Equilibrium Psychotherapy

Understanding Attachment Styles

Understanding Attachment Styles

Where attachment theory comes from, what the four adult styles feel like from the inside, how they show up with partners, friends and at work, and why none of them is fixed.

13 minute read  ·  2,907 words  ·  four styles

Your partner says, “I think I need a quiet weekend on my own.” One person hears a perfectly reasonable request. Another hears the beginning of the end. A third feels a flicker of relief that’s a little hard to admit. If you’ve ever wondered why the same words land so differently, part of the answer may lie in attachment theory, the idea that our earliest relationships teach us what to expect from closeness, and that those expectations follow us into the relationships we have now.

01

Part one of four

Where the idea comes from

Bowlby, Ainsworth, and the experiment that turned a theory into something you could watch

Bowlby, Ainsworth, and the Strange Situation

Attachment theory began with the British psychiatrist John BowlbyJohn Bowlby 1907 to 1990British psychiatrist and psychoanalyst. Much of his early work was with children separated from their families, and a 1951 report he wrote for the World Health Organization argued that young children need a warm, continuous relationship with a caregiver. in the middle of the twentieth century. His big idea was that we’re born needing closeness, the same way we’re born needing food. He noticed that how babies were cared for seemed to shape how they coped with being apart, and later how they handled relationships of their own.

Later, Mary AinsworthMary Ainsworth 1913 to 1999Developmental psychologist, born in the United States and raised in Canada. Before the Strange Situation, she spent months watching mothers and babies at home, first in Uganda and later in Baltimore., a developmental psychologist, put Bowlby’s ideas to the test with a short observation called the Strange Situation. A baby and parent spend a few minutes in an unfamiliar playroom, the parent slips out briefly and then comes back, and researchers watch what the baby does at the reunion.

Ainsworth described three patterns: secure, avoidant and anxious-ambivalent. In the 1980s, Mary Main and Judith Solomon added a fourth, disorganized, for babies whose reactions didn’t fit any of the three. It was only years later that researchers started asking whether adults show something similar in their closest relationships. The patterns were first seen in babies, and only later traced into adult love.

Here’s what the Strange Situation looks like in practice. Keep an eye on what the baby does when the parent comes back, because that reunion is the moment researchers watch most closely.

02

Part two of four

The four styles

Where you sit on two sliding scales, and what each corner feels like from the inside

Two dimensions rather than four boxes

The four adult styles are usually presented as a list. They’re better read as a field with two dimensions: how much you worry about closeness, and how much you avoid it. Even Ainsworth’s baby patterns, it turns out, sort along two very similar lines.

Low anxiety
High anxiety
Low avoidance

Secure

Anxious

Preoccupied

High avoidance

Avoidant

Dismissive

Fearful-avoidant

Secure sits low on both scales. Fearful sits high on both, which is why it reads as a mix of the other two. The axes are continuous, so most people sit somewhere on the field rather than squarely in a corner, which Part 3 comes back to.

In most studies, somewhere between half and three in five adults have a mostly secure attachment style, and secure is the most common style in most of the countries that have been studied. How everyone else divides up depends a lot on who’s asked and how, which is one more reason to think of these as sliding scales rather than four boxes.

What it looks like on an ordinary evening

You send a message that matters to you, and the reply doesn’t come. One person puts the phone down and gets on with the evening. Another checks it every few minutes and starts rereading what they wrote, looking for the mistake. A third is a little relieved by the quiet, and then takes a day to answer the next message. It’s the same silence, and it makes three very different nights.

That’s your attachment style in everyday life. It shows up less in big dramatic moments and more in small, automatic reactions whenever someone you care about feels close, or far away. When you lean anxious, your system tends to turn the volume up: you notice every sign of distance and reach harder for reassurance. When you lean avoidant, it tends to turn the volume down: you play down what you need and reach for space. Neither reaction is a flaw. Each one is a way you learned to stay safe with the people you needed.

Secure

low anxiety  ·  low avoidance

In relationships

  • People with a secure attachment style are comfortable with closeness, trust the people they love, and keep healthy boundaries.
  • They can be close to someone without constantly fearing they’ll be left, and without leaning on them for everything.

