Chapter 14

Attachment in Children
Gökçen İLHAN ILDIZ & Emine AHMETOĞLU

INTRODUCTION
Attachment is an emotional process necessary for survival of a child and is
synonymous with the child’s search for an emotional tie to a caregiver (Hazan &
Shaver, 1994). Emphasizing on the importance of attachment, Bowlby defines is as “the
meaningful, private and long-lasting emotional tie between two people”. Bowlby (1973)
suggests that inclination to and necessity of forming attachment is necessary for
survival of newborns and the functional attachment system from the developmental
perspective. The most apparent behavior of a child is “the effort to attach”. The baby
strives to cling to the mother (Güneş, 2014). The baby needs to be attached to the
mother and avoids exclusion (Scharff, 1995). “The baby thinks that mother is his/her
continuation, wants to see her anytime. In her absence, he/she gets worried, begins to
cry and feels alone” (Güneş, 2014). “Need for attachment is apparent in both human
beings and primates and can be defined as a bio-social process to protect the newborn
baby from external threats, therefore the need for forming close relationships with other
human beings is a fundamental aspect of human nature” (Bowlby, 1980).
First, Freud (1960) suggested that an infant’s emotional attachment to mother
formed the basis of his/her future relationships. Contemporary researchers recognized
the importance of parent-infant attachment but suggested that following development is
influenced not only by early attachment experience but also ongoing quality of parent-
child attachment (Berk, 2013). It is known that insecure attachment to the caregiver
may cause emotional and behavioral problems in later stages of life (Perry, 2001).
To summarize, attachment includes several key roles. Therefore; 1) attachment
enables long-lasting emotional ties with special ones, 2) this relationship provides
security, comfort and satisfaction, 3) loss or the risk of losing the special one causes
extreme suffering” (Perry, 2001).
Basic Functions of Attachment
Bowlby (1980) suggests the existence of an attachment system designed to
safeguard the intimacy between infant and caregiver under threatening circumstances.
As infants need care and protection for a long time, they are born with a desire to be
close to attachment figures and a series of behaviors to keep this intimacy. The system
that strengthens attachment behavior works with the basic objective of providing
security and protection. Therefore, when a threat to security is perceived the system
works automatically and keeps active through whole life (Shaver&Mikulincer, 2002).
Attachment behavior develops persistently and is sustained strongly through whole


Lecturer, Namık Kemal University, Vocational School of Health Services, Child
Development Program

Assoc. Prof., Dr., Trakya University, Faculty of Education, Dept. of Preschool Education
lie. (Hazan&Shaver, 1994). Bowlby (1982) suggested functions and three aspects of
attachment relationships. The first is being close to the caregiver, the second is using the
mother as the basis for support when exploring the environment and beginning new
things and the third is the mother’s role as a shelter for comfort, protection and support.
Seeking Intimacy: Bowlby (1980) suggests that attachment process involves an
attachment relationship different from other social relations and newborn babies display
behaviors that mean they want to enhance security and keep physical intimacy when
they are scared or feel unguarded or distressed. Thus, babies seek an attachment figure
for intimacy. Maintaining the intimacy with the caregiver is the most basic objective
within the attachment type and it provides an area where newborns may develop
securely.
Safe Base: Attachment figure functions as a secure base that will give the child
trust and courage when he/she gets scared (Bowlby, 1980). When the child is afraid or
feels threatened for any reason, he seeks intimacy to the attachment figure. In such
cases, caregiver (attachment figure) serves as a secure base where the child may return
for comfort and security (Hazan&Shaver, 1994). The child uses the caregiver as the
“secure base” when exploring the environment and learning new behaviors (Bowlby,
1982).
Safe Haven: Bowlby (1982) suggests that the caregiver is a safe haven for the baby
as he/she trusts the caregiver for comfort, support and reassurance. The baby must
occasionally leave the caregiver in order to explore the environment and after reunion
attachment figure functions as a safe haven to provide the child with comfort,
reassurance and support (Hazan&Shaver, 1994). In a relationship, there is primarily a
tie that allows someone to contact with the attachment figure and maintain this
intimacy. By time, this attachment figure is used as a safe haven in case of illness threat
or dangerous situations. In other words, attached person uses the attachment figure as a
shelter for security, protection and support (Farley&Shaver, 2000).
Development Stages of Attachment
A child is quite far from being a tabula rasa (a philosophical view suggesting that
human brain is an empty sheet) at birth. On the contrary, he/she has behavioral systems
waiting for activation, each of these systems is activated, ended, strengthened or
weakened by certain stimuli. Several of these systems lay the foundation of attachment
development in the future. Primitive systems that mediate crying, sucking, clinging
behaviors of newborns may be given as examples. These are followed by laughing and
babbling a few weeks later and crawling and walking a few months later. These
behavior systems are displayed in a simple order. Some motor patterns develop in a
more detailed fashion than fixed behavior pattern and stimuli that activate and end these
patterns may only be distinguished roughly. Even so, there is a distinction from the
beginning and there is an inclination to respond to stimuli from another person in a
particular way (auditory stimuli caused by human voice, visual stimuli by human face
and tactile and kinesthetic stimuli by human arms and body). Complex systems that
mediate attachment to certain figures at infancy and childhood-indeed fort he rest of
life- flourish from these little experiences. This development is divided into several
stages with no definite borders (Bowlby, 1969). These stages are as below:
Stage I: The Baby Distinguishes Figures Restrictedly: At this stage, the baby
displays certain behaviors towards people but his/her ability to distinguish one person

