Falling In Love: Why We Choose The Lovers We Choose Part 10

Social constructionists quote studies showing that men and women look for similar things in a mate. Studies done at a university and a dating club show, for example, that both men and women put at the top of their lists of desirable traits in a partner, kindness, consideration, honesty, and a sense of humor (Goodwin, 1990).

An a.n.a.lysis of personal ads also showed that the most desirable traits of a potential mate are understanding and a sense of humor (Smith et al., 1990). After the relationship has been established, the partner's sensitivity and ability to be empathetic and intimate correlate with satisfaction from the relationship in both men and women.

Another study, which investigated men's and women's values in heteros.e.xual relationships, found no evidence for women's allegedly greater concern with having a secure, committed, s.e.xually exclusive relationship. Most of the men and women who partic.i.p.ated in the study valued equally these features of intimacy (Cochran & Peplau, 1985). A review of studies on differences in the genders' approaches to s.e.x shows that women have a strong interest in their s.e.xual functioning and are able to function s.e.xually at a level similar to that of men. Furthermore, in many societies, especially Western societies, women have s.e.x outside of marriage regularly with no concern for punishment or criticism. On the whole, women are expressing their s.e.xuality far more freely than it was common to think (Small, 1992).

s.e.xuality as an aspect of courtship varies as the ages of the people in the courtship vary, not just because of life experience and comfort with oneself, but also because of when s.e.xual libido peaks for women.

Women tend to peak in s.e.xual functioning in their 30s and 40s-a later age than men-and have the capacity to be multi-o.r.g.a.s.mic.

Instead of a view of s.e.xuality that emphasizes the differences between men and women, social constructionists emphasize the subjective experience of every individual. The ideal relationship between two s.e.xual partners, either heteros.e.xual or h.o.m.os.e.xual, is "intersubjective"-that is, two individuals who treat each other as 122 subjects rather than objects and delight in each other's uniqueness (Goldner, 1998). An intersubjective relationship is the exact ant.i.thesis of a s.e.x-role stereotyped relationship that rigidly defines the different roles of men and women. Jessica Benjamin (1998) describes an intersubjective s.e.xual relationship using a joke she heard from a friend who grew up in Long Island.

One full-moon night in midsummer, the horseshoe crabs all come out from the water onto the bay sh.o.r.e, where they mate amid clattering of sh.e.l.ls. Then they all light up and say to each other, "It was good for me. How was it for you?"

Benjamin writes, "Obviously, the joke lies in the attribution of human intersubjectivity to crabs: concern with each other's pleasure, respect for the inevitable difference between my experience and yours."

If our individual differences are so large and the focus on them so beneficial to our intimate relationships, why then are so many people and so many researchers and theoreticians convinced that men and women are attracted to different things in a potential mate? Carol Tavris (1992) believes that "human beings love to divide the world and its inhabitants into pairs of opposites," we/them, good guys/ bad guys, and, of course, men/women. "Western ways of thinking emphasize dualisms and opposites, and pose many questions of human life in fruitless either/or terms." Are we uniquely human or basically mammalian? Are we shaped by nature or by nurture? After we divide things, the same tendency makes us emphasize the differences between them. When parents who have two children are asked to describe them, they tend to describe them as opposites; if one is an "angel," almost always the other one is a "devil." The oversimplification hides the fact that the similarity is much greater than the difference.

GENDER DIFFERENCES IN ATTRACTION: SOCIAL.

CONSTRUCTION THEORY VS. EVOLUTIONARY.

THEORY.

Social construction theory views gender differences in romantic attraction as minor and as the result of primarily cultural forces; evolution theory views them as large and as the result of innate, biologically based differences. The greatest differences are a.s.sumed to be in the male's attraction to physical appearance and the female's attraction to status. Which theory is correct?

ON GENDER AND LOVE, STATUS AND BEAUTY.

123.

In order to answer this question, I looked at the romantic attraction interviews, and compared the responses of the 93 young American men and women to the responses of the 89 young Israeli men and women (Pines, 1998a). Results of this gender by culture comparison provide partial support for both the evolutionary and social construction theories.9 As predicted by evolutionary theory, more men were attracted to the physical appearance of their partner than women; 80 percent of the men and 53 percent of the women mentioned the physical appearance of their partner when describing why they fell in love.