Where it comes from

  • Children whose caregivers are, most of the time, warm and responsive are more likely to become secure.
  • That care gives them comfort and a sense of safety, so they can explore the world with confidence, knowing there’s a reliable base to come back to.

Emma is in a long-term relationship. When her partner needs space to focus on work, she doesn’t feel threatened. She knows the connection doesn’t disappear just because they’re apart for a while. She’s open about how she feels, and she trusts her partner to be open too.

People who are more secure tend to have happier, steadier relationships, and to find the stress in them easier to handle.

Anxious (preoccupied)

high anxiety  ·  low avoidance

In relationships

  • People with an anxious attachment style often long for closeness but worry about whether their partner really cares, or will stay.
  • They may look for a lot of reassurance, and a small sign of distance can feel much bigger than it is.

Where it comes from

  • This style is more common in people whose early care felt unpredictable: loving at some moments and hard to reach at others.
  • Early care is only part of the story, though. Later relationships and friendships leave their mark too, and twin studies suggest genes play some part.

Nina tends to overthink every little thing her partner does. If they don’t text back quickly, she fears they’re losing interest or pulling away (read receipts have a lot to answer for). No amount of comfort seems to fully ease her fears.

People who lean anxious tend to feel more stress in their relationships, and they’re more prone to ruminationruminationTurning the same worry over and over without arriving anywhere. It differs from thinking a problem through in that it does not resolve, and tends to keep distress going. and emotional highs and lows.

Avoidant (dismissing)

low anxiety  ·  high avoidance

In relationships

  • People with an avoidant attachment style value their independence so much that closeness can start to feel like pressure.
  • They often keep their feelings to themselves and prefer to handle hard things alone.

Where it comes from

  • This style is more common in people whose feelings were often met with distance or discouragement, so leaning on themselves felt safer than leaning on someone else.
  • Like every style, it can also be shaped by what happens later in life.

Jake enjoys dating, but as soon as someone starts getting close, he pulls back. The moment a relationship starts to feel serious, he finds a reason to step away, sometimes by going quiet altogether.

People who lean avoidant tend to feel less satisfied and less connected in their relationships, often because keeping some distance feels safer.

Fearful-avoidant

high anxiety  ·  high avoidance

In relationships

  • People with a fearful-avoidant attachment style want closeness and are frightened of it at the same time.
  • They may swing between reaching out and pulling away, which can be confusing for them and for the people close to them.

Where it comes from

  • This style is more common in people who grew up with frightening or chaotic experiences, such as abuse, neglect or a home under heavy strain, where the person who should have been a comfort was sometimes a source of fear.
  • But it isn’t proof of a hard past, and plenty of people with this style don’t have one.

Mark wants to feel close to his partner but is terrified of being hurt. Sometimes he showers his partner with affection, and at other times he goes quiet and distant without quite knowing why himself. His fear of being rejected keeps him from fully letting anyone in.

This combination often goes with finding strong feelings hard to manage, and with relationships that feel stormy and uncertain. You’ll sometimes see this style called “disorganized.” That word really belongs to a pattern researchers see in babies, which is related but not the same thing.

Where do you sit?

Now that you’ve met all four attachment styles, here’s a way to think about where you usually land. Move the two sliders to where you tend to be with someone close to you, and see where that puts you on the field.

This is a way to reflect, not a test or a diagnosis. Nothing you choose is saved or sent anywhere.

You’re leaning toward the secure corner, but not sitting in it. Most people land somewhere around here, away from the edges.

Where you land can change with the person you have in mind, and over time.
03

Part three of four

How it shows up in adult life

Beyond romance, the chase and retreat cycle, and why most people recognize themselves in more than one style

How attachment styles affect adult relationships

Most research on adult attachment asks about romantic partners, but your attachment style shows up with friends, family and at work too. You have a style with your mother, your father, your closest friend and your partner, and they don’t always match. They’re related, a bit like cousins, but the one that best predicts how a particular relationship goes is the style you have in that relationship. At work, the same patterns turn up in how people handle feedback and colleagues. For example:

Secure

Tend to handle conflict constructively, seek support when needed, and balance independence with intimacy in all types of relationships.

Anxious

May struggle with trusting friends or colleagues, fearing rejection or abandonment in both personal and professional settings.

Avoidant

Often prefer to keep a distance, avoiding emotional entanglements, whether with friends, partners, or coworkers.