184
from another is restricted to olfactory and auditory stimuli. This stage lasts from birth to
at least eight weeks, often until twelve months and it is occasionally elongated under
unfavorable circumstances. Behaviors of a baby towards people around include
orientation, watching eye movements, grabbing and reaching, smiling and babbling.
The baby usually stops crying upon hearing a certain sound or seeing a face. Each of
these infant behaviors influences the behaviors of caregivers and the time spent with the
caregiver. After approximately twelve months, these friendly responses intensify and
turn into “complete social responses” with all their warmth, joy and pleasure
(Rheingold, 1961; cited by. Bowlby, 1969).
Stage 2: Orientation to the Distinguished Figure(s) and Watching Signs: At
this stage, baby displays the same intimacy toward people as in Stage 1, however it is
more apparent toward the mother than others. There is no different response to auditory
stimuli before four weeks and visual stimuli before ten weeks. Both are clearly seen
after twelve weeks in most of home-grown children and this stage may last up to six
months depending on circumstances (Bowlby,1969).
Stage 3: Maintenance of Attachment Through Locomotion in addition to
Signs: At this stage, the baby becomes increasingly more capable of distinguishing
people and widens the range of responses, going after the mother, greeting upon reunion
and using her as a base for exploration. Meanwhile, his/her friendly and equal
(nondiscriminant) approach towards all people is weakened. Certain people are selected
as helping attachment figures while others are not. They are increasingly more cautious
against strangers and feel anxiety or need to withdraw sooner or later. At this stage,
some of the mediating systems are regulated for an objective child’s attachment to
mother is clearly seen by everyone (Bowlby, 1969).
Stage 3, often begins between six and seven months but it begins after the first
birthday of children who have not made much contact with a basic figure. It probably
lasts for the second year and even the third year (Bowlby, 1969).
Stage 4: Goal-Based Partnership: At Stage 3, intimacy toward an attachment
figure is maintained by infants or children by means of goal-based systems that use a
primitive cognitive map. Within the framework of this map, the mother is seen as an
independent and permanent object in time and space with predictable motions.
However, despite this phenomenon the baby cannot be expected to understand the
factors that attract or repel the mother or what he/she can do in order to change these
behaviors. The baby still cannot understand that mother behaviors are shaped around
targets set by her, these targets are numerous and a bit conflicting and it is possible to
understand these targets and behave accordingly. However, this changes over time. By
observing mother behaviors and factors that influence these behaviors, the infant begins
to understand mother’s objectives and what she does to achieve them. After that,
worldview develops more and his/her behaviors become more flexible (Bowlby, 1969).
Factors That Influence Attachment
Temperament
Relationship between attachment and infant’s temperament has been discussed and
examined for a very long time. A child’s innate characteristics may cause him respond
negatively to stressful situations or regulate his feelings differently and this causes the
individual differences between responses of children to separation and parents’ reaction

185
to children (Bates, Maslin&Frankel, 1985; Belsky&Rovine, 1987; Egeland&Farber,
1984).
Temperament plays a key role in manifestation of nervousness, sociability and
pleasure from close contacts which are thought to be closely related to attachment. This
causes differences in attachment status of children by changing the nature of infant-
mother interaction and thus influencing the quality of attachment (Lewis&Feiring,
1989). Goldsmith & Alansky (1987) suggest that bad-tempered children receive less
sensitive messages from their mothers and this reduced mother-child interaction quality
and infant sociability has impacts on mother’s social responsiveness to her child.
Differences in temperament serve to prevent and regulate the responses of primary
caregiver to the signals from the infant, influencing the quality of initial social
relationship (Goldsmith&Campos, 1982). It is observed that mothers of bad-tempered
children are quite indifferent toward their children (Pederson et al., 1990).
There are several evidences that temperament is related to certain infant behaviors
that occur during Strange Situation Procedure (reactions to strangers such as crying and
discomfort) (Vaughan et al., 1989,Gunnar et al., 1989). Studies of a meta-analysis on 15
studies each involving both temperament and strange situation data show that there is a
moderate relationship between temperament inclined to distress and crying and resistant
behaviors in strange situation (Goldsmith&Alansky, 1987). According to a study on
newborns, 3-month old babies (Belsky&Rovine, 1987; Lewis&Feiring, 1989) and 12-
month babies (Bradshaw et al., 1987; Belsky&Rovine, 1987), temperament may
influence the expression of behaviors often considered as secure or insecure attachment.
Attachment theorists began to agree with temperament theorists over time, accepting
that children are different from each other at birth but emphasizing that personal
characteristics are influenced by social experiences (Belsky&Rovme, 1987; Stevenson-
Hinde, 1988). Consequently, temperament may determine the child’s attachment type
and different interaction patterns are expected to occur when temperament changes
(Belsky&Rovme, 1987; Lewis&Feiring, 1989).
Maternal Behavior and Sensitivity
Attitude, anxiety and behaviors of mothers have a direct impact on attitude,
anxiety and behaviors of children. One of the basic issues of attachment theory is
mother’s consistent and sensitive responsiveness of mother to child’s signals. “Maternal
sensitivity” may be conceptualized as being ready to receive the child’s signals, sorting
out, understanding and interpreting the child’s reactions and setting an appropriate level
of control and flexiblity when providing care (Lounds et al., 2005). The more mother
and child respond to each other’s feelings, the more their social interaction will improve
(Rijt-Plooij&Plooji, 1993; cited by. Soysal et al., 1999). Parental sensitivity and
responses of parents or caregivers to child’s signals are vital for the child to organize
their emotional experience and regulate “security feeling” (Kobak&Sceery, 1988).
Child’s signals to mother are valuable, meaningful and important. These signals initiate
the interaction between mother and child. Children of mothers defined as sensitive are
able to Express their needs freely and feel comfortable and safe (Etzion-Carasso
&Oppenheim, 2000). Several studies confirm the role of mother in shaping infant
behavior (Ainsworth, Bell&Stayton, 1972; Sameroff, Seifer&Elias, 1982). In studies on
Western babies, a special kind of communication called interactional synchrony
separates experiences of secure and insecure infants from each other. Interactional

