Old and new internal working models of attachment: The organization of feelings and language
Abstract
Old internal working models of attachment are based on the organization of feelings and behavior which develop on the basis of parents' sensitivity to infants' and young children's attachment and exploratory needs. New internal working models reflect the process of language discourses with older and wiser conversation partners during the many subsequent years of immaturity. It is proposed that successful linguistic co-construction of internal coherence of attachment emotions and their external correspondence may lead to secure states of mind even in cases of less than optimal early attachment experiences--and vice versa. Attachment theory needs to address the problem of how early secure or insecure organizations of attachment emotions interact with the later construction of mature internal working models through language discourse with others, and with what emotional outcome. This would help to solve the theoretical paradox between continuity--unchangeable determinism from early infancy--and non-continuity--irrelevancy of early attachment experiences for later states of mind.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Attachment style influences affective, cognitive, and linguistic functions.
“Attachment style not only constitutes a model of relationships with others, but also influences affective, cognitive, and linguistic functions (Grossmann, 1999;van IJzendoorn et al., 1995).”
From The Role of Personality in Language Learning (2026) · cites this paper as Grossmann, 1999
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The Development of the Person: Social Understanding, Relationships, Conscience, Self
Thompson, R. A. (2007) · Handbook of Child Psychology · doi:10.1002/9780470147658.chpsy0302 · Cited by 326 · see citing works
The Role of Personality in Language Learning
Mrzyglod, E., Esposito, A., Fabbro, A., Fabbro, F., Crescentini, C., & Matiz, A. (2026) · Psychology of Language and Communication · doi:10.58734/plc-2026-0004
- Authors
- Grossmann, K. E.
- Affiliations
- University of Regensburg (DE)
- Corresponding author
- Grossmann, Klaus E.
- Venue
- Attachment & Human Development
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 1999-12
- Volume
- 1
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 253-269
- ISSN
- 1461-6734 (ISSN-L)
- 1469-2988
- OpenAlex
- W2106897936
- Cited by
- 46
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2024: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 2.41
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Attachment & Human Development (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Attachment and Relationship Dynamics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Child and Animal Learning Development
- Keywords
- internal working models, attachment, language discourse, secure attachment, insecure attachment, parental sensitivity, attachment theory, emotional development
- MeSH terms
- Child, Child, Preschool, Emotions, Humans, Infant, Internal-External Control, Language Development, Life Change Events, Object Attachment, Parent-Child Relations, Personality Development
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review