Attachment Style and Self-Regulation: Paper Example

Attachment theories are psychological models which attempt to describe the short term and long term dynamics of interpersonal relationships between humans (Cakic & Marjanovic-Umek, 2015). The theory does address a particular facet within the humans in the ways they respond to relationships when hurt, perceiving a threat or when separated from their loved ones. Essentially, infants are more attached to any caregiver if provided with any but in any relationship, there are individual differences. Within any form of relationship, there are different attachment patterns which range from secure attachment, anxious-avoidant affection, and anxious-ambivalent attachment. Secure affection is demonstrated by the children that show some distress at times when their caregiver leaves but can compose themselves and do something with the know-how that their caregiver will return. Anxious-ambivalent individuals are defined by the children that become very distressed in the times when their caregiver leaves and are not able to compose themselves. The paper, therefore, aims at demonstrating that anxious-ambivalent individuals report more impulsivity than securely attached people.

If this sample essay on"Attachment Style and Self-Regulation: Paper Example" doesn’t help,
our writers will!

Trust an expert

Anxious-ambivalent attachment is an attachment pattern which typically explores pint-sized in strange situations and often cagey of the strangers even in the presence of the parent (Ein-Dor, 2015). At the departure of the mother, the child becomes highly distressed and at her return, the child is ambivalent. The strategy of anxious-ambivalent is a rejoinder to the unpredictability responsive caregiving, helplessness and the pageants of anger directed at the caregiver on the reunion. It is a conditional stratagem to maintain the handiness of the caretaker by preventatively enchanting control of the interaction (Cakic & Marjanovic-Umek, 2015). The children with anxious-ambivalent attachment are always distrustful, suspicious and highly impulsive than secure attached individuals and act desperate and clingy. Often, they tend to emphasis passionately on their mother and have a hyper-vigilant behavior regarding the unavailability or availability of the parent. They dither between the over-dependent adhering and the angry denunciation of their caretaker.

Geller & Farber (2015) assessed the attachment patterns of children between 12 to 18 months noted that the reunion of the children with the anxious-ambivalent attachment with their mothers, the children were dazed, confused, stared into space avoiding direct eye contact with their parents. They alternated between squirming away and clinging to her. At times, the children actively resisted the comforting gestures of their mothers while others lingered intensely engrossed on their mothers but did not appear to be comforted or satisfied. He further noted that they had a high impulsivity than the individuals with secure attachment kind of relationship. The limited responses and the narrow focus of these children prevented any further exploratory behavior or further play (Ein-Dor, 2015). Blalock et al. (2015) established that the kids with obnoxious childhood involvements are more probable to cultivate ambivalent attachments. Furthermore, the study elucidated that the youngsters with ambivalent affections are more prospective to experience hitches in maintaining bosom relationships as grownups.

In adulthood, the children with anxious-ambivalent attachment often have preoccupied patterns of attachment. As adults, they are insecure and self-critical. Mostly, they seek reassurance and approval from others and yet their self-doubt in never relieved. The deep-seated feeling of rejection within their relationship makes them not trusting, worried and impulsive. Due to this, they act overly dependent, clingy and impulsive to their partner. Their lives are not balanced, and their timidity leaves them turned against themselves and fervently fraught in their interactions.

The adults with patterns of preoccupied attachments are usually, impulsive, desperate and self-critical often presumptuous the protagonist of the chaser in the relationship. They usually have negative views of themselves and possess positive opinions of other persons especially their partner and parents. They heavily rely on their partners to validate their self-worth. The fact that they were brought up distrustful of their inconsistency and the absence of their caregivers, they are highly sensitive to rejection. Often, they anticipate abandonment or rejection and look for ciphers that their companion is losing interest. This is not the case for those who experienced secure attached relationships (Cakic & Marjanovic-Umek, 2015).

The individuals who experienced securely attached relationships often uphold a high sense of self-esteem, are positive about themselves and are less impulsive. In whatever relationship they fall into, they feel secure and are more accommodating. They are more satisfied in their relationships and can venture out to the world and explore it independently. Secure adults often have similar relationships with their companions, feel secure and connected while at the same time permitting themselves and their companions to move more freely. In distressful situations, secure grownups offer support to their partners. They can request comfort from their partners in cases feeling troubled. They are often in genuine, equal and open relationships with both persons feeling independent yet loving toward each other.

The differences in the types of attachments are developed in the early ages of childhood growth (Blalock et al., 2015). They are highly dependent on the caregivers behavior towards the child and the surrounding environment. Developing a secure attachment with the child is often more advantageous than having an anxious-ambivalent kind of attachment.

References

Blalock, D. V., Franzese, A. T., Machell, K. A., & Strauman, T. J. (2015). Attachment style and self-regulation: How our patterns in relationships reflect broader motivational styles. Personality And Individual Differences, 8790-98.

Cakic, L., & Marjanovic-Umek, L. (2015). Methods used by mothers to help children during solving cognitive problem tasks: comparison between mothers of securely and insecurely attached preschool children/ Metody, ktorymi matky pomahaju detom riesit kognitivne ulohy: porovnanie matiek s pevnou a slabou vztahovou vazbou k svojim predskolskym detom. Studia Psychologica: Journal For Basic Research In Psychological Sciences, (1), 21.

Ein-Dor, T. (2015). Attachment dispositions and human defensive behavior. Personality And Individual Differences, 81(Dr. Sybil Eysenck Young Researcher Award), 112-116.

Geller, J. D., & Farber, B. A. (2015). Attachment Style, Representations of Psychotherapy, and Clinical Interventions With Insecurely Attached Clients. Journal Of Clinical Psychology, 71(5), 457-468.