You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
Few areas of academic inquiry have had as profound an influence on psychoanalytic psychology as attachment theory and research. Attachment theory shares several core assumptions with psychoanalytic theory: that early experiences exert an enduring influence on adult personality, that this influence operates through internalized representations of early relationships, that personality and psychopathology reflect attempts at adaptation, and that psychological defenses play a central role in this process. Over the past several decades, attachment researchers have devoted considerable efforts to testing and extending these tenets while cultivating what appears to be a broad theoretical and methodological consensus. Or so the story goes.
Attachment theory projects the image of a continuous intellectual tradition characterized by consensus and unity. Even a cursory review of the popular press, the “parentosphere,” or online forums on romantic relationships reveals how often attachment research is invoked in formulations such as “attachment researchers say” or “attachment theorists agree that,” as if the field spoke with a single voice. This image is often mobilized in broader cultural disputes, sometimes as a rhetorical appeal to authority. A telling example occurred in May 2025, when the controversial conservative activist Charlie Kirk participated in a question-and-answer session at the University of Cambridge (Kirk, 2025). On that occasion, Kirk dismissed all the well-informed arguments of his more liberal student opponents—at one point even questioning Darwinian evolution. He did, however, concede his adversary's point once: when they invoked the (purported) research consensus among attachment researchers that early rearing experiences shape romantic preferences.
In his latest book, Developments in Attachment Research, Robbie Duschinsky offers a new account of contemporary attachment theory as a rich tapestry of voices and perspectives, at times complementary and at time