Fearful-avoidant

May want to be close to friends and colleagues but hold back, expecting to be let down.

And if you’re a parent reading this and running through a checklist, take a breath. Being responsive to your child matters, but it’s one ingredient among many, and no parent gets it right every time. Children need a base that’s reliable enough, not a parent who’s perfect.

When one of you reaches and the other retreats

Plenty of couples will recognize this one. Something feels off, and one of you wants to talk about it right now. The other needs to go quiet first. The more one reaches, the more the other pulls back, and the more the other pulls back, the harder the first one reaches. By the end of the evening, you’re both hurt, and neither of you got what you needed.

Couples researchers call this the demand-withdraw pattern, and it’s one of the best-studied patterns there is. It goes with unhappier relationships, whichever partner is doing the chasing. Attachment seems to play a part. In one study of newlyweds, couples with an anxious wife and an avoidant husband got physically stressed just waiting for a difficult conversation. During it, she found it hard to see when he was upset, and he found it hard to turn to her for support.

The cycle is the problem, not either person in it. Once you can both name it, even just “we’re doing the thing again,” you can step out of it together. The one who chases slows down. The one who retreats says when they’ll come back, and then really does come back. Small moments of turning back toward each other help the rest of the time.

Can you have more than one attachment style?

If an online quiz has ever told you that you’re “an avoidant,” it’s worth knowing how researchers actually see attachment styles. When they’ve tested whether people really fall into separate types, the answer keeps coming back no. Attachment works like a sliding scale, and it can shift from one relationship to the next. It works more like height than like blood type: everyone sits somewhere on the two scales, and most of us sit somewhere in the middle of both.

Maya

Maya generally feels confident and secure in her close friendships, where she’s able to express her needs and trust her friends. However, when it comes to romantic relationships, she often worries about being abandoned and needs constant reassurance from her partner. This shows a mix of secure and anxious attachment tendencies.

A style describes how you’ve learned to protect yourself. It isn’t a verdict on who you are, and it isn’t a diagnosis. That’s worth remembering when “avoidant” gets thrown around online like an insult. Someone who needs space isn’t broken, and someone who needs reassurance isn’t too much!

Someone who felt secure growing up can become more guarded, or more anxious, after a betrayal, a loss or a painful breakup. Studies that follow people over many years find that big life events like these are often where change happens.

Recognizing that you can have more than one attachment style can be a relief. The way you are with one person doesn’t decide how you’ll be with the next.

04

Part four of four

None of this is fixed

What can move, what moves it, and where a therapist actually helps

Can your attachment style change?

Attachment styles can change. On average, people become a little less anxious and a little less avoidant as they get older, and being in a relationship seems to help. Relationships don’t only reveal your style. Over time, they can change it. When a partner meets anxiety with steady, specific reassurance, or gives an avoidant person room while staying warm, the insecure reaction tends to calm down. Being loved well, over time, is one of the ways people become more secure.

Therapy can help too. When researchers pulled together studies of people in therapy, security tended to rise and attachment anxiety tended to fall, across many kinds of therapy, CBT included. Avoidance shifted less clearly, so it’s a hopeful picture rather than a finished one. For couples, emotionally focused therapy is built around attachment and has good evidence for easing relationship distress, with signs that partners feel more secure with each other afterward. Mindfulness may help as well: people who are more mindful tend to be less anxious and less avoidant in their relationships, although it isn’t yet clear which comes first.

If you lean one way

Most people are only as needy as their unmet needs.

Amir Levine and Rachel Heller, Attached (2010)

If you lean anxious, the urge to send one more message is a feeling, not an instruction. Try naming it to yourself first, something like “I’m scared they’re pulling away,” and give it ten minutes before you act on it (the phone will still be there). It helps to tell a partner plainly what reassures you, because a clear ask is so much easier to meet than a test. And build your footing outside the relationship too. Anxiety seems to ease most when you feel surer of your own worth, so friendships, work you’re proud of and time alone that feels good all count.

One caveat: if a partner keeps letting you down, or treats you badly, the worry may be an accurate read of the relationship, and the relationship is what needs looking at.

