By Dr. Jocelyn Markowicz, PhD, Psychologist

Attachment Hope for Couples: How to Improve Your Security Odds

You walk into the room and lock eyes with the most gorgeous human being you have ever seen. This individual locks eyes with you as well. You begin talking and realize that the chemistry between you is intense. You plan a date. You have several great dates. You fall in love and begin to talk about spending the rest of your lives together. You have the wedding. You go on the honeymoon. You begin to live your day-to-day lives together. (Perhaps not quite in that order.) But then, as you settle into shared lives, you notice that something is changing. The arguments are more frequent. The emotions are not all positive. Why does your partner leave when there is conflict? Why does your partner walk away when you need soothing? Why are they sometimes exhaustingly clingy and other times too independent? John Bowlby and Mary Ainsworth offered an answer rooted in attachment styles to these questions. Several researchers after them offered solutions. I’d like to share them with you. 

The Evolution of a Relationship

It is important to acknowledge that it takes time for interpersonal patterns to emerge within a romantic relationship. A perception bias occurs when you first fall in love that naturally heightens your connection to your partner’s strengths and limits your awareness of their weaknesses. Thus, it is in day-to-day living that you develop more accurate perceptions of patterns that are problematic. 

Why You Relate the Way You Do

In the 1960s, John Bowlby asserted that we learn positive and negative ways of relating based on our parent-child experiences. Our ways of relating are designed to strengthen our bond with our attachment figures (parents/caregivers) growing up. They help us survive. An attachment behavioral system gradually emerges wherein we attempt to regulate our emotions and behaviors toward an attachment figure. To do this, Bowlby (1980) asserted that the attachment system essentially asks the following fundamental question: Is the attachment figure nearby, accessible, and attentive? According to Bowlby (1980), an individual who has experienced a secure attachment is likely to view attachment figures as available, responsive, and helpful. An insecurely attached individual would view attachment figures as inaccessible, untrustworthy, and unreliable.

Different Attachment Styles

Ainsworth expanded on Bowlby’s attachment behavioral system and introduced specific attachment styles that explain our attachment behaviors. She outlined three specific attachment styles: (1) secure attachment and two insecure attachment styles: (1) anxious-resistant, and (2) avoidant (Ainsworth, 1979). In adult romantic relationships, the insecurely attached adult who is anxious-resistant would be dependent on their partner and yet reject their soothing attempts. The insecurely attached adult who is avoidant would not seek emotional or physical comfort from their partner when experiencing emotional distress. 

Bowlby and Ainsworth helped us to understand that our way of relating to others is guided by our early attachment experiences, but do we indeed exhibit the same attachment behaviors in our adult romantic relationships?

Further Research into Attachment Styles 

Hazen and Shaver (1987) evaluated Bowlby’s theoretical premise that early attachment behaviors extend to adulthood and are relatively stable. They conducted research and found that adults also reported the three attachment categories that Ainsworth determined (secure, anxious-resistant, and avoidant). Their research identified that romantic relationships are attachment bonds and share similar attachment behaviors that characterize parent-child interactions. In essence, Bowlby and Ainsworth were right to suggest that we can look at our adult relationships and evaluate our partner’s attachment behaviors based on their childhood attachment experiences. 

Are People Stuck Forever in Patterns from Childhood? 

What happens if you partner with someone with an insecure attachment style? Can their attachment style become secure? 

Researchers had the same questions about whether or not early attachment behaviors could be changed in adulthood. Findings across several studies did indicate that while early attachment style is relatively stable (Kim, Baek, & Park, 2021), attachment behaviors can change (Tmej, AMA et al., 2020; Sims, 2000; Rimane, Steil, Renneberg, & Rosner’s, 2020; Overall, Simpson, & Struthers, 2013; Gazder & Stranton, 2010; Park, Johnson, MacDonald, & Impett, 2019). Therein lies the hope for the couple. So, back to the question, what happens if you partner with an insecurely attached individual? How can you increase your secure attachment odds in your relationship?

Distress in romantic relationships is the leading cause for adults to seek psychological services (Bradbury, 1998). There are specific interventions that increase attachment security or reduce the negative impact of insecure attachment behaviors in romantic relationships. The following interventions are supported by empirical examination.

