7.1.2, 7.1.8 - Ainsworth and attachment types
Learn how Ainsworth observed attachment through exploration, separation and reunion, what the three original attachment classifications mean, and how sensitivity, temperament and cultural context qualify the interpretation.
The Strange Situation procedure
The Strange Situation is a structured observation designed to make attachment-related behaviour visible under manageable changes in an infant’s sense of security.
An infant may show little proximity-seeking while playing comfortably at home. Ainsworth introduced novelty, a stranger and brief separations so researchers could observe how the balance between exploration and comfort seeking changed. Secure-base behaviour involves using the caregiver’s availability to explore; safe-haven behaviour involves seeking comfort when distressed. These ideas explain why both play and reunion behaviour are observed.
The procedure was developed for infants around the end of the first year and commonly used around 12–18 months. In its standard sequence, a researcher introduces caregiver and infant to an unfamiliar playroom, then leaves. The following episodes progressively change who is present.
| Episode | People present and main event |
|---|---|
| 1 | Researcher briefly introduces caregiver and infant, then leaves. |
| 2 | Caregiver and infant remain; exploration with a secure base is observed. |
| 3 | Stranger enters, approaches gradually and interacts; caregiver then leaves. |
| 4 | Infant remains with stranger during the first separation. |
| 5 | Caregiver returns for the first reunion; stranger leaves; caregiver later leaves again. |
| 6 | Infant is briefly alone during the second separation. |
| 7 | Stranger returns and responds to the infant. |
| 8 | Caregiver returns for the second reunion; stranger leaves. |
The whole procedure is brief, usually described as about 20 minutes. Most planned episodes are around three minutes; distress can require a separation to end early. Observers assess exploration, distress, proximity seeking, contact maintenance, resistance and avoidance. The reunions are especially informative: crying during separation by itself does not distinguish the relationship pattern. The question is how the child uses this caregiver when comfort becomes available.
This is a controlled observation rather than a test in which researchers randomly create attachment types. Standardising events allows comparison, but everyday relationships remain the source of individual differences. Historical research involving distress is studied as evidence; learners should not reproduce separations or classify children themselves.
The three original attachment patterns
Ainsworth’s original classifications describe organised patterns of behaviour toward a particular caregiver, rather than three fixed kinds of child.
| Classification | Exploration and separation | Reunion behaviour |
|---|---|---|
| Secure, B | Often explores with the caregiver available; may be distressed by separation. | Seeks or welcomes contact when needed, can be comforted, then returns to exploration. |
| Insecure-avoidant, A | Often shows relatively little overt separation distress and continues activity. | Avoids or minimises interaction/contact with the caregiver; little preference for their comfort may be visible. |
| Insecure-resistant/ambivalent, C | Often explores less and is strongly distressed by separation. | Seeks proximity or contact but also resists it, and remains difficult to soothe. |
For instance, a fictional infant who approaches the returning caregiver, accepts comfort and resumes play illustrates a secure pattern even if the infant cried strongly when alone. Another who reaches to be picked up but then pushes away while remaining distressed illustrates the approach–resistance combination. Neither example allows a real diagnosis from one behaviour outside a standard assessment.
“Avoidant” does not mean unattached, unaffected or healthy independence. Low visible crying is not proof that the child feels no stress. “Resistant” does not mean naughty or deliberately difficult. These labels describe how a relationship is organised in the observed situation. A child can have different relationships with different caregivers, and patterns can change with experience. Later researchers added a disorganised classification; it was not one of Ainsworth’s original three.
Distributions from particular early US samples are not universal targets, scores that every nursery should achieve, or percentages to apply to an unfamiliar population. Classification requires the overall pattern and trained coding, not matching one line of a table.
Ainsworth’s research and sensitivity
Ainsworth linked brief laboratory behaviour to repeated observations at home, allowing attachment classifications to be interpreted in the context of a developing relationship.
The Baltimore project recruited through private-practice paediatricians and ultimately studied 26 infant–mother pairs. Its repeated home visits from early infancy gave detailed records of signals, interaction and care; the Strange Situation was used near the end of the first year. The aim was to investigate how attachment developed and how individual differences related to caregiver behaviour. This was longitudinal observational research, not random assignment to different caregiving styles.
Ainsworth and Bell’s separate 1970 report combined 56 white, middle-class infants aged 49–51 weeks, including infants followed from birth and another subsample. It examined the attachment–exploration balance in the eight-episode procedure. Exploration tended to decline when the caregiver was absent; crying and searching increased during separation, and proximity/contact seeking increased at reunion. The authors concluded that attachment and exploration interact. These 56 infants should not be confused with the 26 pairs in the Baltimore home-observation project. Original 1970 article, reproduced PDF
Continue this lesson.
You’re previewing NovaLearn without an account. Create a free account to read the rest.
Create free account