186
synchrony is best defined as an “emotional dance” where parent responds to child’s
signals in rhythmic and timely manner (Berk, 2013). Maternal Care: Bowlby (1982)
emphasizes that familiarization is important for the infant’s survival. According to
Bowlby (1982) any behavior that brings the infant closer to parent or others is
familiarization; this behavior may also be called “motherhood”, “mother care” and
“feeding”. Relationship between familiarization and mother care shows that maternal
behavior must focus on reducing the distance between infant and mother. In
familiarization, mother stands close to infant and supports him/her when distressed.
This behavior provides protection for he infant and is an important aspect of
attachment. For example, it is suggested that feeding should not be considered as
merely satisfying the infant’s hunger because foundations of initial emotional patterns
are laid at this stage (Yapıcı&Yapıcı, 2005). Insufficient care is an important predictor
of attachment degeneration (Berk, 2013).
Excessive Weeping
Excessive weeping is one of the factors that influence attachment. It may threaten
the relationship between baby and parents (Gander&Gardiner, 2001). Robinson&Moss
(1970) reported a young mother who waited for her child’s birth eagerly. However, as
the baby cried excessively during the first month, showed no reaction when hugged and
was late in smiling and making eye contact and his development was slow, mother felt
that she was restricted and was not loved or found appropriate and finally rejected the
baby at the end of the third month (Hazan & Shaver, 1994). Bell & Ainsworth (1972)
report that babies cry more when their parents do not care them. They suggest that when
babies cry a lot mothers prefer to leave them and pretend not to care and more weeping
causes them to withdraw more.
Internal Working Models of Parents
Parents bring their own attachment experiences to their families. They build their
internal working models on this experience (Berk,2013). Mother attachment
representations influence the child’s attachment status considerably (LJzendoorn, 1995).
Although this is partially explained by the fact that maternal representations influence
her reactions to the infant’s signals and then the child’s attachment status, it was found
that these representations are better than maternal sensitivity in predicting infant
attachment (Belsky, 1999; VanIJzendoorn, 1995). A study on mothers indicated that
internal working models of mothers (as a result of their own experience) were related to
attachment type of their own children (Main et al., 1985; Van Ijzendoorn et al., 1999).
Bowlby (1982) thought that changes in infant behavior influence mother’s
responses to the infant, however he believed that what mother brings to the relationship
is much more complex and effective than what the child brings”. Initially, maternal
sensitivity was considered as the basic maternal factor in the child’s attachment security
(Ainsworth, 1967). Recent studies also focus on attachment representations of mothers.
These representations are based on mother’s attachment experience in her own
childhood. With adulthood, these experiences are designed as a cognitive model that
underlies feelings and thoughts on attachment (Main, Kaplan&Cassidy, 1985). Adult
Attachment Interview (AAI), the first scale designed to evaluate these representations
classifies mothers into four groups according to their judgments on their own
attachment experiences. (1) Autonomous mothers care for and value attachment needs,
solving attachment issues from childhood. (2) Dismissing mothers are inclined to