There was no difference, however, in the frequency with which men and women mentioned status as a cause of attraction; 4 percent of the men and 4 percent of the women mentioned status.

On the other hand, culture did have an effect on the importance of status. While 8 percent of the Americans interviewed were attracted to the status of their partner, almost none of the Israelis, 0 percent, were. Americans were also more influenced by propinquity, 63 percent, as compared to 46 percent of the Israelis, and by similarity, 30 percent, as compared to 8 percent of the Israelis.

Interestingly, gender differences were found where evolutionary theory had not predicted that they should be found: women were found to be significantly more likely than men to attribute arousal to romantic attraction, namely, 30 percent of women versus 16 percent of men. And gender differences were not found where they were expected: men were as likely as women to be attracted to someone who satisfied their needs, namely, 56 percent of the men versus 58 percent of the women.

These findings, as well as other findings reported throughout the chapter, suggest a need for an integrated theory of romantic attraction that combines some aspects of evolutionary theory with the contributions of the social theories. While there have been several attempts to offer such an integrated approach, there also have been those who believe that such an integration is impossible. It has been argued, for example, that although research may show an integration of biological and social influences, such different approaches as evolutionary psychology and social construction theory cannot conjoin (DeLamater & Hyde, 1998).

I myself believe that an integration of evolutionary theory, psychoa.n.a.lytic theory, social norm theory, and social construction theory is not only possible, but necessary. Each of these theories highlights an important aspect of the way men and women experience falling in love. Biological forces, the physical excitation of falling in love, which I will describe later in the book, affect 124 falling in love. Different childhood experiences influence the different romantic choices of women and men. And social norms prescribe the mating game. Nevertheless, falling in love remains the most private and unique experience.

SUGGESTIONS FOR THOSE SEEKING LOVE.

What should those seeking love conclude from all this? It is possible, of course, to simply conclude that it is important, especially for women, and especially on the first date, to try and gain maximum benefit from physical appearance. And it is important for men to appear successful and ready to commit. But it is also possible to conclude, as the social constructionists suggest, that what both men and women are looking for is a partner who is kind, considerate, and fun to be with. Luckily, these are traits that, with effort, can be adopted and developed. But social constructionists are saying something else, too. They are saying that each one of us is a unique individual, and that our uniqueness is more important than the similarities we share with our own s.e.x or the differences that divide us from the opposite s.e.x.

As I was writing this, a young man arrived for his therapy session.

He is a very handsome and bright young man who is finishing his law degree and comes from a very wealthy family. Nevertheless, he has never been in an intimate relationship. Wanting very much to have such a relationship, and realizing that there must be a problem if he continuously fails to establish one, brought him to therapy. In this session he talked about his difficulty in bringing out his "true self," that part of him that is "sensitive and vulnerable and easily hurt" when he meets new women. "Women expect a man to be strong and sure of himself," he told me. By not being himself, and by behaving according to the masculine s.e.x-role stereotype, he kept himself from the true intimacy he longed for.

This young man has two choices: (a) either play the dating game and present a mask of the masculine persona, or (b) take the risk and present his true self. He is familiar with the first option, and if he chooses to continue with it, he may only get to know the feminine persona that women will present in response. If he chooses the second, and scarier, option, the woman he likes may well reject him because she perceives him as, in his words, "weak and feminine." Since the hope is that once the bridge of first acquaintance has been crossed, the couple can go beyond stereotypes to a truly intimate relationship, the path chosen ought to be the one likely to lead to this end.

Part Two

U N C O N S C I O U S C H O I C E S.

H o w We C h o o s e T h e L o v e r s We C h o o s e The heart has its reasons, which reason knows nothing of. The heart has its reasons, which reason knows nothing of.

-Blaise Pascal Lovers and men of intellect cannot mix...

Lovers who drink the dregs of the wine reel from bliss to bliss: The dark-hearted men of reason Burn inwardly with denial.

