly with a significant percentage of accuracy. However, it lacks evidence for unresolved issues, it is imprecise in measurements, it is over or under-representing certain groups in research samples, it is only based on thoughtfulness and ability of adults to describe childhood experiences therefore, indicating some degree of the unreliability.

References

Arnott, B., & Meins, E. (2007). Links among antenatal attachment representations, postnatal mind–mindedness, and infant attachment security: A preliminary study of mothers and fathers. Bulletin of the Menninger Clinic, 71(2), 132-149.

Bakermans-Kranenburg MJ, Van IJzendoorn MH, Juffer F: Less is more: meta-analyses of sensitivity and attachment interventions in early childhood. Psychol Bull

Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J., & Van IJzendoorn, M. H. (1993). A psychometric study of the Adult Attachment Interview: Reliability and discriminant validity. Developmental psychology, 29(5), 870.

Bick, J., Dozier, M., Bernard, K., Grasso, D., & Simons, R. (2013). Foster mother–infant bonding: Associations between foster mothers' oxytocin production, electrophysiological brain activity, feelings of commitment, and caregiving quality. Child development, 84(3), 826-840.

Bowlby, J. (1973). Attachment and loss: Volume II: Separation, anxiety and anger. In Attachment and Loss: Volume II: Separation, Anxiety and Anger (pp. 1-429). London: The Hogarth Press and the Institute of Psycho-Analysis.

Brody, G. H., Flor, D. L., Hollett-Wright, N., & McCoy, J. K. (1998). Children's development of alcohol use norms: Contributions of parent and sibling norms, children's temperaments, and parent–child discussions. Journal of Family Psychology, 12(2), 209.

Cowan, P. A., Cowan, C. P., & Mehta, N. (2009). Adult attachment, couple attachment, and children's adaptation to school: An integrated attachment template and family risk model. Attachment & Human Development, 11(1), 29-46.

De Haas, M.A., Bakermans-Kranenburg, M.J. and Van Ijzendoorn, M.H., 1994. The Adult Attachment Interview and questionnaires for attachment style, temperament, and memories of parental behavior. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 155(4), pp.471-486.

Fonagy, P., & Bateman, A. W. (2005). Attachment Theory and Mentalization-Oriented Model of Borderline Personality Disorder.

Guttmann-Steinmetz, S., & Crowell, J. A. (2006). Attachment and externalizing disorders: A developmental psychopathology perspective. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 45(4), 440-451.

Hautamäki, A., Hautamäki, L., Neuvonen, L., & Maliniemi-Piispanen, S. (2010). Transmission of attachment across three generations. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 7(5), 618-634.

Kyle, G., Graefe, A., Manning, R., & Bacon, J. (2004). Effects of place attachment on users’ perceptions of social and environmental conditions in a natural setting. Journal of environmental psychology, 24(2), 213-225.

Lyons-Ruth, K. and Jacobvitz, D. (2016). Attachment disorganization from infancy to adulthood: Neurobiological correlates, parenting contexts, and pathways to disorder. Handbook of attachment: Theory, research, and clinical applications, 3, pp.667-695.

Sagi, A., van IJzendoorn, M. H., Scharf, M., Joels, T., Koren-Karie, N., Mayseless, O., & Aviezer, O. (1997). Ecological constraints for intergenerational transmission of attachment. International Journal of Behavioural Development, 20(2), 287-299.

Sette, G., Coppola, G., & Cassibba, R. (2015). The transmission of attachment across generations: The state of art and new theoretical perspectives. Scandinavian journal of psychology, 56(3), 315-326.

van IJzendoorn MH (1995). Adult attachment representations, parental responsiveness, and infant attachment: a meta-analysis on the predictive validity of the Adult Attachment

Van Horn, P. and Lieberman, A.F., 2011. Psychological impact on and treatment of children who witness domestic violence. In Child Abuse and Neglect (pp. 501-515). WB Saunders.

Verhage, M. L., Schuengel, C., Madigan, S., Fearon, R. M., Oosterman, M., Cassibba, R., ... & van IJzendoorn, M. H. (2016). Narrowing the transmission gap: A synthesis of three decades of research on intergenerational transmission of attachment. Psychological Bulletin, 142(4), 337.

Weinberg, E. (2006). Mentalization, affect regulation, and development of the self. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 54(1), 251-269.

Take a deeper dive into The Impact of Narcissistic Traits on Student’s Attitudes Towards Life and Learning in Higher Education with our additional resources.