Attachment styles refer to the different behavioral patterns observed in children according to the quality of the bond they form with their caregivers. The basis of this classification is the “Strange Situation” observation method developed by the psychologist Mary Ainsworth, who worked with Bowlby.
Who was Mary Ainsworth?
Mary Ainsworth (1913–1999) was an American-Canadian developmental psychologist who made important contributions to the development of attachment theory. In the 1950s Ainsworth worked in John Bowlby’s team in London and then observed mother-infant relationships in Uganda. Later, research conducted in Baltimore strengthened the empirical foundations of the theory. For the general framework of the theory, see What Is Attachment Theory?.
What is the Strange Situation procedure?
The Strange Situation procedure is a laboratory method developed to observe how infants aged about 12 to 20 months react to brief separations from, and reunions with, a caregiver (Granqvist et al., 2017). Over roughly twenty minutes, the infant goes through short episodes with the caregiver, with the caregiver and a stranger, with the stranger alone, and apart from the caregiver. Researchers evaluate the infant’s orientation to play and exploration, the distress shown at separation and, especially, the behavior shown when the caregiver returns.
What are the attachment styles according to Ainsworth?
- Securely attached pattern: The infant explores the environment comfortably while the caregiver is present; the infant may show distress at separation but approaches the caregiver easily on return, is comforted and can return to play.
- Avoidant pattern (a form of attachment insecurity): The infant may show no obvious distress at separation and, when the caregiver returns, may keep away or not direct attention to the caregiver.
- Ambivalent (resistant) pattern (a form of attachment insecurity): The infant shows intense distress at separation; on the caregiver’s return the infant both seeks closeness and may show anger or resistance, and can be hard to comfort.
- Disorganized pattern: This pattern, absent from Ainsworth’s original classification, was added later by Main and Solomon; it is characterized by inconsistent, contradictory or apparently confused behavior.
The three basic patterns derive from the work of Ainsworth and colleagues (1978). Many studies have reported that most children show a securely attached pattern; however, these proportions may vary by culture and sample.
Why do the names of attachment styles differ between sources?
The names and number of categories used for attachment styles depend on the age group and the classification being considered. The table below summarizes these differences.
| Approach | Applied to | Names used |
|---|---|---|
| Ainsworth et al. (1978); Main and Solomon | Infants | Securely attached; avoidant; ambivalent (resistant); disorganized |
| Hazan and Shaver (1987) | Adults (romantic relationships) | Securely attached; avoidant; anxious/ambivalent |
| Bartholomew and Horowitz (1991) | Young adults | Four patterns based on positive or negative images of the self and of others; often labeled preoccupied, dismissing and fearful, alongside a securely attached pattern |
| Dimensional approach (Fraley et al., 2015) | Adults | Anxiety and avoidance dimensions |
For this reason, names such as “avoidant” or “dismissing” and “anxious” or “preoccupied” may describe patterns that are similar but not identical; mapping labels directly across sources can be misleading. In adult attachment, individual differences in two samples fit a dimensional model better than a categorical one (Fraley et al., 2015).
What do attachment styles depend on?
Ainsworth’s studies showed that a caregiver’s sensitive and consistent responsiveness to an infant’s signals (caregiver sensitivity) is related to attachment patterns. However, attachment cannot be explained by caregiver behavior alone; the child’s temperament, family circumstances, cultural context and life events may also play a role.
Can an attachment style change over time?
Both continuity and change are seen. In a 20-year follow-up (50 participants), about 72% of infants received the same classification regarding attachment security in early adulthood; change was more common among those who reported negative life events (Waters et al., 2000). According to one review, attachment is more changeable in childhood and adolescence than in adulthood, and the link between early caregiving and adult attachment style is weak and inconsistent (Fraley and Roisman, 2019).
How are attachment styles approached in adulthood?
Attachment patterns in adults are not fixed labels attached to a person; they can change across relationships and over time. Work aimed at understanding a person’s relationship patterns can be addressed in psychotherapy; for detailed information, see Interpersonal Relationship Difficulties and How They Are Addressed in Psychotherapy and What Is Psychodynamic Psychotherapy?.
What are common misconceptions about attachment styles, and what are their limits?
- “An attachment style is a diagnosis, and attachment insecurity is a mental disorder.” No. Classifications are used in observation and research, and attachment insecurity on its own is generally not treated as a mental disorder. In particular, disorganized attachment is described as not a validated clinical diagnosis at the individual level and as distinct from “attachment disorders” (Granqvist et al., 2017).
- “Everyone has a single, fixed attachment style.” No. Patterns in infants can be relationship specific (Granqvist et al., 2017); adult attachment has been modeled better with anxiety and avoidance dimensions than with categories, and it can change over time.
- “Online tests show your attachment style conclusively.” No. Online test results do not replace a clinical assessment and should not be read as a permanent label; if support is being considered, see When Can Psychological Support Be Considered?.
Expert note
Popular accounts of attachment styles can tend to place a person in a single category. These patterns, however, are tendencies that gain meaning within a person’s life story, current relationships and cycles of thoughts and behaviors. From a perspective that draws on cognitive behavioral and psychodynamic psychotherapy theories, recurring patterns in relationships are considered together with past experiences and with the thoughts and behaviors maintained today.
Rather than finding a label, examining recurring relationship patterns with curiosity can often be more illuminating. The information in this article does not replace an individual assessment.
Clinical Psychologist Özgün Emre Yaylacı
Frequently asked questions
At what age is the Strange Situation procedure used?
The procedure is used with infants aged about 12 to 20 months (Granqvist et al., 2017).
Is attachment insecurity a mental disorder or a diagnosis?
No. Patterns of attachment insecurity are not a diagnosis but behavior patterns observed in relationships; on their own they are generally not treated as a mental disorder. A diagnosis requires a comprehensive clinical assessment.
Can an attachment style change?
Attachment patterns can show some continuity, but they are not fixed. In one follow-up study the classification stayed the same in about 72% of cases after 20 years, and negative life events were associated with change (Waters et al., 2000).
Does everyone have a single attachment style?
Not always. Adult attachment has been reported to be modeled better with anxiety and avoidance dimensions than with categories (Fraley et al., 2015), while patterns in infants can be relationship specific (Granqvist et al., 2017).
Who developed attachment theory?
The foundations of the theory were laid by John Bowlby; Mary Ainsworth’s work enriched the theory empirically.
Sources
This article was prepared for general information; the following sources were consulted in preparing it (in English):
- Ainsworth, Blehar, Waters, and Wall (1978): Patterns of Attachment: A Psychological Study of the Strange Situation. Erlbaum (Psychology Press, 2015 edition)
- Granqvist et al. (2017): Disorganized attachment in infancy: A review of the phenomenon and its implications for clinicians and policy-makers. Attachment & Human Development, 19(6), 534–558
- Hazan and Shaver (1987): Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(3), 511–524
- Bartholomew and Horowitz (1991): Attachment styles among young adults: A test of a four-category model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61(2), 226–244
- Fraley et al. (2015): Are adult attachment styles categorical or dimensional? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 109(2), 354–368
- Waters et al. (2000): Attachment security in infancy and early adulthood: A twenty-year longitudinal study. Child Development, 71(3), 684–689
- Fraley and Roisman (2019): The development of adult attachment styles: Four lessons. Current Opinion in Psychology, 25, 26–30
This article was prepared by Clinical Psychologist Özgün Emre Yaylacı. Last updated: October 23, 2026. The content is for general information only and does not constitute diagnosis, treatment or personal guidance.
