A Secure Base from Which to Explore Close Relationships
Abstract
The theory of attachment as a secure-base relationship integrates insights about affect, cognition, and behavior in close relationships across age and culture. Empirical successes based on this theory include important discoveries about the nature of infant–caregiver and adult–adult close relationships, the importance of early experience, and about stability and change in individual differences. The task now is to preserve these insights and successes and build on them. To accomplish this, we need to continually examine the logic and coherence of attachment theory and redress errors of emphasis and analysis. Views on attachment development, attachment representation, and attachment in family and cross-cultural perspective need to be updated in light of empirical research and advances in developmental theory, behavioral biology, and cognitive psychology. We also need to challenge the theory by formulating and testing hypotheses which, if not confirmed, would require significant changes to the theory. If we can accomplish these tasks, prospects for important developments in attachment theory and research are greater than ever, as are the prospects for integration with other disciplines.
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?
Secure base concepts underlie both EST and attachment theory.
“Secure base notions are at the foundation of both EST and attachment theory (Cummings & Davies, 2010; Waters & Cummings, 2000).”
From Prospective Relations between Family Conflict and Adolescent Maladjustment: Security in the Family System as a Mediating Process (2015) · cites this paper as Waters & Cummings, 2000
Coping responses serve to regain or maintain a secure base within the family when coping with threatening interpersonal stress and adversity.
“These coping responses serve to regain or maintain a secure base within the family when coping with threatening interpersonal stress and adversity (Waters & Cummings, 2000).”
From Prospective Relations between Family Conflict and Adolescent Maladjustment: Security in the Family System as a Mediating Process (2015) · cites this paper as Waters & Cummings, 2000
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 36 · Cited by 587
- Authors
- Waters, E., & Cummings, E. M.
- Affiliations
- Stony Brook University (US)
- University of Notre Dame (US)
- Venue
- Child Development
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2000-01-01
- Volume
- 71
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 164-172
- ISSN
- 0009-3920 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-8624
- OpenAlex
- W2051648402
- Cited by
- 587
- References
- 36
- Citations by year
- 2026: 18 · 2025: 16 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 25 · 2019: 25 · 2018: 23 · 2017: 27 · 2016: 38 · 2015: 37 · 2014: 38 · 2013: 34 · 2012: 28
- FWCI
- 20.23
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- Locations
- Child Development (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institutes of Health (5r01mh044935-10)
- National Institute of Mental Health (MH44935)
- National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
- Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (HD36261, R01HD036261)
- 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
- attachment theory, secure base, close relationships, early life experience, individual differences, attachment development, attachment representations, family attachment, behavioral biology, cognitive psychology
- MeSH terms
- Child, Child Development, Child, Preschool, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Object Attachment
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