Key Points
Rationale
Attachment theory posits that people develop working models of attachment based on their experiences in close relationships, which guide their interactions with others (Collins et al., 2004).
These working models are believed to be flexible and can be refined based on ongoing relationship experiences (Arriaga et al., 2018; Collins et al., 2004).
Waddington’s (1957) writings on the development of biological cells and his analogy of a marble rolling down a hill, known as the epigenetic landscape (Fraley & Brumbaugh, 2004).
Waddington’s Classical Epigenetic Landscape
In the early stages of a relationship, attachment working models are relatively malleable, similar to a marble at the top of a hill that can easily change direction. External forces can easily influence the trajectory of newer working models (J. G. Holmes & Rempel, 1989; Kelley, 1979; Murray, 1999; Murray et al., 2006).
As relationships progress, attachment working models become more stable, and individuals tend to stick closely to their established trajectory, even when faced with external pressures.
Consequently, individuals in well-established relationships are expected to demonstrate less extreme fluctuations in their partner-specific attachment security, generally and in response to attachment-related events (Hadden et al., 2014).
Despite the centrality of the canalization hypothesis in attachment theory, it has rarely been studied empirically.
Method
The study analyzed longitudinal data from 1,741 adults who completed between three and 24 online survey assessments of their attachment styles and life experiences from yourPersonality Project (see Fraley et al., 2021).
The median test-retest interval was 35 days.
Procedure
Participants completed surveys on their attachment styles, personality traits, and life experiences through a website. Those who met the eligibility criteria were invited to participate in a paid longitudinal study involving additional assessments every 30 days.
Sample
The final analytic sample included 1,741 participants, with 83.74% identifying as female and 76.11% as White. The average age of participants was 35.43 years (SD = 11.29).
Measures
The study used the Experiences in Close Relationships-Relationship Structures questionnaire (ECR-RS) to assess partner-specific attachment anxiety and avoidance.
Participants also reported on the occurrence and subjective valence of various life events.
The study also measured other life events not specific to romantic relationships, with at least 600 occurrences within and across people:
Statistical measures
The researchers used mixed-effects location scale (MELS) models to examine within-person fluctuations in partner-specific attachment security as a function of romantic relationship length and attachment-related events.
Results
H1: People involved in newer romantic relationships should demonstrate greater within-person fluctuations around their individual trajectories of partner-specific security compared to those in more established romantic relationships,
Consistent with the first hypothesis, people in newer romantic relationships demonstrated greater fluctuations around their individual trajectories of partner-specificattachment anxietycompared to those in more established relationships.
The extent to which people fluctuated in partner-specific anxiety declined more rapidly across the first few years of a romantic relationship and then declined more gradually before starting to plateau.
However, this trend was not observed for partner-specificattachment avoidance, as the extent to which people fluctuated around their trajectories of avoidance did not differ across various stages of romantic relationships.
H2: We would expect to find that attachment-related events are associated with greater fluctuations in partner-specific security among those in newer versus more established romantic relationships.
The findings provided some support for the second hypothesis in the context of partner-specific attachment anxiety.
Attachment-related events, such as conflicts with one’s partner, were associated with greater fluctuations in partner-specific attachment anxiety among those in newer versus more established relationships.
The extent to which people fluctuated in attachment anxiety following a fight or argument with their partner tended to decrease more rapidly across the first few years of a relationship and then eventually plateaued at a level above typical fluctuations at conflict-free times.
Additionally, people in newer romantic relationships demonstrated greater fluctuations in partner-specific anxiety on occasions when their partner did something special for them, while those in established relationships tended to deviate less from their overall trajectories of anxiety during such events.
However, for partner-specific attachment avoidance, the occurrence of attachment-related events was not associated with greater fluctuations among those in newer versus more established relationships.
Insight
The findings suggest that the developmental dynamics of attachment anxiety and avoidance in adult romantic relationships may differ.
Partner-specific attachment anxiety appears to be more reactive to environmental cues and relationship experiences, particularly in newer relationships.
Strengths
Limitations
Implications
The findings highlight the importance of considering both average levels and within-person fluctuations in attachment security when studying adult romantic relationships.
Interventions aimed at promoting secure attachment and relationship well-being should take into account the different developmental dynamics of attachment anxiety and avoidance.
Future research should investigate the potential benefits and drawbacks of fluctuations in attachment security at different stages of romantic relationships and explore ways to promote adaptive levels of stability in attachment trajectories.
References
Primary reference
Dugan, K. A., Fraley, R. C., Gillath, O., & Deboeck, P. R. (2023). Testing the canalization hypothesis of attachment theory: Examining within-subject variation in attachment security.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.Advance online publication.https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000488
Other references
Arriaga, X. B., Kumashiro, M., Simpson, J. A., & Overall, N. C. (2018). Revising working models across time: Relationship situations that enhance attachment security.Personality and Social Psychology Review, 22(1), 71-96.https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868317705257
Collins, N. L., Guichard, A. C., Ford, M. B., & Feeney, B. C. (2004). Working models of attachment: New developments and emerging themes. In W. S. Rholes & J. A. Simpson (Eds.),Adult attachment: Theory, research, and clinical implications(pp. 196-239). Guilford Press.
Fraley, R. C., & Brumbaugh, C. C. (2004). A dynamical systems approach to conceptualizing and studying stability and change in attachment security. In W. S. Rholes & J. A. Simpson (Eds.),Adult attachment: Theory, research, and clinical implications(pp. 86-132). Guilford Press.
Fraley, R. C., & Roisman, G. I. (2015). Early attachment experiences and romantic functioning. In J. A. Simpson & W. S. Rholes (Eds.),Attachment theory and research: New directions and emerging themes(pp. 9-38). Guilford Press.
Hadden, B. W., Smith, C. V., & Webster, G. D. (2014). Relationship duration moderates associations between attachment and relationship quality: Meta-analytic support for the temporal adult romantic attachment model.Personality and Social Psychology Review, 18(1), 42-58.https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868313501885
Holmes, J. G., & Rempel, J. K. (1989). Trust in close relationships. In C. Hendrick (Ed.),Close relationships(pp. 187-220). Sage Publications.
Kelley, H. H. (1979).Personal relationships: Their structures and processes. Erlbaum.
Murray, S. L. (1999). The quest for conviction: Motivated cognition in romantic relationships.Psychological Inquiry, 10(1), 23-34.https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327965pli1001_3
Murray, S. L., Holmes, J. G., & Collins, N. L. (2006). Optimizing assurance: The risk regulation system in relationships.Psychological Bulletin, 132(5), 641-666.https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.132.5.641
Waddington, C. H. (1957).The strategy of genes: A discussion of some aspects of theoretical biology. Allen & Unwin.
Keep Learning
Olivia Guy-Evans, MSc
BSc (Hons) Psychology, MSc Psychology of Education
Olivia Guy-Evans is a writer and associate editor for Simply Psychology. She has previously worked in healthcare and educational sectors.
Saul McLeod, PhD
BSc (Hons) Psychology, MRes, PhD, University of Manchester
Saul McLeod, PhD., is a qualified psychology teacher with over 18 years of experience in further and higher education. He has been published in peer-reviewed journals, including the Journal of Clinical Psychology.