Transference-Focused Therapy

Transference-focused therapy (TFT) is a therapeutic intervention that aims to reduce impulsivity, stabilize mood, and improve interpersonal and occupational functioning. The intervention is specifically designed for individuals who struggle with borderline personality disorder. Trauma can impact the internalized representations of personality. It is not uncommon for individuals to develop maladaptive personality traits in response to trauma. Trauma impacts attachment bonds. TFT is a great choice for an individual partner in a couple dyad who may also struggle with borderline personality. A recent study found that individuals who participated in TFT moved towards securely attached with some preoccupied behaviors away from insecurely attached with preoccupied behaviors (Tmej, AMA et al., 2020)

Emotionally Focused Therapy

Emotionally focused therapy (EFT) for couples focuses on reshaping distressed couples’ structured, repetitive interactions and the emotional responses that evoke partners and foster the development of a secure emotional bond (Jonson, 1996; Jonson, 1999). The EFT model assumes that the negative emotions and interactional cycles typical of distressed couples represent a struggle for secure attachment (Bowlby, 1969). Sims (2000) randomized 26 couples in which at least one partner had been rated as insecurely attached to EFT or a waitlist control group. Couples in the EFT treatment condition increased their attachment security (and decreased attachment-related avoidance) more than the control couples. 

Trauma-Focused Cognitive Processing Therapy

Trauma-focused cognitive processing therapy (CPT) focuses on changing the dysfunctional beliefs associated with trauma. Trauma during our early attachment years impacts our attachment functioning, thereby shaping how we related to others in romantic relationships. CPT offers hope for couples in that an insecurely attached partner, who has been the victim of trauma, can participate in this mode of treatment to improve functioning. In Rimane, Steil, Renneberg, and Rosner’s (2020) study, individuals who participated in CPT experienced reduced avoidance attachment (insecure) behaviors when assessed post-treatment.

Dyadic Regulation Processes

Dyadic regulation processing occurs in couples therapy and is designed to improve attachment-relevant dyadic interactions between them. Applying the Dyadic Regulation Processing Model, researchers evaluated how partners can buffer the impact of their partner’s anxious resistant or avoidant behaviors due to their insecure attachments. Overall, Simpson and Struthers (2013) videotaped romantic couples discussing relationship problems identified by one partner who wanted changes in the other partner. Results indicated that insecurely attached partners whose partners displayed more softening exhibited less anger and withdrawal, and their discussions were more successful. These partners buffered their insecurely attached partner’s responses by learning to be sensitive to their autonomy needs, validating their viewpoint, and acknowledging their constructive efforts and good qualities.

Partner Relationship Mindfulness

General mindfulness is defined as the awareness of what is happening in the moment. In their study, Gazder and Stranton (2010) defined relationship mindfulness (RM) as open or receptive attention to and awareness of what is taking place internally and externally in a current relationship. They found that an individual’s own daily relationship mindfulness did not buffer the effects of their own insecure attachment on same-day relationship behaviors, but their partner’s daily relationship mindfulness did. In essence, you can buffer the impact of your partner’s insecure attachment behaviors by increasing your own relationship mindfulness. Therapy is a great place to learn how to practice relationship mindfulness techniques.

Partner with Someone with a Secure Attachment Style

As outlined, various treatment interventions can move an individual and couple towards more secure attachment relating. At this point, you may be thinking that hope is only achieved within a therapeutic setting. I have good news for you. If you are a securely attached individual, you play an important role in your relationship with an insecurely attached partner. Experiencing secure behaviors within romantic relationships can reduce representations of insecure attachment style (Park, Johnson, MacDonald, & Impett, 2019). How romantic! Your secure attachment behaviors can provide a secure base for your insecurely attached partner to grow. In the context of your relationship, you and your partner will experience many life events together. In their most recent study, Fraley, Gillath, and Deboek (2020) found that life events could change attachment style presentations in adulthood, with some changes yielding an enduring pattern.  

What Lies within Our Power?

We cannot go back to our childhood and choose caregivers that would prevent us from developing an insecure attachment style. We, therefore, cannot prevent the impact of any dysfunctional early childhood attachment experiences on who we are, interpersonally, as adults. However, there is hope. We can increase our secure attachment odds by choosing partners who are securely attached. We can participate in couples therapy interventions. We can also offer a secure attachment base for our insecurely attached partner. Attachment styles do not equate to fixed potential in your relationship – there is always room for growth. 

If you’re ready to explore how therapy can help you and your relationship, click through to find a couples therapist near you.

References

Ainsworth, M. D. S. (1979). Attachment as related to mother-infant interaction. In Advances in the study of behavior (Vol. 9, pp. 1-51). Academic Press.

Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and loss: Vol. 1. Attachment. New York: Basic Books.

Bowlby, J. (1980). Loss: Sadness & depression. Attachment and Loss (vol. 3); (International psycho-analytical library no.109). London: Hogarth Press.

Bradbury, T. N. (1998). The developmental course of marital dysfunction. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Gazder, T. & Stanton, S. C.E (2020). Partners’ Relationship Mindfulness Promotes Better Daily Relationship Behaviors for Insecurely Attached Individuals. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 5;17(19):7267.

