Attachment and Divorce
Attachment and Divorce:
FAMILY CONSEQUENCES
Bowlby 's, Ainsworth 's, and Shaver 's research created the understanding that infant styles create a disposition for later behavioral traits. More current research has questioned the significance of how the disruption of the attachment structure (such as in divorce) can affect children 's behaviors throughout life. The research on this topic is contradictory and somewhat inconclusive, with research asserting that either attachment style or external environment has been the main contributor to the behaviors seen in members of divorced families, while many sources stated that it is likely to be a combination of both influences. With either explanation, research concludes that children of divorced families have a disposition to these behaviors, but the end development of behavior and personality is in the hands of the individual and the external factors that are present.
Abstract
The attachment theory that was developed by Harlow, Bowlby, and Ainsworth, which states that attachment is a key aspect to determining personality and behavior throughout an individual 's lifetime. Attachment can be defined as the strong bond that develops first between parent and child, and later in peer and romantic relationships (Bowlby, 1969). Research on divorce and separation of attachment figures has yielded conflicting results. It is often reported that children of divorce have trouble adapting to different stages of their lives because of their experience with broken or detached attachment bonds. These children are said to have no accurate template for successful relationships to replicate in their lives. Other research provided results that children of divorce adapt to life 's situations and relationships within normal ranges when compared to their peers (Armistead, Forehand, Summers, & Tannenbaum, 1998). Taking this into account, these researchers looked to peer relations, socioeconomic status, general distress, or
FAMILY CONSEQUENCES
Bowlby 's, Ainsworth 's, and Shaver 's research created the understanding that infant styles create a disposition for later behavioral traits. More current research has questioned the significance of how the disruption of the attachment structure (such as in divorce) can affect children 's behaviors throughout life. The research on this topic is contradictory and somewhat inconclusive, with research asserting that either attachment style or external environment has been the main contributor to the behaviors seen in members of divorced families, while many sources stated that it is likely to be a combination of both influences. With either explanation, research concludes that children of divorced families have a disposition to these behaviors, but the end development of behavior and personality is in the hands of the individual and the external factors that are present.
Abstract
The attachment theory that was developed by Harlow, Bowlby, and Ainsworth, which states that attachment is a key aspect to determining personality and behavior throughout an individual 's lifetime. Attachment can be defined as the strong bond that develops first between parent and child, and later in peer and romantic relationships (Bowlby, 1969). Research on divorce and separation of attachment figures has yielded conflicting results. It is often reported that children of divorce have trouble adapting to different stages of their lives because of their experience with broken or detached attachment bonds. These children are said to have no accurate template for successful relationships to replicate in their lives. Other research provided results that children of divorce adapt to life 's situations and relationships within normal ranges when compared to their peers (Armistead, Forehand, Summers, & Tannenbaum, 1998). Taking this into account, these researchers looked to peer relations, socioeconomic status, general distress, or
References: Ainsworth, M. D. S. (1967). Infancy in Uganda: Infant care and the growth of attachment. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. Ainsworth, M. D. S. (1969). Object relations, attachment and dependency. Child Development, 40, 969-1025. Ainsworth, M. D. S., Blehar, M. C., Waters, E., & Wall, S. (1978). Patterns of attachment: A psychological study of the strange situation. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Amato, P. R. (2001). Children of divorce in the 1990s: An update of the Amato and Keith (1991) meta-analysis. Journal of Family Psychology, 15, 355-370. Amato, P. R., & Keith, B. (1991). Parental divorce and adult well-being: A meta-analysis. Journal of Marriage & the Family, 53, 43-58. Berman, W. H. (1988). The role of attachment in the post-divorce experience. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 496-503. Blakeslee, S., & Wallerstein, J. S. (1989). Second chances: Men, women and children a decade after divorce. New York: Ticknor & Fields. Booth, C., Clarke-Stewart, K. A., McCartney, K., Owen, M. T., & Vandell, D. L. (2000). Effects of parental separation and divorce on very young children. Journal of Family Psychology, 14, 304-326. Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and loss: Attachment (Vol. 1). New York: Basic. Harlow, H. F. (1958). The nature of love. American Psychologist, 13, 573-585. Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. R. (1987). Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 511-524. Kobak, R. (1999). The emotional dynamics of disruptions in attachment relationships. In J. Cassidy & P. R. Shaver (Eds.), Handbook of attachment (pp. 21-43). New York: Guilford. Nakonezny, P. A., Shull, R. D., & Rodgers, J. L. (1995). Divorce rate across the 50 states and its relation to income, education, and religiosity. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 57, 477-488. Waite, L. J., & Gallagher, M. (2000). The case for marriage. New York: Doubleday. Warner, R. L., & Seccombe, K. (2003). Marriage and families: Relationships in social context. Toronto, Canada: Wadsworth. Weiss, R. S. (1976). The emotional impact of marital separation. Journal of Social Issues, 32, 135-145.