If you lean avoidant, notice the moment you reach for space, and try staying one minute longer. Avoidance seems to loosen through small, low-stakes experiences of relying on someone and finding that it goes fine. When you do need space, say so, and say when you’ll be back, so it lands as a pause rather than a door closing.

In both cases, the aim is to widen your range, so the old reaction becomes one option rather than the only one.

Earned security

Some people had a hard start and have a secure attachment style anyway. Researchers call this earned security. It means a difficult childhood doesn’t have to decide how you love as an adult. Most of this research uses a long interview about childhood, not the short questionnaires behind online quizzes. The two measure related but different things, so a quiz result and an interview result won’t always agree.

There’s a catch, though. When adults are asked to look back, some who describe a rough childhood turn out to have had more support than they remember. But when children have been followed from infancy, some who started out insecure really did grow into secure adults with good relationships, and whether people changed often tracked what happened to them along the way. Where you started shapes you, but it doesn’t get the last word.

Where therapy fits

If you’re curious about your own attachment style and how it might be shaping your relationships, exploring it with a therapist can be a good first step. You don’t need to know your style to start. Noticing the pattern is enough.

In therapy, you can look at where the pattern started, what keeps it going now, and what you’d like to do differently.

REFERENCES

  1. Ainsworth, M. D. S., Blehar, M. C., Waters, E., & Wall, S. (2015). Patterns of attachment: A psychological study of the strange situation. Psychology Press. (Original work published 1978)
  2. 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.
  3. Bartholomew, K., & Horowitz, L. M. (1991). Attachment styles among young adults: A test of a four-category model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61(2), 226-244.
  4. Beck, L. A., Pietromonaco, P. R., DeBuse, C. J., Powers, S. I., & Sayer, A. G. (2013). Spouses’ attachment pairings predict neuroendocrine, behavioral, and psychological responses to marital conflict. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 105(3), 388-424.
  5. Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and loss: Vol. 1. Attachment. Basic Books.
  6. Burgess Moser, M., Johnson, S. M., Dalgleish, T. L., Lafontaine, M.-F., Wiebe, S. A., & Tasca, G. A. (2016). Changes in relationship-specific attachment in emotionally focused couple therapy. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 42(2), 231-245.
  7. Chopik, W. J., Edelstein, R. S., & Grimm, K. J. (2019). Longitudinal changes in attachment orientation over a 59-year period. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 116(4), 598-611.
  8. Cyr, C., Euser, E. M., Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J., & van IJzendoorn, M. H. (2010). Attachment security and disorganization in maltreating and high-risk families: A series of meta-analyses. Development and Psychopathology, 22(1), 87-108.
  9. De Wolff, M. S., & van IJzendoorn, M. H. (1997). Sensitivity and attachment: A meta-analysis on parental antecedents of infant attachment. Child Development, 68(4), 571-591.
  10. Donnellan, M. B., Burt, S. A., Levendosky, A. A., & Klump, K. L. (2008). Genes, personality, and attachment in adults: A multivariate behavioral genetic analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34(1), 3-16.
  11. Fraley, R. C., Heffernan, M. E., Vicary, A. M., & Brumbaugh, C. C. (2011). The Experiences in Close Relationships-Relationship Structures Questionnaire: A method for assessing attachment orientations across relationships. Psychological Assessment, 23(3), 615-625.
  12. Fraley, R. C., Hudson, N. W., Heffernan, M. E., & Segal, N. (2015). Are adult attachment styles categorical or dimensional? A taxometric analysis of general and relationship-specific attachment orientations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 109(2), 354-368.
  13. Fraley, R. C., Roisman, G. I., Booth-LaForce, C., Owen, M. T., & Holland, A. S. (2013). Interpersonal and genetic origins of adult attachment styles: A longitudinal study from infancy to early adulthood. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 104(5), 817-838.
  14. Fraley, R. C., & Shaver, P. R. (2000). Adult romantic attachment: Theoretical developments, emerging controversies, and unanswered questions. Review of General Psychology, 4(2), 132-154.