187
idealize their own parents but they underestimate the importance of attachment in their
own childhood (3) preoccupied mothers are furiously attached to their childhood
attachment figures and have difficulty in separating their past from the current situation
(4) Indecisive mothers have difficulty in speaking properly about attachment often
because of a trauma or abuse (Hesse, 1999).
Infant’s Appearance
Another factor of attachment is the infant’s appearance and movements
(Yapıcı&Yapıcı, 2005). Parents sometimes fail to deal with infants who have serious
physical defects. They may reject their babies in various ways such as leaving them or
providing very little care (Gadner&Gardiner, 2001).
Psychological Factors
According to Bowlby (1969), defects in child attachment are related to three
psychological situations seen in the first three years of life. These are protest,
desperateness, dissociation and long-term separation. Protest involves serious distress
caused by separation and desperateness involves sorrow, mourning, withdrawal. After
dissociation or long-term separation, the infant seems incapable of developing proper
attachment with the primary caregiver. The child may even lose his attachment skill
totally. The child hardens, shows interest in physical, inanimate objects and focuses on
himself. All these characteristics are visible in children who display guilty behavior
(Fonagy et al., 1997). Bowlby observed in his first study that children with the most
guilty behaviors are the ones who fail to form close connections with others. It is
observed that attachment of these children with their primary caregivers is insecure
(Katz, 1999).
Attachment Styles in Infancy and Childhood
Ainsworth Strange Situation Procedure
According to Canadian psychologist Ainsworth who was Bowlby’s student, a baby
needs the presence of a stronger adult from birth for protecting and satisfying her basic
needs. This is often the mother who gives birth to and grows the child (Ainsworth,
1967). In his attachment theory, Ainsworth concentrates on mother’s and infant’s need
for intimacy (Ainsworth, 1989). According to him, the infant uses attachment behaviors
to form security feeling by being close to the attachment figure (Ainsworth et al., 1978;
cited by., Lewis, Feiring & Rosenthal, 2000). Ainsworth (1989) defines attachment
system as a genetically innate system due to its role in survival. Thus, the child will not
go too far away from the caregiver but explore the environment safely when the
caregiver is around. According to him, attachment is based on this behavior system
(Ainsworth, 1989). According to Mary Salter, family security at early phases provides a
base for persons to develop themselves by creating new skills and fields of interest.
When family security is missing, the person suffers the shortage of a secure base
(Salter, 1940; cited by.,Bretherton, 1992).
Ainsworth is known as the person to introduce attachment theory into empirical
research (Griffin&Bartholomew, 1994). By helping to test empirically what Bowlby put
forward in attachment theory (Bretherton, 1992), he developed Strange Situation
Procedure in order to determine attachment level of an infant to family (Holmes, 1993)
and tested attachment security objectively (Meterson, 2013). He used 56 babies from
white American, middle-class families as the study sample (Bell, 1970). Ainsworth

188
came to terms with these 26 families before the birth of their children and paid 18 home
visits from the first month through the 54th week of the baby. Each visit lasted for 4
hours and data was collected from each family for total 72 hours (Bretherton, 1992).
During these observations, analyses were made on feeding (Ainsworth& 1969), face-to-
face mother-child interaction (Blehar, Lieberman&Ainsworth, 1977), weeping
(Bell&Ainsworth, 1972), greeting of the infant (Stayton&Ainsworth, 1973), balance
between attachment and exploration (Ainsworth, Bell&Stayton, 1971), obedience, close
physical contact (Stayton, Hogan&Ainsworth, 1971), approaching behavior (Tracy,
Lamb&Ainsworth,1976) and affectionate contact (Tracy&Ainsworth, 1981;cited
by.Bretherton 1992). Strange Situation Procedure was repeated after babies turned one.
Ainsworth and colleagues separated babies from parents and then brought them back
together in laboratory conditions (Ainsworth, 1979; Masterson, 2013). While designing
this technique, they drew on from the fact that securely attached infants must use their
parents as safe bases while exploring an unfamiliar play room (Berk, 2013). Here, the
main proposition is that intensity of infant’s attachment depends on maternal sensitivity
toward the infant’s needs and communicative behaviors (Ainsworth, Bell&Stayton,
1971; Ainsworth et al., 1978). In the study, relationships between 12-24-month old
infants and their caregivers were assessed at eight phases (Ainsworth, 1982; cited
by.,Paterson&Moran, 1988). Stres-causing phases were regulated in order to activate
attachment and exploration systems of infants. Infants in the study were distributed into
one of three groups according to their scores on scales for intimacy and contact seeking,
maintenance of contact, trust, avoidance, seeking and communication from a certain
distance (Ainsworth et al., 1978). Key features that distinguish three attachment
categories of parents from each other are mother interactions that are considered as
sensitive, warm, timely and rewarding (Isabella&Belsky, 1991). Ainsworth and
Eichberg (1991) found significant correlation between Strange Situation Classifications
and working models of mothers, there was also 80 % similarity between attachment
styles of parents and children. Attachment styles that were defined: 1-Secure
Attachment: In this attachment style, infant behaviors are active and open to
exploration. Infants have used parents as secure bases (Berk, 2013) and explored the
environment eagerly when they are with caregivers (Ainsworth, 1989; Hazan&Shaver,
1990; Cassidy&Berlin, 1994). They were not disturbed by the arrival of stranger. When
their mothers left, they wept and got distressed a little. When their mothers returned,
they wanted to contact and went on exploring the environment after relaxing in their
arms (Ainsworth, 1978).
2-Preoccupied Ambivalent Attachment: These children are not sure that their
mothers will respond or help when they are called (Barnett&Vondra, 1999). As they are
not securely attached, they are always preoccupied about where their mothers are and
fail to explore the environment. In laboratory settings, these children showed no interest
in toys when their mothers were in the room and got too distressed and began to weep
when their mothers left the room (Fonagy, 1999). The suffered a very intense
preoccupation, distress and fury in their mothers’ absence, refusing to communicate
with any stranger in the room and were not easily comforted when their mothers
returned (Hazan&Shaver, 1994; Sümer&Güngör, 1999a). They both sought and rejected
physical contact (Barnett&Vondra, 1999). On one hand, they seemed to be relaxed and
pleased with mother’s arrival and on the other hand they were aggressive and furious
toward mother (Ainsworth et al., 1978; Lounds et al., 2005).