-Talal al-Din Rumi, Lovers and Men of Intellect Lovers and Men of Intellect P eople often express an amused surprise when they hear about the effects such situational variables as proximity and arousal have on falling in love. But they readily agree that such variables do indeed have an effect and often have examples of their own to prove it. People usually express less surprise, however, when they hear about the influence of similarity in background and att.i.tudes, a pleasant personality, and physical beauty-qualities found in the beloved. These are the kinds of things "everybody and his grandmother" know about falling in love. Research data about reciprocal attraction, filling needs in romantic love, the process of falling in love, and gender differences in romantic attraction, help people organize information that they already had in one form or another. P eople often express an amused surprise when they hear about the effects such situational variables as proximity and arousal have on falling in love. But they readily agree that such variables do indeed have an effect and often have examples of their own to prove it. People usually express less surprise, however, when they hear about the influence of similarity in background and att.i.tudes, a pleasant personality, and physical beauty-qualities found in the beloved. These are the kinds of things "everybody and his grandmother" know about falling in love. Research data about reciprocal attraction, filling needs in romantic love, the process of falling in love, and gender differences in romantic attraction, help people organize information that they already had in one form or another.

But even after a detailed discussion of the situational and conscious determinants of falling in love, people can be left with a strong feeling that something is still missing. Somehow missing from the studies and theories, interesting and amusing as they may be, is the most important, significant, and mysterious element-the magic of love. The studies do not explain why it is 125 126.

that we fall in love with one person and not with another who is more similar in background and att.i.tudes, whose personality is more pleasant, appearance more impressive, and whom we see more often. The theories do not explain why one person makes us "walk on air" as if we had found our "match made in heaven,"

as if we had known him or her our entire lives, even though it's been only two weeks. Why does another person, who is a far more appropriate mate according to all the relevant criteria, leave us cold? These are the kinds of questions the second part of this book addresses. Here, we will focus on the unconscious processes in falling in love. Because they are unconscious, these processes are difficult to observe directly and study empirically. As a result, unlike the first part of the book, the second part relies less on empirical research, and more on clinical evidence.

8.O P E N N E S S TO L OV E.

Bened.i.c.k. I could find in my heart that I had not a hard heart, for, truly, I love none. I could find in my heart that I had not a hard heart, for, truly, I love none.

Beatrice. I thank G.o.d, and my cold blood...for that I had rather hear my dog bark at a crow than a man swear he loves me." I thank G.o.d, and my cold blood...for that I had rather hear my dog bark at a crow than a man swear he loves me."

-Shakespeare, Much Ado About Nothing Much Ado About Nothing "I 'msingle and I don't have a boyfriend. I would say I have never 'msingle and I don't have a boyfriend. I would say I have never had a boyfriend.... Other people are more excited about just being had a boyfriend.... Other people are more excited about just being with someone than being with someone in particular. I had a few good with someone than being with someone in particular. I had a few good male friends, but as far as a romantic relationship goes, I just was not male friends, but as far as a romantic relationship goes, I just was not ready emotionally. I was just not used to it. Most people were moving ready emotionally. I was just not used to it. Most people were moving faster than I was and I just wasn't very comfortable... I have no faster than I was and I just wasn't very comfortable... I have no problem being friends with men, but it's sort of a struggle getting into problem being friends with men, but it's sort of a struggle getting into a romantic thing. Something about it just didn't feel right to me...the a romantic thing. Something about it just didn't feel right to me...the whole idea just scared me." whole idea just scared me."

"I've been kind of shy. I haven't pursued relationships with girls my age. I'd like to, but I hadn't bothered to. I'd like to get married, my age. I'd like to, but I hadn't bothered to. I'd like to get married, have kids, but the bachelor life suits me. I'm in no rush. It'll happen have kids, but the bachelor life suits me. I'm in no rush. It'll happen eventually. Once in a while I may think about it when I see a couple eventually. Once in a while I may think about it when I see a couple on the street. I'm kind of reclusive. I don't like partners." on the street. I'm kind of reclusive. I don't like partners."

"I have never been in a romantic relationship, not really. I got buddies and stuff... I'm a tough guy to get along with. I have a bad problem and stuff... I'm a tough guy to get along with. I have a bad problem with the physical aspect of the relationship. When you find someone you with the physical aspect of the relationship. When you find someone you like, they don't always like you. I don't tell them what I feel. It's tough like, they don't always like you. I don't tell them what I feel. It's tough 'cause I can be guessing wrong... Like this woman in the place where I work. We'd go out and hang out, but she didn't want to get involved. So work. We'd go out and hang out, but she didn't want to get involved. So I never confronted her. I was asking her out but she would say I'm busy. I never confronted her. I was asking her out but she would say I'm busy.