  15. Fraley, R. C., & Spieker, S. J. (2003). Are infant attachment patterns continuously or categorically distributed? A taxometric analysis of Strange Situation behavior. Developmental Psychology, 39(3), 387-404.
  16. Granqvist, P., Sroufe, L. A., Dozier, M., Hesse, E., Steele, M., van IJzendoorn, M., Solomon, J., Schuengel, C., Fearon, P., Bakermans-Kranenburg, M., Steele, H., Cassidy, J., Carlson, E., Madigan, S., Jacobvitz, D., Foster, S., Behrens, K., Rifkin-Graboi, A., Gribneau, N., . . . Duschinsky, R. (2017). Disorganized attachment in infancy: A review of the phenomenon and its implications for clinicians and policy-makers. Attachment & Human Development, 19(6), 534-558.
  17. Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. (1987). Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(3), 511-524.
  18. Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. R. (1990). Love and work: An attachment-theoretical perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59(2), 270-280.
  19. Levine, A., & Heller, R. (2010). Attached: The new science of adult attachment and how it can help you find, and keep, love. Jeremy P. Tarcher.
  20. Li, T., & Chan, D. K.-S. (2012). How anxious and avoidant attachment affect romantic relationship quality differently: A meta-analytic review. European Journal of Social Psychology, 42(4), 406-419.
  21. Main, M., & Solomon, J. (1990). Procedures for identifying infants as disorganized/disoriented during the Ainsworth Strange Situation. In M. T. Greenberg, D. Cicchetti, & E. M. Cummings (Eds.), Attachment in the preschool years: Theory, research, and intervention (pp. 121-160). University of Chicago Press.
  22. Mickelson, K. D., Kessler, R. C., & Shaver, P. R. (1997). Adult attachment in a nationally representative sample. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73(5), 1092-1106.
  23. Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2016). Attachment in adulthood: Structure, dynamics, and change (2nd ed.). Guilford Press.
  24. Roisman, G. I., Holland, A., Fortuna, K., Fraley, R. C., Clausell, E., & Clarke, A. (2007). The Adult Attachment Interview and self-reports of attachment style: An empirical rapprochement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(4), 678-697.
  25. Roisman, G. I., Padrón, E., Sroufe, L. A., & Egeland, B. (2002). Earned-secure attachment status in retrospect and prospect. Child Development, 73(4), 1204-1219.
  26. Schmitt, D. P., Alcalay, L., Allensworth, M., Allik, J., Ault, L., Austers, I., Bennett, K. L., Bianchi, G., Boholst, F., Borg Cunen, M. A., Braeckman, J., Brainerd, E. G., Jr., Caral, L. G. A., Caron, G., Casullo, M. M., Cunningham, M., Daibo, I., De Backer, C., De Souza, E., . . . Zupančič, A. (2004). Patterns and universals of adult romantic attachment across 62 cultural regions: Are models of self and of other pancultural constructs? Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 35(4), 367-402.
  27. Schrodt, P., Witt, P. L., & Shimkowski, J. R. (2014). A meta-analytical review of the demand/withdraw pattern of interaction and its associations with individual, relational, and communicative outcomes. Communication Monographs, 81(1), 28-58.
  28. Simpson, J. A. (1990). Influence of attachment styles on romantic relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59(5), 971-980.
  29. Simpson, J. A., & Overall, N. C. (2014). Partner buffering of attachment insecurity. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 23(1), 54-59.
  30. Spengler, P. M., Lee, N. A., Wiebe, S. A., & Wittenborn, A. K. (2024). A comprehensive meta-analysis on the efficacy of emotionally focused couple therapy. Couple and Family Psychology: Research and Practice, 13(2), 81-99.
  31. Stevenson, J. C., Emerson, L.-M., & Millings, A. (2017). The relationship between adult attachment orientation and mindfulness: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Mindfulness, 8(6), 1438-1455.
  32. Taylor, P., Rietzschel, J., Danquah, A., & Berry, K. (2015). Changes in attachment representations during psychological therapy. Psychotherapy Research, 25(2), 222-238.
  33. 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.

BOOKS FROM OUR SHELF

  1. Johnson, S. M. (2008). Hold me tight: Seven conversations for a lifetime of love. Little, Brown.

Last reviewed October 2026

A therapist taking notes on a clipboard during a session, with the other person's hands clasped in front of them

WORKING WITH THIS

A pattern you learned is a pattern you can work on

If you recognize yourself in one of the four, or in more than one, that’s a good place to start. Therapy is a place to look at where the pattern came from, where it still fits, and where it has stopped being the thing that keeps you safe.

Related Posts