Written by: Anabel Thien
Attachment in a Nutshell
Attachment patterns formed in early childhood have been theorised to be means of regulating physical and emotional proximity to caregivers, which are projected into adult relationships (Baxter & Bullis, 1986, as cited in Bippus & Rollin, 2003) There are 4 types of attachment styles a person can develop in the course of their upbringing: Secure, Anxious-Ambivalent, Dismissive-Avoidant and Fearful-Avoidant (Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991, as cited in Bippus & Rollin, 2003). A securely-attached person is comfortable with mutual trust and interdependence and practises a healthy balance of intimacy and space (Firestone, 2013). The other attachment styles are characterised as insecure and tackle conflict differently from each other.
Individuals with the Anxious-Ambivalent or Anxious-Preoccupied attachment style are characterised by emotional hunger. Marked by a deep fear of abandonment, they constantly seek validation to fulfil a sense of security and appear distressed when they are not assured of their partner's attention. Dismissive-Avoidant individuals are resistant to intimacy and prefer relying on themselves. Distant and emotionally guarded in relationships, they also feel numb and neglect their own feelings (Firestone, 2013). Lastly, Fearful-Avoidant attachment, also known as Disorganised attachment, blends elements from both the Anxious and Avoidant types. People with this attachment style attempt to reach out but have an impulse to distance themselves because they are afraid of getting too close to others (Bifulco et al., 2002). They have an erratic approach to relationship development, making them prone to emotional storms (Firestone, 2013).To better understand attachment styles in the context of conflict, attachment can also be viewed according to the dimensions of anxiety and avoidance (Shi, 2003, as cited in Cann et al., 2008).
Understanding Conflict Styles
We can understand conflict management by two main factors: concern for self and concern for others. Concern for self represents the need to satisfy one's personal goals when solving conflict. In contrast, concern for others refers to the felt importance of ensuring others get a desirable outcome from conflict (Blake & Mouton, 1964, as cited in Cann et al., 2008). With these elements in mind, five conflict management styles are proposed: integrating, dominating, obliging, avoiding and compromising (Rahim, 1983). Researchers have identified a link between attachment styles and conflict styles (Cann et al., 2008) which will be explored further in this article.
Secure Attachment
Individuals with secure attachment tend to adopt more constructive styles like compromising and integrating than the insecure attachment types. Compromising assumes a medium concern for self and medium concern for others approach. When in conflict, people in this category will have a give-and-take attitude and negotiate tradeoffs, leaving both parties partially satisfied. On the other hand, the Integrating style has high concern for self and others. One who uses this style wants to ensure both parties' outcomes are maximised (Cann et al., 2008). In conflict, they would likely assess the situation objectively and collaborate with others to think of solutions that allow for a win-win situation (Antonioni,1998).
High Anxiety
This category would most suitably describe individuals with the Anxious-Ambivalent attachment style. People in this category would prefer Obliging, which expresses a high concern for others while having a low concern for self. They are more likely to make concessions, even if their needs are disregarded (Shi, 2003, as cited in Cann et al., 2008). In an argument, they appear less confrontational and act in a self-sacrificing manner, agreeing with other parties to appease them (Antonioni, 1998).
Anxiously attached individuals perceive their self-worth negatively and project their insecurity in seeking closeness from others when they are emotionally provoked. They thus have a tendency to exercise emotionally-focused coping styles that amplify distress. They are intensely sensitive to actual or perceived cues of rejection, diminishing their awareness of cues of support. When faced with relational conflict, the internal distress they experience influences them to resort to impulsive behaviours that aggravate the conflict at hand (Baptist et al., 2012).
High Avoidance
This category refers to Dismissive-Avoidant (low anxiety, high avoidance) and Fearful-Avoidant (high anxiety, high avoidance) personalities. These attachment styles are positively correlated to Dominating and Avoiding approaches. The Dominating style is associated with a low concern for others and a high concern for self. As such, they prioritise their own goals over others. They may be perceived as pushy as they assert themselves and subsequently garner negative impressions from others (Cann et al., 2008). In conflict, they may be aggressive in maintaining their stand, only taking solutions that guarantee their needs are met, even at the expense of others (Antiononi, 1998).
