The limits of the attachment network

Marian J. Bakermans-Kranenburg*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to JournalReview articleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

From the beginning, theories of attachment and caregiving have given rise to questions about minimum and maximum numbers of attachment figures. The child's tendency to direct attachment behavior to a specific figure rather than to whoever is nearby has led to the idea of monotropy, suggesting that a child would thrive best with one special attachment figure. From an evolutionary perspective kinship caregiving networks are more plausible as they would increase the chances of survival, and in hunter-gatherer and agricultural communities paternal care and kinship networks providing care for young children were indeed common. A recent development in cultural evolution is the invention of organized day care and children's homes and institutions. Although the attachment network may increase in size with the child's cognitive development, research on institutionalized care demonstrates that high numbers of caregivers preclude secure attachments. The limiting factor to attachment networks may however not be the number of caregivers, but the opportunities for the child to learn contingencies in social relationships that have an attachment component.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)117-124
Number of pages8
JournalNew Directions for Child and Adolescent Development
Volume2021
Issue number180
Early online date7 Sept 2021
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Nov 2021

Bibliographical note

Special Issue: Early Attachment Networks to Multiple Caregivers.

Funding Information:
The author was supported by a European Research Council grant (ERC AdG 669249)

Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 The Authors. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development published by Wiley Periodicals LLC.

Keywords

  • alloparents
  • daycare
  • institutionalized care
  • kinship networks
  • monotropy

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'The limits of the attachment network'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this