I never confronted her on it. We used to get into huge arguments. We were very similar. That scared me. She was getting to the core of me. were very similar. That scared me. She was getting to the core of me.

There were things about me I didn't want her to know."

127.

128.

A tenth of the men and women interviewed about their significant intimate relationships said that at age 23 they still had never been in a romantic relationship.1 Their romantic involvements with members of the opposite s.e.x had not gone beyond one or two dates. Other interviewees talked about highly intimate and highly satisfying relationships of many years. Some people had had only one such significant relationship at this age; some had had two or even three significant relationships. A small number, 2 percent, of the people, all of them men, had had four or more significant, intimate relationships.

There are people who fall in love easily, very intensely and repeatedly, some even claiming that they cannot live without love.

And there are others who have never been in love and are convinced that all the stories about the intensity of romantic love are either vast exaggerations or straight out lies (Tennov, 1979). One of these, a good-looking man and a highly respected journalist, told me recently that he is convinced that pa.s.sionate love is an invention. He himself has l.u.s.ted after many women and he knows what s.e.xual pa.s.sion is, but he has never fallen in love.

Why is it that some people can find love and a romantic relationship easy and satisfying, while others want desperately to have a truly intimate relationship but fail? Why do still others avoid relationships all together? The answer to this question is not simple.

One major explanation has been provided by Attachment Theory, Attachment Theory, formulated first by British child psychoa.n.a.lyst John Bowlby (1982). formulated first by British child psychoa.n.a.lyst John Bowlby (1982).

Like Freud and most of the psychoa.n.a.lytically oriented theoreticians and researchers that followed him, Bowlby believes that early childhood experiences, most of them unconscious, have the most profound impact on adult love relationships. For Bowlby, the key is "attachment," the first stable love relationship that the baby develops. The ability to attach is innate, but the form it takes depends on the relationship that the baby has with a "primary caregiver," most often the mother. Bowlby believes that an infant needs a reliable, ongoing attachment to the primary caregiver, and that the infant suffers grievously, even irreparably, if that attachment is interrupted or lost. He developed the concept of "internal working models" to describe how the infant's sense of self and sense of others unfold through interactions with that primary caregiver.

The major premises of attachment theory are that: * intimate relationships of adults are guided by internal working models constructed from early childhood relationship experiences; OPENNESS TO LOVE.

129.

* these models shape an individual's beliefs about whether he or she is worthy of love and whether others can be trusted to provide love and support; * these models also influence the kinds of interactions individuals have with others and their interpretations of these interactions.

Bowlby believes that the inborn human need for attachment is the result of an evolutionary development. Babies are born with a repertoire of behaviors that are aimed at obtaining and preserving closeness to a "strong and wise caregiver." The maintenance of the closeness is related not only to the baby's inborn repertoire, but also to the ability, willingness, sensitivity, and accessibility of the caregiver.

The experiences the baby has with the caregiver are internalized into mental models of the self and the other. These internalized working models are generalized to other relationships. The internal model changes with development because, despite being genetically imprinted, it is sensitive to environmental influences. The internal model is responsible for all the patterns of attachment, including first and foremost, romantic attachment.

While John Bowlby is the theoretical father of attachment theory, Mary Slater Ainsworth is its empirical mother. She provided empirical evidence for a number of conclusions intuited from the theory. Mary Ainsworth, a student of Bowlby, conducted experimental observation of babies. She and her students observed 76 babies and their mothers in their homes. The observers paid attention to each mother's style of responding to her infant in such areas as feeding, crying, cuddling, eye contact, and smiling. Each mother-baby pair was observed for a total of seventy-two hours, spread over eighteen observation sessions, each lasting four hours. One-year-old babies were taken by their mothers to the laboratory and experienced a procedure termed "strange situation." Mother and baby were put in a toy-filled room where a friendly research a.s.sistant greeted them and invited the baby to play with the toys. The infant was observed as the mother left the room three times for three-minute intervals. During two intervals the research a.s.sistant was in the room, during another interval the baby was alone. Ainsworth identified three distinct patterns in the baby's reaction to the room full of toys, to the mothers departure, and to her return.

The securely attached, securely attached, about two-thirds of the babies, were infants who were ready to explore the room on their own, but turned around once in a while to make sure Mother was there. They protested or cried on separation, but when the mother returned, 130 about two-thirds of the babies, were infants who were ready to explore the room on their own, but turned around once in a while to make sure Mother was there. They protested or cried on separation, but when the mother returned, 130 they greeted her with pleasure, frequently stretching out their arms to be picked up, and molding to her body. They were relatively easy to console.