189
 3-Avoidant Attachment: These infants played with toys when their mothers were in
the room but did not uset them as a safe base (Ainsworth et al., 1978) . Infants seemed
not to be distressed or affected by separation (Hazan&Shaver, 1994). They showed only
a little dissatisfaction upon their mothers leaving the room (Ainsworth et al., 1978;
Fonagy, 1999;Bretherton, 2003). When they showed dissatisfaction, they were
comforted by the stranger as easily as by their mothers (Ainsworth 1978). They avoided
contact with the stranger and played with toys (Sümer&Güngör 1999). Upon reunion,
they were indifferent to mothers’ arrival, moved away from them and focused their
attention on toys (Campos et al., 1983).
There are studies supporting the view that infant attachment styles proposed by
Ainsworth et al are transferred to the later stages of life (Davilla, Burge&Hammen,
1997). In a longitudinal study, Waters et al (2000) contacted with people from
Ainsworth’s Strange Situation 20 years later in order to test the permanency of
attachment styles and applied adult attachment interview form to these people. They
concluded that attachment styles do not change and the same attachment styles are
maintained.
Main and Soloman Disorganized Attachment
Disorganized attachment was proposed by Main and Solomon. It is apart from
“organized” categories (ambivalent, preoccupied and security) in Strange Situation
Procedure of Ainsworth and was also used by Ainsworth and Eichberg (1991). It is a
mixture of avoidant and indecisve behaviors and considered as the fourth category of
infant reactions in strange situation ( Main&Solomon,1986).
Disorganized attachment is not related to the infant’s nature or temperament
(Carlson, 1998). Disorganized attachment occurs when caregiver scares the infant/child
with abuse, bad, frightening and/or unbalanced behaviors. Twenty one per cent of
children of depressed mothers are in disorganized category and this rate rises in case of
other risk factors such as alcohol, drugs and child abuse (VanIJzendoorn et al, 1999). It
was found that mothers of children are prone to sexual harassment and neglectful
behavior and have failed to solve problems with their own caregivers (Barnett et
al.1999). Main et al report that parents of these children often suffered unsolved and
deep sorrow, traumas or losses with attachment figures in their childhood
(Belsky&Cassidy,1994).
Main and Hesse (1990) suggest that scary parental behaviors are the primary
mechanism that causes disorganized infant attachment. Both Schuengel, Bakermans-
Kranenburg and Van IJzendoorn (1999) support the view that scary parental behavior
and infant’s placement in this category at Strange Situation Procedure are correlated.
Solomon and George (2011) revealed that defects in organizatio of caregiving setting
may predict disorganized behavior in Strange Situation Procedure. When the need for
attachment arises, children in disorganized attachment relationship display bizarre,
conflicting and unaccountable behaviors (Hesse&Main, 2000). In strange Situation
Procedure (Ainsworth et al.,1978), behaviors of infants in disorganized attachment
category show that they do not have an appropriate strategy for resorting to caregivers
in stressful situations and receiving their assistance (Goldwyn et al,. 2000).
Simultaneous and conflicting behaviors and feelings, apparent dissociation, abnormal
movements, signs of dreading the parent tor absence of an attachment strategy are some
of these behaviors (Main &Hesse, 1990).

190
 CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS
Attachment is a process that forms at early stages of life and influences human life
in multiple ways. Attachment relationship between caregiver and infant guides human
behaviors including exploration activities in infancy, peer relationships, adaptation,
school success, problem-solving skill at childhood, parental role, relationships with
spouses and close surrounding. Securely attached children are expected to begin life as
more healthy and confident individuals.
Considering that attachment forms during early years and is quite important in
human life, responsibilities of parents are better understood. Mothers assume the most
important responsibility in forming attachment. They have to respond to infants’ needs
on time from the birth in order to develop a good attachment. Their sensitivity,
unlimited and unconditioned love toward children will enable children to develop
secure attachment. Fathers have important responsibilities as well as mothers. They
have an important role in emotional development of all children. Even though children
are likely to be attached to caregivers, fathers’ role in forming this attachment cannot be
ignored. Fathers’ warm approach, sensitivity to their needs and physical contact will
also enhance development of attachment. Positive relationships in the family also
influence infant attachment. Harmony and intimacy between parents and warm
atmosphere will keep infants away from negative events and enhance their spiritual and
emotional development. A child with healthy emotions will be able to form attachment
properly. Parents are sometimes late in gaining awareness about attachment and forming
positive relationship with their children and this affects children negatively. However, it
must be kept in mind that children need love and attention of their parents at every age.
Warmth, sensitivity and love toward children will influence them positively at all
periods.
Preschool children need an adult to trust and come closer before starting school.
Teacher is this adult. It is known that children at this period develop attachment with
their teachers. Preschool teachers must be sensitive to students’ needs and treat them
warmly in order to help them develop positive social relationships with peers and a
positive attitude toward school. Given that education is multilateral process, one duty of
teachers is to inform parents about child development. Informing parents about
attachment will help them understand its importance.
REFERENCES
Ainsworth, M. D. S. (1967). Infancy in Uganda: Infant Care and The Growth of Love
Baltimore. Johns Hopkins University Press.
Ainsworth, M. D. S. (1969). Object Relations, Dependency and Attachment: a Theoretical
Review of the Infant-Mother Relationship. Child Development, 40 (4), 969-1025.
Ainsworth, M. D. S. (1979). lnfant-Mother Attachment. American Psychologist,34, 125-129.
Ainsworth, M. D. S. (1989).Attachments Beyond Infancy. American Psychologist,44(4),
709-716.
Ainsworth, M. D. S.; Bell, S. M. & Stayton, D. (1971). Individual Differences in Strange
Situation Behavior of One-Year-Olds. In H. R. Schaffer (Ed.), (17-57). Theorigins of
Humansocial Relations London: Academic Press.
Ainsworth, M. D. S.; Bell, S. M. & Stayton, D. (1972). Individual Differences in the
Development of Some Attachment Behaviors. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly of Behavior and
Development, 18 (2), 123-143.