On the other hand, Fearful-Avoidant attachment styles tend toward the Avoiding conflict style. They have low concern for self and others and will make little effort to manage the conflict (Cann et al., 2008). They are reluctant to cooperate and are more effective in fighting rather than deriving solutions to the conflict. In heated discussions, they may also physically withdraw themselves to protect themselves (Karaırmak & Duran, 2008). All participants in the conflict will thereupon not have their needs met (Antiononi, 1998). Fearful types also have elements of high anxiety. Their confusion between the need for intimacy and the need for space can manifest in a turbulent temperament and dramatic behavioural changes as well (Firestone, 2013).
Avoidant individuals are wired to believe that they will not receive validation or adequate attention when they need it. While growing up, they come to terms with feeling ignored and hence are accustomed to feeling distant. As a result, the concept of closeness is uncomfortable or even frightening for them. When in conflict, they will be dismissive toward and reject intimacy and dependency on others to avoid getting hurt from potential rejection and disappointment (Fraley & Shaver, 2000, as cited in Baptist et al., 2012).
One Way Best Way?
It may seem that an integrating style is the best approach to managing conflict, but that is not the case. Instead, one should discern between the five practices depending on the conflict they are met with (Antiononi, 1998). It would not be appropriate if the Integrating style was used on minor disagreements or when time is scarce as it would be tedious. Similarly, one may favour the Obliging style even if they tend toward other conflict styles because they are a subordinate to a superior in a workplace. Even the Avoiding style can be sustainable when used in the right context – in an intense argument, two people could have a 'time-out' and disengage, followed by reuniting to shift to a compromising style once their emotions have settled. The notion that a person's attachment style influences their tendency towards a conflict style is definitely backed by overwhelming evidence. However, it is ideal that everyone, regardless of their attachment tendencies, aims be adept at recognising different approaches for different situational contexts and switch between the conflict styles (Antiononi, 1998).
References:
Antonioni, D. (1998). Relationship between the Big Five Personality Factors and Conflict Management Styles. International Journal of Conflict Management, 9(4), 336–355. https://doi.org/10.1108/eb022814
Baptist, J. A., Thompson, D. E., Norton, A. M., Hardy, N. R., & Link, C. D. (2012). The effects of the intergenerational transmission of family emotional processes on conflict styles: The moderating role of attachment. The American Journal of Family Therapy, 40(1), 56–73. https://doi.org/10.1080/01926187.2011.575030
Bifulco, A., Moran, P. M., Ball, C., & Bernazzani, O. (2002). Adult attachment style. I: Its relationship to clinical depression. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 37(2), 50–59. https://doi.org/10.1007/s127-002-8215-0
Bippus, A. M., & Rollin, E. (2003). Attachment style differences in relational maintenance and conflict behaviors: Friends' perceptions. Communication Reports, 16(2), 113–123. https://doi.org/10.1080/08934210309384494
Cann, A., Norman, M. A., Welbourne, J. L., & Calhoun, L. G. (2008). Attachment styles, conflict styles and humour styles: Interrelationships and associations with relationship satisfaction. European Journal of Personality, 22(2), 131–146. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.666
Firestone, L. (2013, July 30). How your attachment style impacts your relationship. Psychology Today. Retrieved April 13, 2022, from https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/compassion-matters/201307/how-your-attachment-style-impacts-your-relationship
Karaırmak, Ö., & Duran, N. O. (2008). Gender differences in attachment styles regarding conflict handling behaviors among Turkish late adolescents. International Journal for the Advancement of Counselling, 30(4), 220–234. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10447-008-9059-8
Rahim, M. A. (1986). Referent role and styles of handling interpersonal conflict. The Journal of Social Psychology, 126(1), 79–86. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.1986.9713573
Comments