The anxiously attached anxiously attached or or ambivalent, ambivalent, about 10 percent, seemed anxious and insecure. They tended to cling and were afraid to explore the room on their own. They became terribly anxious and agitated upon separation, often crying profusely. They sought contact with Mother when she returned, but simultaneously arched away from her angrily, resisting her efforts to soothe them. about 10 percent, seemed anxious and insecure. They tended to cling and were afraid to explore the room on their own. They became terribly anxious and agitated upon separation, often crying profusely. They sought contact with Mother when she returned, but simultaneously arched away from her angrily, resisting her efforts to soothe them.

The avoidant, avoidant, about 20 to 25 percent, gave the impression of independence. They explored the new environment without using their mothers as a secure base, and they didn't turn around to be certain of the mother's presence. When the mother left, the avoidant infant didn't seem affected; but an examination of the infant's heartbeat showed a very strong response. And when she returned, the infant snubbed or avoided her. about 20 to 25 percent, gave the impression of independence. They explored the new environment without using their mothers as a secure base, and they didn't turn around to be certain of the mother's presence. When the mother left, the avoidant infant didn't seem affected; but an examination of the infant's heartbeat showed a very strong response. And when she returned, the infant snubbed or avoided her.

Because Ainsworth and her team had observed the mother-baby pairs in their homes, she was able to make specific a.s.sociations between the babies' attachment styles and the mothers' styles of parenting. Mothers of securely attached babies were found to be more responsive to the hunger signals and crying of their infants and to readily return the infants' smiles. Mothers of anxiously attached babies were inconsistent and unresponsive to the baby's needs.

Mothers of avoidant babies rejected their infants either physically or emotionally (Ainsworth et al., 1978).

In other words, the three attachment patterns seen in the laboratory were directly related to the ways the babies were mothered.

The insecure babies developed strategies that helped them cope with a mother's rejection or inconsistency.

The anxious baby tries desperately to make mother pay attention and love him or her. The baby senses that when the begging is loud enough or the scene dramatic enough, Mother responds because of guilt. This is why the anxious baby clings to Mother or tries to punish her when she doesn't respond. The baby is addicted to Mother and to the effort to change her.

The avoidant baby chooses the opposite strategy. This baby learns to suppress and ignore needs and emotions. The baby is angry at Mother and distances from her even while remaining as attached to her as the anxious baby. Since pleas for attention have been rejected in an insulting and hurtful way, the baby says in effect to the rejecting mother: "Who needs you anyway? I can manage on my own!" At times grandiose feelings about the self are added to this response- "I'm perfect and I don't need anyone"-suggesting the early development of a narcissistic personality.

OPENNESS TO LOVE.

131.

Often, the mother's inattention results from the emotional deprivation she herself had suffered in her childhood. Her baby's emotional needs remind her of her own infantile needs that she had succeeded in repressing at great effort. The reminder generates an internal anger, depression, and rejection, which she then expresses toward her child. In this way, the problem is transferred from one generation to the next in a multi-generational pattern.

In succeeding studies, researchers showed that the attachment patterns formed in infancy persist in adulthood. The patterns of intimate relationships that people exhibit as adults are powerfully influenced by the types of relationships they had with their primary caregivers, most often the mother. When the primary caregiver is consistent, stable, trustworthy, and responsive, the baby will develop a sense of security in love, and, as an adult, will feel comfortable and satisfied in love relationships. When the primary caregiver is not consistent, stable, and trustworthy, and if the baby is abandoned or rejected, then the baby will develop an adult pattern of anxiety and ambivalence about love, or else will attempt to avoid altogether the dangers involved in intimate relationships (e.g., Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991; Shaver & Clark, 1994).

A famous series of studies conducted by Philip Shaver and Cindy Hazan used a measure of adult romantic attachment that was inspired by Mary Ainsworth's work (Hazan & Shaver, 1987; Shaver & Hazan, 1993). These studies, as well as numerous others, demonstrated the existence of three romantic attachment styles.

