ABSTRACT
Attachment theory and psychoanalytic theory have common roots but have evolved in epistemologically distinct ways. Attachment theory, far closer to empirical psychology with its positivist heritage, has been in some ways method bound over the past fifteen years. Its scope was determined less by what fell within the domain defined by relationship phenomena involving a caretaking–dependent dyad and more by the range of groups and behaviors to which the preferred mode of observation, the strange situation, the Adult Attachment interview, and so on, could be productively applied. This sheltered the theory from a range of ideas that clinical psychoanalysts evolved, particularly in the context of analytic work with increasingly severely disturbed, chronic personality-disordered individuals. Psychoanalytic ideas have rarely taken into consideration relevant observations from the field of attachment and, conversely, a paradigm-bound attachment theory has felt it had little to benefit from the clinical discoveries of psychoanalysts. Yet both bodies of knowledge are progressing towards the same endpoint, 192which is perhaps still some way off: a developmental understanding of personality and psychological disorder. This book has attempted to illustrate that distinctions made by attachment theorists are frequently closely linked to distinctions generally accepted within particular psychoanalytic traditions. Attachment theory may share more with some psychoanalytic traditions than others but this does not mean that even “distant cousins” of attachment theory (e.g., modern Kleinian theory) do not cover similar ground, albeit from a radically different perspective. Taking psychoanalytic theory as a whole, many important discoveries of attachment theory can be seen to have been observed on the couch as well as in the laboratory. There are some areas familiar to psychoanalytic clinicians where attachment theory has not yet ventured. Bringing the two approaches into closer contact, beyond creating lively debate, has the potential greatly to enrich both traditions. Such a dialogue may highlight where attachment theory methodology may be applied for the exploration of psychoanalytic work and ideas. For example, attachment status may be used as a measure of outcome for psychoanalytic treatment. The focus of attachment research may additionally be broadened to incorporate areas beyond its traditional domain of social development in the context of the dyad.
