Resultados de Grupo Nominal

As highlighted by the above study, and in line with Jones (1996) suggestion, an important area of future attachment research would be to examine the relationship between that AAI and other clinically relevant measures of interpersonal behaviour, role expectations and repetitive emotional structures. Attachment theory is primarily about relationships, and interpersonal communication, therefore it would seem reasonable to further examine of the validity of the AAI, by examining how classification relates to a measure of interpersonal difficulties. In particular the recent work of Fonagy et al (1996, 1997) suggests that examination of the interpersonal consequences of deficits in individual capacities for reflective self functioning, as measured by the AAI, would be extremely important in further exploring the link between mentalising and psychopathology.

The notion that people will continue to act in ways, sometimes maladaptive, in an attempt to maintain a psychological tie with an earlier attachment figure forms the basis of Interpersonal Theory (Sullivan, 1953; Leary, 1957). Thus an individual will continue to enact interpersonal styles that are similar in some representational or actual way to that of their earliest attachment relationship. Although this may often be painful in itself and cause difficulties in current relationships, it is hypothesised that these patterns of interpersonal relating serve to reduce the anxiety produced by relating in a different manner and thus protect the self-image. A current account of interpersonal theory suggests a number basic postulates :

That every interpersonal behaviour can be described along two axes -

• A dimension of affiliation of nurturance that ranges from hostile behaviour to friendly behaviour

• A dimension of power, control, and dominance ranging from submissive behaviour to dominating behaviour

• That two interacting people reciprocally influence each others behaviour as they interact. Thus one person’s actions elicit, evoke or invite a particular class of

action from another person. These often occur in complementary forms, such that each person assumes ways of behaving that fall at opposing ends of the axes i.e. one person is dominant in an interaction, whilst the other is submissive. It is proposed that conflict in relationships occur when two people interacting attempt to behave in the same way e.g. both dominating.

Difficulties with interpersonal relationships are among the most commonly problems reported in clinical settings, and therefore Horowitz and Rosenberg (1988) developed the Inventory of Interpersonal Problems as an instrument to measure such problems. Much of the research using this instrument has so far focused on validation studies. However, Horowitz and Rosenberg (1993) themselves produced an important piece of work examining the link between interpersonal problems, attachment styles, and outcome in brief dynamic psychotherapy. This work bridged the gap in the research literature between the long hypothesised link between attachment relationships and the later development of interpersonal difficulties. Horowitz and Rosenberg hypothesised that an individual's interpersonal style is intimately linked to his/her interpersonal learning history, and in part this must include that person's attachment history. Thus for example, people whose earliest social experience with their caregiver was disappointing, or insecure, may develop a distrust of other people, avoid intimate contact, or dogmatically retain control in relationships. A different set of experiences in ones early attachment relationship, such that the caregiver serves to underscore ones incompetence and dependence on others, may lead one to become submissive within adult interpersonal relationships.

Horowitz and Rosenbergs’ study employed 36 subjects, 8 male and 28 female, who had been accepted for 20 sessions of brief dynamic psychotherapy. The initial part of the study involved examining the type of interpersonal problems that people presented with, using the 127-item Inventory of Interpersonal Problems. Unfortunately figures are not given for the number of people presenting with particular interpersonal problems. The next part of the study was to determine each

participants hypothesised attachment style. In contrast to the development of the AAI described above, Bartholomew (1990) and Bartholomew and Horowitz (1991) have devised an alternative way of classifying individuals’ attachment style. The notion that the child internalises his/her experiences into a working model of attachment is still adopted, but also conceptualised in terms of the interpersonal problems with which they are associated. Four categories, three very similar to those proposed by the AAI, are generated :

• Secure - where the individual is judged to be comfortable with intimacy and autonomy

• Preoccupied - where the individual is preoccupied with relationships • Dismissing - where the individual is dismissing of intimacy, and is thus counter-dependent

• Fearful - where the individual fears intimacy, and is thus socially avoidant

It is interesting that in this study, Horowitz and Rosenberg adopt a very similar method for assessing attachment style, as in AAI research. Thus they use a semi-structured interview asking questions about the importance of close relationships, their experiences with loneliness and shyness, their trust of others, their impressions of other people evaluations of themselves, and their hopes for change in their social lives. These interviews are tape-recorded and then assigned to of the above classifications by a team of three raters. Of the sample in the study, 47% were judged as secure, 18% as dismissing, 14% as preoccupied, and 21% as fearful.

Although the sample size was relatively small interesting associations were shown when self-reported interpersonal difficulties were correlated with the attachment classification system. Those judged as securely attached demonstrated interpersonal profiles reflective of the whole array of interpersonal styles, but more clearly within the nuturant, warm domain. Those judged to be dismissing in their attachment style tended to be cold and introverted in their interpersonal styles. The

preoccupied group showed elevated levels of over-expressiveness, dominance and autocratic interpersonal styles. Finally, the fearful group reported interpersonal problems relating to submissiveness, introversion, and social inhibition.

Fonagy et al (1996, 1997) suggest a strong link not simply between an individuals attachment history and later interpersonal functioning, but how this may manifest itself as a consequence of the development of mentalising capacity. Thus the differences in interpersonal difficulties observed between those individuals rated as Dismissing and Preoccupied with respect to attachment, may reflect more their respective capacities for mentalising. It may be hypothesised that those individuals presenting as Dismissing, with associated interpersonal difficulties of coldness and introversion, may have a lower capacity for reflecting on the mental states of others, thus through their deficit in understanding the others perspective, tend to alienate people in interpersonal situations. By contrast individuals presenting as Preoccupied in their attachment style may show higher capacities for mentalisation, but through constant engagement, rumination, or preoccupation with the thoughts of other people, behave in ways which mediate anticipated threat, and thus show interpersonal styles of submissiveness or over-dependency.

For adolescence as a developmental phase during which identity formation is central, interpersonal functioning may be seen as a crucial arena in which to test out, revise, and further develop ones identity. Thus interpersonal problems that develop through attachment relationships, in those individuals presenting with psychopathology, may have serious consequences on identity formation during this period.