Secure. Adults with a secure attachment style are comfortable depending on others and having others depend on them. It is relatively easy for them to become emotionally close to people. They feel themselves valuable and worthy of love and respect. They can trust people; they believe that people have good intentions and can be counted on in an hour of need. They develop intimate relationships easily and don't worry about being alone or about someone getting too close to them. They are not overly concerned about abandonment or dependency; and they tend to score high in sensitivity to others, and low in compulsive giving. Adults with a secure attachment style are comfortable depending on others and having others depend on them. It is relatively easy for them to become emotionally close to people. They feel themselves valuable and worthy of love and respect. They can trust people; they believe that people have good intentions and can be counted on in an hour of need. They develop intimate relationships easily and don't worry about being alone or about someone getting too close to them. They are not overly concerned about abandonment or dependency; and they tend to score high in sensitivity to others, and low in compulsive giving.

Avoidant. Adults with an avoidant attachment style tend to be isolated. They are uncomfortable being close to others; they find it difficult to allow themselves to depend on others, or to trust others completely. They are nervous when anyone gets too close; and, often, their partners in a relationship want them to be more intimate than they are comfortable being. They have many separations but suffer less from relationship termination. They are loners, uncomfortable in relationships involving intimacy and closeness; they have more 132 Adults with an avoidant attachment style tend to be isolated. They are uncomfortable being close to others; they find it difficult to allow themselves to depend on others, or to trust others completely. They are nervous when anyone gets too close; and, often, their partners in a relationship want them to be more intimate than they are comfortable being. They have many separations but suffer less from relationship termination. They are loners, uncomfortable in relationships involving intimacy and closeness; they have more 132 one-night stands and are more likely to be unfaithful and enjoy loveless s.e.x.

Anxious-ambivalent. Adults with an anxious-ambivalent attachment style see others as reluctant to get as close as the adults would like. Adults with an anxious-ambivalent attachment style see others as reluctant to get as close as the adults would like.

They often worry that their partner doesn't really love them, or won't want to stay with them. They are seeking such high levels of closeness and commitment that they scare away potential partners who often view them as clingy and suffocating. They are insecure and invest too much in relationships. They tend to think that people don't value them as much as they should and that, in general, people are untrustworthy. They often separate again and again from the same partner and tend to be jealous in relationships. They have low self-concepts and reveal too much about themselves. They worry about being abandoned and their love not being reciprocated, and they worry about being too close and dependent. They tend to get a high score in compulsive giving and a low score in sensitivity.

The three attachment styles influence not only the way people act in romantic relationships and caregiving styles, but also their s.e.xual styles. Secure Secure individuals are willing to experiment s.e.xually, but do so in the context of a continuing relationship. They enjoy nearly all physical and s.e.xual contact from cuddling to oral s.e.x. individuals are willing to experiment s.e.xually, but do so in the context of a continuing relationship. They enjoy nearly all physical and s.e.xual contact from cuddling to oral s.e.x.

They are unlikely to engage in one-night stands or to have s.e.x outside the primary relationship. Avoidant Avoidant individuals take less enjoyment from almost all physical, as opposed to s.e.xual, contact, are more likely to engage in one-night stands, have extramarital s.e.x, and are more likely to think that s.e.x without love is pleasurable. individuals take less enjoyment from almost all physical, as opposed to s.e.xual, contact, are more likely to engage in one-night stands, have extramarital s.e.x, and are more likely to think that s.e.x without love is pleasurable.

Anxious individuals like the physical, nurturing, aspects of the relationship, but enjoy s.e.x less. individuals like the physical, nurturing, aspects of the relationship, but enjoy s.e.x less.

A recent study of adult attachment styles in a large, nationally representative sample involving thousands of people shows that 59 percent are securely attached, 25 percent are avoidant, and 11 percent are anxious (Mickelson et al., 1997). I think it is fascinating to note that these percentages are very close to Ainsworth's original observations in infants some twenty years earlier.

Childhood adversities such as physical abuse and serious neglect have the most consistent a.s.sociation with insecure, adult attachment styles, and relate strongly to anxious and avoidant adult attachment.

Psychopathology in a parent has a strong a.s.sociation with insecure attachment. A parent's substance abuse is related to avoidant attachment. Financial adversity during childhood is related to insecure adult attachment. The adult attachment styles are related to people's ability to function in romantic relationships (Brennan & Shaver, 1995).

OPENNESS TO LOVE.

133.

