[THREAD] Nice to see attachment stability on this list. Most attachment researchers disagree about my conclusions of the attachment data on stability. But two of the most rigorous tests IMO simply don’t support the basic prediction: infant attachment predicts adult attachment 1/ https://twitter.com/trentknauer/status/1180913015274819584

Fist up, Groh et al. 2014 https://srcd.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/mono.12113 did a rigorous longitudinal study using multiple attachment measures across the lifespan. Associations between infant attachment and adolescent/early adult attachment were non significant. 2/

Second, Pinquart et al. 2013 https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Martin_Pinquart/publication/233847620_Meta-analytic_evidence_for_stability_in_attachments_from_infancy_to_early_adulthood/links/573abb5e08ae9ace840dddbc.pdf did a meta-analasis. Again, the association between infant attachment and adolescent/early adult attachment is non significant. 3/

What does shake out of the attachment stability literature are few things, tho. Shorter durations between assessments, say middle childhlood—>adolescence, are significant. Also, self reports in adulhood about current attachments to parents and romantic others are sig. 4/

The question is, however, are these the same question as “early attachments to parents are predictive of attachment to romantic partners”?

I dont think so. 5/

I don’t think short term stability of a trait is necessarily indicative of long term stability. Theoretically, I don’t think attachment in middle childhood is the same as infant attachment or adult attachment. I dont think the same attachment system is operating across devel. 6/

The standard theory of how attachment develops over the lifespan is not clear IMO and not well supported by data. As reviews point out, there are many current debates and issues to be resolved. See here for Fraley’s ( @rcfraley) recent excellent review 7/ https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev-psych-010418-102813

Attachment theory needs to be IMO overhauled in light of what we now know about development, genetics, and biology rather than endlessly trying to mash the current data into Bowlbys outdated theoretical framework. /end