22.2: Attachment and Primary Caregiving

Last updated
Save as PDF

Page ID: 142188

Todd LaMarr

\( \newcommand{\vecs}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \) \( \newcommand{\vecd}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash {#1}}} \)\(\newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\) \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\) \( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\) \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\) \( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \(\newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\) \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\) \( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\) \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\) \( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)\(\newcommand{\AA}{\unicode[.8,0]{x212B}}\)

Attachment

Attachment theory was developed by John Bowlby in the 20th century to understand an infant’s reaction to the short-term loss of their caregiver (Bowlby, 1969). Bowlby proposed that children are pre-programmed from birth to develop attachments and maintain proximity to their primary attachment figure(s), who was typically their mother but could be any person assuming the role of caregiver for that child. He used the term ‘attachment’ in a conscious effort to move away from deficit terms such as ‘dependency’ and ‘over dependency’, which were historically used to explain what Bowlby coined as ‘attachment behaviors’ (Bowlby, 1969). Defined as ‘seeking and maintaining proximity to another individual’ (Bowlby, 1969), attachment behaviors allow infants and toddlers to stay close to their attachment figure by either demonstrating signaling behaviors such as crying and smiling, or approach behaviors such as following and clinging (Ainsworth & Bell, 1970). ^{^[1]}

The research on attachment relationships has important implications for supporting the implementation of primary caregiving. The first year of life is considered a critical period for attachment development and infants and toddlers require a secure base in childcare settings, in addition to the home setting, to develop secure attachments (Lee, 2016). It is critical that caregivers understand the importance of secure relationships and their impact on children’s future wellbeing. Instead of a single primary attachment figure, children need access to consistently available attachment figures who can include a combination of their mother, father or paid caregiver(s) (Brown et al., 2022; van IJzendoorn et al., 1992). As a result of a network of attachment figures, children’s secure base is maintained when separating from a specific attachment figure. ^{^[1]}

Decades of longitudinal research have supported the notion that individual differences in children’s attachment security to primary caregivers are of critical importance for children’s social, emotional, and cognitive development. Several meta-analyses suggest that variations in attachment security are associated with individual differences in a range of child outcomes: higher attachment security (as compared to insecurity) is associated with better social competence (Groh et al., 2014, 2017), emotion understanding (Cooke et al., 2016), quality of peer relationships (Pallini et al., 2014), language competence (Van IJzendoorn, Dijkstra & Bus, 1995), as well as fewer internalizing (Groh et al., 2012, 2017; Madigan, Atkinson, Laurin & Benoit, 2013) and externalizing behavior problems (Fearon et al., 2010; Groh et al., 2017). Furthermore, attachment security during the first three years of life is related to later brain development (Hidalgo et al., 2019; Leblanc et al., 2017; Leblanc, Dégeilh, Beauchamp & Bernier, 2022; Moutsiana et al., 2015).

^{^[1]} Wilson-Ali et al., (2019). Multiple perspectives on attachment theory: Investigating educators’ knowledge and understanding. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 44(3), 215-229. CC by NC 4.0