Kim Bartholomew divided the avoidant category into two, thus changing the three adult attachment categories into four (1990). In the measure she developed, that is used in the context of an interview, people are categorized on the basis of the following four descriptions.

Secure. It is easy for me to become emotionally close to others. I am comfortable depending on others and having others depend on me. I don't worry about being alone or having others not accept me. It is easy for me to become emotionally close to others. I am comfortable depending on others and having others depend on me. I don't worry about being alone or having others not accept me.

Fearful Avoidant. I am somewhat uncomfortable getting close to others. I want emotionally close relationships, but I find it difficult to depend on others or to trust them completely. I sometimes worry that I will be hurt if I allow myself to become emotionally too close to others. I am somewhat uncomfortable getting close to others. I want emotionally close relationships, but I find it difficult to depend on others or to trust them completely. I sometimes worry that I will be hurt if I allow myself to become emotionally too close to others.

Preoccupied. I want to be completely emotionally intimate with others, but I often find that others are reluctant to get as close as I would like. I am uncomfortable being without close relationships, but I sometimes worry that others don't value me as much as I value them I want to be completely emotionally intimate with others, but I often find that others are reluctant to get as close as I would like. I am uncomfortable being without close relationships, but I sometimes worry that others don't value me as much as I value them Dismissing Avoidant. I am uncomfortable with close emotional relationships. It is very important to me to feel independent and self-sufficient, and I prefer not to depend on others or have them depend on me. I am uncomfortable with close emotional relationships. It is very important to me to feel independent and self-sufficient, and I prefer not to depend on others or have them depend on me.

Attachment styles can be measured as early as 12 months of age, and in the absence of major environmental change, persist into adulthood (Stein et al., 1998). The nature of the early relationship between a mother and her baby influences what that baby as an adult will think, feel, and believe about intimate relationships. Will the adult trust others or not? Will he or she expect love or rejection in intimate relationships? These are learned responses acquired very early in life in response to the degree of sensitivity and consistency received during infant care-taking.

Attachment styles also affect coping. An interesting study shows that attachment style influences the way couples respond to an anxiety-provoking situation. In the study, both husbands and wives filled out an adult attachment measure. The wives were told that they were going to take part in an activity "that produces anxiety in most people." The husbands were told that they would take part in a neutral activity. The couples were videotaped as they waited together. a.n.a.lysis of the videotapes showed that it was possible to predict the couples' behavior in the waiting room from their attachment style measures. The secure women sought the closeness of their husbands, while the avoidant women kept their distance.

The men showed a similar pattern of behavior. The secure men gave their wives support in words and physical contact when their wives'

134.

anxiety went up, while the avoidant husbands shunned their wives.

The ambivalent men and women did not show a consistent pattern of behavior (Simpson et al., 1992).

CRITICISM OF ATTACHMENT THEORY AND RESEARCH.

While attachment theory has inspired a large and steadily growing body of research, it has also raised a fair amount of criticism. Some criticized Ainsworth's "strange situation" for being an artificial base for data that could not generalize to real life situations. Some criticized the overemphasis on the influence of the relationship between the baby and Mother. Doesn't Father have an influence? And what about siblings, other relatives, teachers, and close friends? Others criticized the tendency to blame Mother for everyone's problems. Doesn't a romantic relationship that ended badly have more of an impact than Mother's handling in the first months of life? Still others criticized the overemphasis on childhood experiences. After all, we continue to evolve and learn from relationships throughout our life.

Ainsworth's response to these criticisms is to say that both she and Bowlby believe that our internal attachment model is sensitive to environmental influences and that people continue to influence us throughout our lives. She extends attachment theory beyond infancy and to "affectional bonds" throughout life, including kinship bonds, friendship bonds, and, of course, s.e.xual pair-bonds (Ainsworth, 1989).

s.e.xual pair-bonds involve three systems: reproductive, attachment, and care-giving. Although s.e.xual attraction may be the most important component at the falling-in-love stage of a romantic relationship, those relationships that depend entirely on the s.e.xual or reproductive component are likely to be short-lived. As the relationship persists, the attachment and care-giving components become more important and sustain the pair-bond even when s.e.xual interest has waned. Attachment and care-giving interact to make for a reciprocal give-and-take. Each partner, at some times and in some ways, looks to the other as stronger and wiser, and the other reciprocates by providing care, comfort, and rea.s.surance that promote feelings of security.