ABSTRACT

Attachment concepts are used in diverging ways, which has caused confusion in communication among researchers, among practitioners, and between researchers and practitioners, and hinders their potential for collaboration. In this essay we explore how attachment concepts may vary in meaning across six different domains: popular discourses, developmental science, social psychological science, psychiatric diagnosis, psychotherapy, and child welfare practice. We attempt to typify these forms of attachment discourse by highlighting points of convergence, divergence, and relay between the different domains. Our general conclusions are that diversity in the use of attachment concepts across different domains of application has been largely unrecognised, and that recognition of these differences would reduce confusion, help identify sites where infrastructure needs to be developed to support coordination, and strengthen opportunities for collaboration to mutual benefit. We suggest that academic attachment discourse would benefit from clarification of core terminology, including: “attachment”, “internal working model”, “trauma”, and “dysregulation”.

摘要

依恋概念的使用方式不同，造成了研究人员之间、从业者之间、研究人员与从业者之间的沟通混乱，阻碍了他们的合作潜力。在这篇文章中，我们探讨了依恋概念在六个不同领域的意义如何变化：流行话语、发展科学、社会心理科学、精神病学诊断、心理治疗和儿童福利实践。我们试图通过强调不同领域之间的收敛点、分歧点和中继点来典型化这些形式的依恋话语。我们的一般结论是，在不同的应用领域中，依恋概念使用的多样性在很大程度上没有得到承认，承认这些差异会减少混淆，帮助确定需要开发基础设施以支持协调的地点，并加强合作机会以实现互惠互利。我们建议学术依恋话语将受益于核心术语的澄清，包括：“依恋”、“内部工作模式”、“创伤”和“失调”。