Hazen, C., & Shaver, P.R. (1987). Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 511-524.

Johnson, S. (1996). The practice of emotionally focused marital therapy: Creating connection. New York. Brunner/Mazel.

Johnson, S. (1999). Emotionally focused couples therapy: Straight to the heart. 

In J. Donovan (Ed.), Short term couple therapy (pp. 14-42). New York Guilford Press.

Fraley, R.C., Gillath, O. & Deboeck,P.R.(2020, August13).Do Life Events Lead to Changes in Adult Attachment Styles? A Naturalistic Longitudinal Investigation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 

Kim, S.‐H., Baek, M., & Park, S. (2021). Association of parent–child experiences with insecure attachment in adulthood: A systematic review and meta‐analysis. Journal of Family Theory & Review.

Overall, N.C., & Simpson J. A.( 2013) Regulation processes in close relationships. In: Simpson JA, Campbell L, editors. The Oxford handbook of close relationships. New York: Oxford University Press; 2013. pp. 427–451.

Park, Y., Johnson, M. D., MacDonald, G., & Impett, E. A. (2019). Perceiving gratitude from a romantic partner predicts decreases in attachment anxiety. Developmental Psychology, 55(12), 2692–2700.

Rimane, E., Steil, R., Renneberg, B. & Rosner, R. (2020). Get secure soon: attachment in abused adolescents and young adults before and after trauma-focused cognitive processing therapy. European Child and Adolescent Psychiatry.

Sims A. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Ottawa; Canada: 2000. Working models of attachment: The impact of emotionally focused marital therapy.

Tmej, A., Fischer-Kern, M., Doering, S., Hörz-Sagstetter, S., Rentrop, M., & Buchheim, A. (2021). Borderline patients before and after one year of transference-focused psychotherapy (TFP): A detailed analysis of change of attachment representations. Psychoanalytic Psychology, 38(1), 12–21.

By Dr. Jeffrey Chernin, PhD, Licensed Marriage and Family Therapist

10 Communication Traps and How to Avoid Them

Since I started practicing therapy over 25 years ago, the majority of couples I have worked with have said to me, “Most of the time, our relationship is good. But when it’s bad, it’s really bad.” At least half of the problem has to do with communication. Over time, the way couples communicate falls into a pattern. Some patterns, or dynamics, are helpful. Others not so much. Once problematic ways of communicating become established, the pattern is so predictable that most couples could write out a script about the way future disagreements will go.

If this sounds familiar, then you have found yourselves falling into communication traps, and the outcome is anger, hurt, and emotional distance. Here are ten common harmful dynamics – plus ways to avoid them. 

#1: The Round-and-Round 

The Round-and-Round is when each of you engages in a process of contradicting the other, Here’s an example: 

     “Your ex texted you? Why didn’t you tell me?”

     “I told you the other day.” 

     “No, you didn’t. I only found out because you told Jodi, and she told me.” 

     “Yes, I did. I told you that night we went to see that movie.”  

     “You did not. That was the last time. But you didn’t this time.” 

Either person can put a stop to the Round-and-Round. If your partner says, “You never told me your ex texted you,” you could reply with “I thought I did. If I didn’t, I should have.” And your partner could have begun with, “Your ex texted you? I don’t recall you telling me.”  You’re approaching each other with a lack of certainty, and the initial statement comes across as checking things out. You’re open to the possibility that you failed to mention it, and your partner admits that maybe you did say something but was possibly distracted or simply forgot.  

#2: Attack-Defend Communication

An attack is a way to express your displeasure or anger about something that your partner has done. It can sound like a challenge, and the expectation is for you to get defensive. It often takes the form of a “Why did you…?” question (as in, “Why did you tell Jodi but not me?”). 

One way to avoid the trap is to not defend yourself. This may sound counterintuitive, but think back to when you have defended yourself. Didn’t your partner simply find new ways to challenge you?

Instead, look for the emotion behind the attack. For example, “Why didn’t you text me?” You can say, “You sound pissed.” Your partner might reply with, “I sure am!” And you can reply with an apology. Disaster averted.

If you tend to go on the attack, try to not put your partner on the defensive. One way is to use a ‘preamble.’ An example is, “I know you didn’t do this intentionally, but you interrupted me several times.” 

#3: Reactivity

Reactivity is a rapid-fire exchange; rushing in as the other person is finishing a sentence or interrupting. When there’s a high degree of reactivity, you may end up in a communication trap.