191
Ainsworth, M. D .S.; Blehar, M. C.; Waters, E. & Wall, S. (1978). Patterns of Attachment: A
Psychological Study of The Strange Situation. Psychology: New York.
Ainsworth, M. D. S. & Eichberg, C. G. (1991). Effects on Infant-Mother Attachment of
Mother’s Experience Related to Loss of an Attachment Figure. In C. M. Parkes, J.
Stevenson-Hinde, & P. Marris (Eds.), Attachment Across the Life Cycle (pp.160-183).
New York: Routledge.
Barnett, D. & Vondra, J. I. (1999).Atypical Patterns of Early Attachment: Theory, Research,
and Current Directions.Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development,
64 (3),1-24.
Barnett, R. C.; Gareis, K. C.& Brennan, R. T. (1999). Fit as a Mediator of the Relationship
Between Work Hours and Burnout. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 4, 307–
317.
Bates, J. E.; Maslin, C. A. & Frankel, K. A.(1985). Attachment Security, Mother-Child
Interaction, and Temperament as Predictors of Behavior-Problem Ratings at Age Three
Years”, Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development,50(1-2), 167-
193.
Bell, S. M. (1970). The Development of the Concept of the Object as Related to Infant-
Mother Attachment”, Child Development, 41 (2), 291-311.
Bell, S. M.& Ainsworth, M. D. S. (1972).Infant Crying and Maternal Responsiveness. Child
Development, 43 ( 4), 1171-1190.
Belsky, J. (1999). Quantity of Nonmaternal Care and Boys' Problem Behavior/Adjustment at
Ages 3 and 5:Exploring the Mediating Role of Parentin. Psychiatry, 62 (1), 1-20.
Belsky, J. & Cassidy, J. (1994). Attachment: Theory and Evidence. M.Rutter & D.Hay
(Eds.), Development Through Life: A Handbook for Clinicians (pp. 373-402). Oxford:
Blackwell.
Belsky, J., Rovine, M. (1987). Temperament and Attachment Security in the Strange
Situation: An Empirical Rapprochement. Society for Research in Child Development,58
(3), 787-795.
Berk, E. L. (2013). Bebekler ve Çocuklar: Doğum Öncesinden Orta Çocukluğa, Erdoğan, I.
N. (Çev. Ed.), (Basım 7), (164-266-278),Nobel Akademik:Ankara.
Blehar, M. C.; Lieberman, A. F., Ainsworth, M. D. S. (1977).Early Face-to-Face Interaction
and Its Relation to Later Infant-Mother Attachment. Child Development,48(1), 182-194.
Bradshaw, D. L.; Goldsmith, H. H., Campos, J. J. (1987). Attachment, Temperament, and
Social Referencing: Interrelationships Among Three Domains of Infant Affective
Behavior. Infant Behavior and Development,10 (2) , 223–231.
Bretherton, I. (2003). Mary Ainsworth: Insightful Observer and Courageous Theoretician.
G. A. Kimble and M. Wertheimer (Ed.).Portraits of Pioneers in Psychology 5, (1-10),
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Bowlby, J. (1969). A ttachment and Loss. Volume I, Basic Books, New York.
Bowlby, J. (1973). Separation Anxiety and Anger. Attachmentand Loss. The Tavistock
Institute of Human Relations, Volume II, United States of America.
Bowlby, J. (1980). Attachment and Loss, Loss Sadness and Depression.Volume III, A
Member of the Perseus Books Group, New York.
Bowlby, J. (1982). Attachment and Loss: Sadness and Depression.Marriage and Family, 44
(1), 248-250.
Bretherton, I. (1992). The Origins of Attachment Theory: John Bowlby and Mary
Ainsworth. Developmental Psychology, 28 (5), 759-775.
Carlson, E. A. (1998). A prospective longitudinal study of attachment disorganization
/disorientation. Child Development, 69, 1107 – 1128

