Families as Contexts for Attachment: Reflections on Theory, Research, and the Role of Family Rituals

Abstract

This commentary draws on Shaver and Mikulincer's (2012) article to discuss key aspects of adult attachment, family theory, and research. First, a reflection is presented on why the historical development of attachment theory calls for a better understanding of the role of the whole‐family context. Second, the issue of the cross‐fertilization of research traditions related to attachment theory and family systems theory is addressed. Third, a brief overview of research on attachment and family processes is presented. Finally, to illustrate the relationship between attachment and whole‐family variables, the particular example of family rituals is discussed. More precisely, a mediational hypothesis is discussed, whereby attachment security is linked to positive outcomes for families via the development of meaningful family rituals.

Approche longitudinale de l’ajustement psychosocial des étudiants primo-entrants en contexte universitaire : une question de transition vers l’âge adulte

“…À l'inverse, il est davantage surprenant que l'environnement familial et la transition d'habitation ne prédisent pas directement l'ajustement psychosocial car la littérature évoque que le lieu de vie ainsi que la qualité des relations parentales et familiales influencent l'ajustement durant la première année universitaire (Holmbeck & Wandrei, 1993 ;Johnson et al, 2010). Nos résultats laissent penser que l'attachement joue le rôle de médiateur pour l'environnement familial et la transition d'habitation puisqu'ils présentent des covariations significatives et que la littérature associe attachement et environnement familial (e.g., Mikulincer & Shaver, 2019 ;Crespo, 2012 ;Kenny & Donaldson, 1991) ainsi qu'attachement et transition d'habitation (e.g., Bernier et al, 2005 ;Kins, Beyers et al, 2012 ;Seiffe-Krenke, 2006). En ce sens, en complément de Scharfe et al (2017), nos observations soulignent le rôle essentiel de l'attachement dans le développement positif des adultes en émergence en période de transition.…”

Stepparents’ Attachment Orientation, Parental Gatekeeping, and Stepparents’ Affinity‐Seeking with Stepchildren

“…Adult attachment theory, which is compatible with family systems theories (Crespo, ; Hazan & Shaver, ; Mikulincer & Shaver, ), is grounded in earlier research on children's attachment to their primary caregivers (Ainsworth, Blehar, Waters, & Walls, ; Bowlby, ). According to attachment theory, mental representations of the world and other people, including the self, also known as internal working models, are largely shaped by a caregiver's emotional availability and responsiveness to children's needs (Ainsworth et al., ; Bowlby, ).…”

“…Internal working models lead to generalized attachment orientations, or relatively stable ways of perceiving and interacting with others (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2012). Individuals who have secure attachment orientations tend to form relationships that facilitate individual well-being and the development of skills needed to build and maintain close and satisfying bonds (e.g., emotion regulation, conflict resolution; Crespo, 2012). In contrast, adults with anxious or avoidant attachment orientations often experience less satisfying relationships because they are either anxious about getting their own needs met or they suppress their emotions and attempt to avoid bonding (Simpson et al, 2011).…”

The Picnic Game: Presentation of a Situation of Observation to Assess Family Interactions

“…On one hand, the represented family refers to the influence of family culture, to be understood at a macro level (cultural values) as well as at a micro level (family history, parental beliefs, and representations; see Jones & Prinz, ; Sigel & McGillicuddy‐De Lisi, ). On the other hand, the practicing family refers to the actual interactions between family members enacted in daily life, which are strongly patterned; that is, they unfold according to predictable interactive schemas (Crespo, ; Fiese et al., ; Minuchin, Rosman, & Baker, ; Sroufe & Fleeson, ). The represented and the practicing family are interrelated, yet distinct: Patterned interactions are an emerging product of the coordination of family members’ behaviors, the latter being driven by representations of the family in individuals (McHale, ; McHale & Rotman, ).…”