Attachment and Parenting Styles

Since the 1920s, developmental psychologists have sought to study the effect that parents have on their children’s social and instrumental development. The most prominent approach to this academic question has come to be known as child-rearing styles, or parenting styles. These parenting styles incorporate the many behaviors of parents into specific developmental outcomes that we commonly see in children (Darling, 1999).

Parenting styles fall into four general categories: indulgent, authoritative, authoritarian, and uninvolved (Darling, 1999; McLeod, 2007). Parents are placed into one of the4se four categories based on their levels of demandingness (how demanding they are of their children to obey, submit, etc.) and responsiveness (how warm and supportive a parent is) (Maccoby & Martin, 1983, as cited in Darling, 1999).

Authoritarian parents are categorized as highly demanding with low levels of responsiveness. They are highly structured, status oriented, and expect obedience from their children without question (Baumrind, 1991, p.62, as cited in Darling, 1999). Authoritarian parents also engage in a type of control called psychological control. Psychological control affects the psychological and emotional development of a child. This is accomplished using guilt induction, withdrawal of love, and shaming (Barber, 1996, p.3296, as cited in Darling, 1999). Furthermore, authoritarian parents have a very punitive discipline style in which failure to obey results in punishment (Darling, 1999).

Directly related to the authoritarian style is the authoritative style. Authoritative parents are also high scorers in the demandingness category, however, they are also highly responsive. Authoritative parents have clear rules of conduct, are assertive but not intrusive, and are open to negotiation with their children when it comes to their rules and judgments. Directly opposed to the authoritarian style, authoritative parents have a very supportive punitive style. Punishment usually comes in the form of support and explanation of the consequences to promote social responsibility and self-regulation (Baumrind, 1991, p. 62, as cited in Darling, 1999).

Bowlby defined four attachment styles that children of the four parenting styles can be categorized into. As stated before, authoritarian parents are highly demanding with very little responsiveness (Baumrind, 1991, p.62, as cited in Darling, 1999). Children raised by authoritarian parents would most likely be categorized as insecure-avoidant. Children in this category are unresponsive to the parent reflecting the unresponsive nature of the parenting style but are independent enough not to become emotional when the parent leaves the room (Berk, 2018).

On the other hand, authoritative parents would normally have children categorized as securely attached. Since the authoritative parent is responsive to emotional and social cues of their children as well as structured with rules and assertive with authority (Baumrind, 1991, p. 62, as cited in Darling, 1999), children raised by these parents show the secure attachment which is categorized by them preferring the mother or parent over a stranger and suing the parent as a “secure base” from which to independently explore their environment (Berk, 2018).

Cultural variations, however, must also be included in any discussion on attachment and parenting styles. According to Berk (2018), evidence indicates that attachment patterns must be interpreted differently based on the cultural situation. For instance, German babies show more avoidant attachments than American babies, however, according to Grossman et al. (1985, as cited in Berk, 2018), German parents value independence and non-clinginess more than American parents which may account for the disparity.

For the most part, the only major cultural difference in attachment styles comes from the distribution of those styles compared to the American standard (Keller, 2012). This is seen not only in the study of German cultural differences (Grossman et al., 1985, as cited in Berk, 2018), but also in many other studies such as those of the Dogon people of Africa (True, Pisani, & Oumar, 2001, as cited in Berk, 2018) and Japanese children (Takahashi, 1990, as cited in Berk, 2018). However, despite the variation in distribution of attachment styles, according to van IJzendoorn & Sagi-Schwartz (2008, as cited in Berk, 2018), the most common attachment style among all cultures is the secure attachment style.

References

Berk, L. E. (2018). Development through the lifespan (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.

Darling, N. (1999). Parenting style and its correlates. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED427896)

Keller, H. (2012). Attachment and culture. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 44(2), 175–194. doi:10.1177/0022022112472253

McLeod, S. (2007). Bowlby’s attachment theory. Retrieved from http://www.simplypsychology.org/bowlby.html