192
Cassidy, J.& Berlin, L. J. (1994). The Insecure/Ambivalent Pattern of Attachment: Theory
and Research.Child Development, 65 (4), 971–991.
Campos, J. J.; Barrett, K. C.; Lamb, M. E.; Goldsmith, H. H. & Stenberg, C. (1983).
Socioemotional Development. E. H. Mussen (Ed.), Infancy and Developmental
Psychobiology, (793-915), NewYork: Wiley.
Davila, J.; Burge, D., Hammen, C. (1997).Why Does Attachment Style Change?. Journal of
Personality and Social Psycholog, 73(4), 50-62.
Egeland, B., Farber, E. A.(1984). Infant-Mother Attachment: Factors Related to Its
Development and Changes Over Time. Child Development, 55 (3), 753- 771.
Etzion-Carasso, A. & Oppenheim, D.(2000). Open Mother-Preschooler Communication:
Relations With Early Secure Attachment. Attachment &Human Development, 2(3), 347–
370.
Farley, C. R. & Shaver, R. P. (2000). Adult Romantic Attachment: Theoretical Develop-
ments, Emerging Controversies, and Unanswered Questions. Review of General
Psychology, 4 (2), 132-154.
Fonagy, P. (1999).The Understanding of Mental States, Mother-Infant Interaction and the
Development of the Self, 26,(37-50), Les Cahiers Psychiatriques: Special Issue in Honor
of Bertrand Cramer.
Fonagy, P.; Steele, H.; Steele M.& Holder, J. (1997). Attachment and Theory of Mind:
Overlapping Constructs? Association for Child Psychology and Psychiatry Occasional
Papers, 14(3), 31–40.
Freud, A.(1960). Discussion of Dr, John Bowlby’s Paper”. Psychoanalytic Study of the
Child, 15, 53-62.
Gander, M.J.;Gardiner, H. W. (2001). Çocuk ve Ergen Gelişimi,Dönmez A. Çelen, N.,
(Çev.),4. Basım, (s.214-217), İmge:Ankara.
Goldsmith, H. H.& Alansky, J. (1987). Maternal and Infant Temperamental Predictors of
Attachment: A Meta-Analytic Review”, Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology,
55 (6), 805–816.
Goldsmith, H. H. & Campos, J. (1982). Toward a Theory of Infant Temperament.
Attachment and Affiliative Systems,(s.161-193), New York: Plenum Press.
Goldwyn, R.; Stanley C.; Smith V. & Green, J. (2000). The Manchester Child Attachment
Story Task: Relationship With Parental AAI, SAT and Child Behaviour. Attachment &
Human Development, 2(1), 71–84.
Griffin, D. & Bartholomew, K. (1994). Models of the Self and Other: Fundamental
Dimensions Underlying Measures of Adult Attachment”, Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 67(3), 430-445.
Gunnar M. R.; Mangelsdorf S.; Larson M., Hertsgaard, L. (1989). Attachment, Tempera-
ment, and Adrenocortical Activity in Infancy: A Study of Psychoendocrine Regulation.
Developmental Psychology, 25(3), 355-363.
Güneş, A. (2014). Güvenli Bağlanma, Erdem, F. (Ed.), 4.Basım, 4,16,17,19,20, 49, s.,Timaş:
İstanbul.
Hazan, C. & Shaver, P. R. (1994). Attachment as an Organizational Framework for Research
on Close Relationships. Psychological Inquiry, 5 (1), 1-22.
Hazan, C. & Shaver, P. R. (1990). Love and Work: An Attachment Theoretical Perspective.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59 (2), 270-280.
Hesse, E. (1999). The Adult Attachment Interview: Historical and Current Perspectives.
Cassidy, J.& Shaver P.R.. (Ed.), Handbook of attachment, (395-433),New York:
Guilford.
Hesse, E. & Main, M. (2000). Disorganized Infant, Child and Adult Attachment: Collapse in

