Characteristic attachment strategies developed in childhood are supposed to continue into adulthood, forming the typical adult attachment style ( secure, anxious or avoidant) of the individual that characterizes his/her attitudes and emotions towards close others. These strategies are called attachment avoidance (maximizing autonomy and distance from others, avoiding intimacy) and attachment anxiety (compulsively seeking proximity and protection, hypersensitivity to signs of possible rejection or abandonment). However, when attachment figures are not reliably available and supportive, the child develops defensive secondary attachment strategies by deactivating or hyperactivating the attachment system. In all forms of attachment, the proximity of the attachment figure provides a sense of security to the individual, and the separation from the attachment figure results in separation stress (Bowlby, 1969, Hazan and Shaver, 1994).Īccording to Bowlby (1969), interactions with available and responsive attachment figures facilitate the optimal functioning of the attachment system and promote a sense of attachment security in the child. companion animals (Archer and Ireland, 2011, Zasloff and Kidd, 1994), places (Hidalgo and Hernandez, 2001, Scannell and Gifford, 2010, Wickler, 1976), material objects (Cipriani and Kreider, 2009, Myers, 1985) or God (Kirkpatrick, 1994, Kirkpatrick and Shaver, 1992). This may explain why people readily develop attachment even toward non-human targets, e.g. According to this theory, the attachment system continues to be sensitive to certain cues and is readily activated in contexts that resemble the infant-parent relationship or elicit similar feelings or behaviours (Fraley & Shaver, 2000). Alternatively, humans’ increased tendency to develop attachment relationship in adulthood and to various targets may be a by-product of their prolonged neotenous state (Fraley & Shaver, 2000). It is supposed that in these cases the attachment system (originally organizing infant-mother attachment) has been co-opted by natural selection to serve other survival/reproduction functions (Fraley, Brumbaugh & Marks, 2005 Shaver & Hazan, 1988). in romantic relationships (Fraley, Brumbaugh & Marks, 2005) or friendships (Markiewicz, Lawford, Doyle, & Haggart, 2006). In humans, however, the attachment system plays an important role also in adulthood and in different kinds of relationships, e.g. In many animal species, the functioning of this system is only observable in the context of parent–offspring attachment, the ultimate function of which is to protect against predators and maintain the supply of resources for the offspring if they remain in proximity to the parent(s). People with anxious attachment style may face challenges as the constant contact and validation the computer-mediated communication offers may deepen their dependence on others.īowlby (1969) claimed that humans and many animal species are born with an innate attachment system that motivates them to seek and maintain proximity to significant others. We conclude that attachment to recently emerged artificial objects, like the mobile may be the result of cultural co-option of the attachment system. Specifically, while the proximity of the phone proved to be equally important for people with different attachment styles, the constant contact with others through the phone was more important for anxiously attached people. People's higher attachment anxiety predicted higher tendency to show attachment-like features regarding their mobile. In this exploratory study we found that young people readily develop attachment toward their phone: they seek the proximity of it and experience distress on separation. We constructed a scale to observe people's attachment to their mobile and we assessed their interpersonal attachment style. We hypothesized that young people form attachment toward their mobile phone, and that people with higher attachment anxiety use the mobile phone more likely as a compensatory attachment target. Attachment styles influence not only interpersonal relationships, but interspecies and object attachment as well. Humans have a biological predisposition to form attachment to social partners, and they seem to form attachment even toward non-human and inanimate targets.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |