Bedrock Layer 2: Attachment

In five minutes, I hope to give you an accurate understanding of attachment theory and why SPAN considers it essential. In particular, you'll understand why I still believe unmanaged mobility is threatening the attachment security of our students.

John Bowlby began formulating ideas about attachment in the 1940's and 50's. Attachment theory would go on to became the dominant, most highly-researched theory in all of psychology. This was partly because of the brilliance of Bowlby's thinking. It was also because of his choice of language.

Attachment. A word everyone felt they understood.

But the exact meaning of attachment, and the precise workings of the attachment behavioral system, are extremely specific. What is attachment exactly?

Bowlby built his work squarely upon Darwin's. He believed attachment was an evolved behavioral system that aided survival. A child's attachment system became activated by threats. Because of our extended period of dependency as a species, Bowlby hypothesized that evolution shaped the attachment system to "turn on" in the face of danger, compelling young, dependent humans to seek proximity with those they felt were "stronger and wiser." He compared it to a thermostat. The system would "turn off" when its desired set-point was reached, meaning either the danger had passed, or the attachment figure had provided the child with sufficient comfort and reassurance. When the thermostat was "off," children would go explore.

Many people confuse attachment with affection. Attachment usually involves affection, but what's more important is the question who you turn to when scared. And we never outgrow this system: attachment shifts from caregivers to close friends, and eventually to a partner. Bowlby was clear: evolution shaped the system to work from cradle to grave.

Secure attachment can be said to occur “when a child has confident expectations of the attachment figure as available and responsive when needed." The primary strategy of the attachment system is to activate and receive the three S's: to be seen, soothed, and made safe. To receive, in other words, empathy.

But if this primary strategy does not work, Bowlby realized a child will develop a secondary strategy. There are two, and they constitute insecure forms of attachment. The first is hyperactivation: turn the thermostat up! Children with this "anxious" strategy usually have inconsistent caregivers, which teaches them to keep signaling, louder and louder, until they finally activate the attachment figure's caregiving. The other secondary strategy is deactivation: turn the thermostat down, or even off. Children with this "dismissive" strategy had parents that discouraged the expression of vulnerability.

Secure, anxious, and dismissive attachment patterns are all what we call "organized." There is also one "disorganized" form of attachment, and it's the most concerning. Disorganized children had caregivers who were themselves the source of threat. How do you turn to a caregiver who is threatening or abusive? This paradox leads to bizarre behavior in kids, like laying on the floor when upset. Turning to the wall. Walking to a parent for a hug—but backwards.

Why is attachment security important? The largest longitudinal and meta-analytic studies all point to the same thing: people secure in their ideas about attachment do better across the lifespan. They have better results at school, at work, and in their own families. Their bodies are healthier, and they likely live longer.

Why? We evolved to survive. Physically, homo sapiens are helpless. No claws. No teeth. No armor. But we had each other. Our power resided in togetherness. And our DNA remembers how dangerous it is to be alone. There is nothing our bodies hate more than being alone. The stress of not being seen, soothed, or safe spreads inflammation throughout the body. Loneliness is about as good for us as smoking.

What does this have to do with mobility at our (international) schools?

Remember the thermostat. What happens if attachment systems are getting constantly activated because kids have to leave loved and trusted people and places? What happens if loved and trusted people keep leaving them? If nobody sees or soothes these experiences, attachment systems will naturally shut down, out of self-defense. Unmanaged mobility will likely create dismissive attitudes about attachment. I call this the "endangered attachment" hypothesis. The fear of making deep personal connections.

Surprisingly, my research so far failed to confirm this hypothesis. But readers should interpret my findings extremely carefully! The absence of proof is not the proof of absence. Our null findings could very well be due to the study's design and size. But most importantly, attachment theory itself—the most empirically-supported theory in all of psychology—continues to provide very good reasons to believe the "endangered attachment" hypothesis could be true.

So another reason SPAN was created was to address the attachment layer of bedrock. Right next to our need to belong—the first layer—we find the adjacent human need to feel secure in our ability to turn to those who are stronger and wiser when we feel threatened or scared. Parents are obvious candidates. So are friends. And so is every employee in a school, where there are daily opportunities—perhaps even responsibilities—to be a stronger, wiser attachment figure for a young person feeling worried or scared.

Empathy is the best medicine for the human body. Something might be hard, but at least we know we're not alone.