193
 the Behavioral and Attentional Strategies. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic
Association, 48, 1097–1127.
Holmes J.(1993). Attachment Theory: A Biological Basis for Psychotherapy. The British
Journal of Psychiatry, 163, 430-438.
Isabella, R. A., Belsky, J. (1991). Interactional Synchrony and the Origins of Infant-Mother
Attachment: A Replication Study.Child Development, 62(2), 373-384.
Katz, L. C. (1999). What’s Critical for The Critical Period in Visual Cortex? Cell, 99 (7),
673– 676.
Kobak, R. R., Sceery, A. (1988). Attachment in Late Adolescence: Working Models, Affect
Regulation and Representations of Self and Others. Child Development, 59 (1), 135-146.
Lewis, M., Feiring, C. (1989). Infant, Mother, and Mother-Infant Interaction Behavior and
Subsequent Attachment.Child Development, 60(4),831-837.
Lewis M.; Feiring, C., Rosenthal, S. (2000). Attachment Over Time. Child Development.
71(3), 707-720.
Lounds, J.J.; Borkowski, J. G.; Whitman, T.L.; Maxwell, S. E., Weed, K. (2005). Adolescent
Parenting and Attachment During Infancy and Early Childhood.Parenting, 5 (1), 91-118.
Main, M., Hesse, E. (1990). Parents’ Unresolved Traumatic Experiences Are Related to
Infant Disorganized Attachment Status: Is Frightened or Frightening Parental Behavior
The Linking Mechanism? In M. Greenberg, D. Cicchetti & E. M. Cummings (Eds.),
Attachment in the preschool years (pp. 161-182). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago
Press.
Main, M. & Solomon, J. (1986). Discovery of A New, Insecure-Disorganized/Disoriented
Attachment Pattern. In T. B. Brazelton & M. W. Yogman (Eds.), Affective Development
in Infancy (pp. 95- 124). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Main, M.; Kaplan, N., Cassidy, J. (1985). Security in infancy, Childhood, and Adulthood: A
Moveto Thelevel of Representation. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child
Development, 50 (1-2), 66-104.
Masterson, F. M. (2013). Bağlanma Kuramı ve Nörobiyolojik Kendinlik Açısından Kişilik
Bozuklukları,2, Masterson,F.M (Ed.),Şentürk,Ş. (Çev.),(21-187), Litera: İstanbul.
Patterson, R. J. & Moran, G. (1988). Attachment Theory, Personality Development, and
Psychotherapy. Clinical Psychology Review, 8 (6), 611-636.
Pederson, D. R.; Moran, G.; Sitko, C.; Campbell, K.; Ghesquire, K., Acton, H. (1990).
Maternal Sensitivity and the Security of Infant-Mother Attachment: A Q-Sort Study.
Child Development, 61 (6), 1974 – 1983.
Perry, B. D. (2001). Bonding and Attachment in Maltreated Children. The Child Trauma
Academy.
Robson, K. S. & Moss, H. A. (1970). Patterns and Determinants of Maternal Attachment.
The Journal of Pediatrics, 77 (6), 976-985.
Rijt-Plooij, H. H. C. & Plooij, F .X. (1993). Distinct Periods of Mother-Infant Conflict in
Normal Development: Sources of Progress and Germs of Pathology. Journal of Child
Psychology and Psychiatry, 34 (2), 229-245.
Scharff, J. S. (1995). Psychoanalytic Marital Therapy. Jacobson,A.S. Gurman, (Ed.).Clinical
Handbook of Couple Therapy, Basım 1, (164-196,s.), New York: Guilford Press
Schuengel, C.; Bakermans-Kranenburg ; M. J & Van Ijzendoorn, M. H. (1999). Frightening
Maternal Behavior Linking Unresolved Loss and Disoiganized Infant Attachment
Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 67, 54-63
Sameroff, A. J.; Seifer, R. & Elias, P. K. (1982). Sociocultural Variability in Infant
Temperament Ratings. Child Development, 53(1), 164-173.
Shaver, P. R.& Mikulincer, M., (2002). Dialogue on Adult Attachment:Diversity and

194
 Integration. Attachment and Human Development, (4),133-161.
Solomon, J., George, C. (2011). Disorganization of Maternal Caregiving Across Two
Generations: The Origins of Caregiving Helplessness. In J. Solomon and C. George
(Eds.) Disorganization of Attachment and Caregiving: Research and Clinical Advances.
New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Soysal, Ş.; Bodur, Ş., İşeri, E. & Şenol, S. (1999). Yenidoğan Döneminde Hastanede Uzun
Süreli Tedavi Görmenin Bağlanma Örüntüsü Üzerindeki Etkileri: Bir Olgu Sunumu”,
Klinik Psikiyatri, 2. 266-270.
Stayton, D. & Ainsworth, M. D. S. (1973). Development of Sparation Behavior in the First
Year of Life. Developmental Psychology, 9(2), 226-235.
Stayton, D.; Hogan, R.& Ainsworth, M. D. S. (1971). Infant Obedience and Maternal
Behavior; The Origins of Socialization Reconsidered. Child Development,42(4), 1057-
1070.
Stevenson, J. & Hinde, R. A. (1989). Individuals in Relationships, Stevenson. J., Hinde,R.A.
( Ed.), Relationships within Families: Mutual Influences, Oxford:Oxford University.
Sümer, N.& Güngör, D. (1999). Yetişkin Bağlanma Stili Ölçeklerinin Türk Örneklemi
Üzerinde Psikometrik Değerlendirmesi ve Kültürlerarası Bir Karşılaştırma.Türk
Psikolojisi Dergisi, 14 (43), 71-106.
Tracy, R. L. & Ainsworth, M. D. S. (1981). Maternal Affectionate Behavior and Infant-
Mother Attachment Patterns. Child Development, 52(4), 1341-1343.
Tracy, R. L., Lamb, M. E.& Ainsworth, M. D. S. (1976). Infant Approach Behavior as
Related to Attachment. Child Development, 47(3), 511- 578.
Van IJzendoorn, M.H. (1995). Adult Attachment Representations, Parental Responsiveness,
and Infant Attachment: A Meta-Analysis on The Predictive Validity of The Adult
Attachment Interview.( Psychological Bulletin, 117, 387—403.)
Van Ljzendoorn, M. H.; Schuengel, C., Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J. (1999). Disorganized
Attachment in Early Childhood: Meta-Analysis of Precursors, Concomitants, and
Sequelae. Development and Psychopathology, 11 (2), 225-249.
Vaughan, T. R., Weber, R. W., Tipton, W. R., & Nelson, H. S. (1989). Comparison of PEFR
and FEV1 in Patients With Varying Degrees of Airway Obstruction Effect of
Mmodestaltitude.Chest, 95 (3), 558-562.
Waters, E., Merrick, S., Treboux, D., Crowell, J., Albersheim, L. (2000). Attachment
Security in Infancy and Early Adulthood: A Twenty-Year Longitudinal Study. Child
Development, 71(3), 684-689.
Yapıcı, Ş., Yapıcı, M. (2005). Çocukta Sosyal Gelişim”, AKÜ Eğitim Fakültesi Haziran, 5
(2).

195