To be less reactive, you may need to pause the argument and spend some time away from each other to collect yourselves. To make it work, have a pact to 

• Not blame the other person for the need to cool down (Rather, say something like, “I’m getting upset and I’m having trouble hearing you over my thoughts”).
• Promise to pick up the topic later and follow up.
• The reply to a request for a cool-down should consist of one word: OK. 

If you’re having trouble becoming less reactive, seek out information about communication. I go into detail on this and the other traps in my book Achieving Intimacy. Try writing in a journal or considering therapy for yourself. If you know where your buttons are coming from, let your partner know. That way, s/he is likely to have more empathy, take your reaction less personally, and stay cool. 

#4: What About-ism

What about-ism is when you wait until your partner brings up a complaint, and then you immediately take the opportunity for airing grievances of your own. For example, if your partner says, “I’m uncomfortable with you visiting your aunt and sitting inside. I really wish you’d sit outside to reduce your risk of Covid.” And let’s say you reply, “Yeah, well what about your shopping for clothes when I have asked you that we should limit shopping just for the essentials.” 

What about-ism is deflection, plain and simple. If your partner what-abouts you, consider answering with, “Fair point. And we should discuss it. But right now I want to finish what I just brought up. Then we can talk about your concern.”

 #5: Bad timing

If your partner does something and you become incensed, the time to talk about it isn’t when it’s happening. That’s because you’re having highly-charged emotions, and you’re more likely to start a quarrel than if you wait until you have calmed down.

 This idea isn’t new. Over 2,000 years ago, the Greek philosopher Plutarch said, “If you’re angry, get out of the situation and don’t come back until you’re calm.”

 It doesn’t mean becoming a doormat. Quite the contrary, bringing up a sensitive subject in a calm and rational manner will show your partner that you’re willing to stand up for yourself, and you’re less likely to say something you’ll regret.

 #6: Not acknowledging the good

Many people speak up when it comes to saying something when their partner does something that hurts them, angers them, or is in need of correcting. But these very same people are sparing when it comes to showing their gratitude, appreciation, and even admiration for their partners.

I have discovered that many people carry a notion inside their heads that if their partners are doing what is expected of them, there’s no need to say anything (this idea finds a corollary and perhaps its roots in corporate life). But when something upsets them,  they should absolutely say something.

However, being criticized over and over can harm your partner’s spirit. It can lead to “Not Good Enough Syndrome,” where your partner says, “No matter what I do, I’m not good enough.” 

The phrase A spoonful of sugar helps the medicine goes down applies here. As a rule-of-thumb, for every correction and criticism, I recommend three to four positive, reinforcing, and grateful comments, and it would hopefully be organic and not forced.

As important, if you have asked for a change in your their behavior and they are essentially complying, it is important to tell them that you see and appreciate your partner‘s efforts.

I have had several clients tell me that offering positive reinforcement is like treating their partners like a dog. My reply is simple: “Yes, and you should ask yourself why you are treating your dog better than your partner.”

If your partner is doing this to you, and you feel like you’re not good enough, you can ask your partner for some acknowledgment. And you can use the same tool: Acknowledge when your partner is being more positive, and try to ignore critical comments. 

#7: Assuming your Partner is a Mind Reader

If you or are upset about something, say what is bothering you. In fact, it’s a bit unfair and even perhaps a set-up to assume that your partner knows what is troubling you. Rather, be explicit.

#8: Scanning for Errors

When you disagree about something, it’s natural to point out the areas in which you differ. However, some people take this a step further and are on the lookout when their partners are mistaken. If you do this, it’s important to ask yourself why you are taking on the role of fault-finding. And why just point out the mistakes when you should also be pointing out what you think is true?

 #9: Waiting to Cash In

Imagine: You repeatedly don’t say anything when your partner does something that really bothers you. You wait. They do it again. And again. And again. Finally, you explode with anger. Instead of cashing in all of your chips at once, mention it by the second or third occurrence. You won’t have stored up as much frustration, and they won’t be so set in their ways. 

 #10 Getting into Theoretical Arguments

Theoretical arguments usually take the form of if… then… For example, “What would you say to that guy at work who has a crush on you if he actually hit on you?” These kinds of statements are often tiptoeing around something that is vulnerable to the person making it. It would be better to be more direct – to express your insecurities and fears.

Rewriting Your Scripts

These suggestions can provide useful methods to help you to avoid communication traps that couples get into time and time again. By rewriting problematic communication scripts, you are on the way as you continue to enjoy the good times, reducing the duration, intensity, and frequency of the bad, and overall strengthening your connection as you increase intimacy.

Looking for more help communicating with your partner? Click here to start your search and filter your results by “Marriage, Couples, or Relationship Counseling” under Type of Service and/or “Marriage/Couples Counseling” under Common Specialties.