This essay will critically evaluate the psychoanalytic concept of Bowlby’s (1969, 1973,

1980) Attachment Theory, The Internal Working Model (Bowlby, 1969; Bowlby,
1973; Bowlby 1980). Throughout, the model is discussed by showing a critical
reflection on the concept, how it relates to the practice of psychotherapy and how it
can be applied to an existential perspective. Critical engagement throughout this
essay enables the reader to engage in a broader perspective of this model.

An attachment can be identified as an emotional tie that forms between two specific
people or animal over a period of time (Ainsworth, 1970). John Bowlby’s Theory of
Attachment is seen as evolutionary from the concept of babies possessing an innate
biological drive for proximity to an individual in order to feel protected, safe and
secure for survival of danger (Bowlby, 1969; Bowlby, 1973; Bowlby 1980). This drive
stimulates proximity seeking attachment behaviours and through appropriate,
prompt response from an attachment figure, such as a primary caregiver, the baby
will feel safe. The response provided to the baby will determine their emotional,
social and physical development throughout their lifespan. In order to understand
the impact of early relationships and how this shapes an individual’s future choice
for their engagement in life, Bowlby developed an important concept of attachment,
known as ‘The Internal Working Model’ (Bowlby, 1969).

The Internal Working Model is a mental framework formed in early childhood in the
parent-child relationship that sets a foundation for how the individual views ‘the self’
and ‘the world’ (Bowlby, 1967). Significant features on how an individual views the
world are developed from a primary caregivers response, which elicits an individuals
development in self worth and how they expect others to respond to them. On the
other hand, significant features on how an individual views the self are displayed in
how they believe their primary caregivers to accept or unaccept them. They
determine their primary caregivers based on how accessible and responsive they are
when in need of support (Bowlby, 1973).

In order to prompt a response from a primary caregiver, the baby will engage in
proximity seeking attachment behaviours. Primary caregivers who are available by
providing a positive prompt response for comfort will enable the baby to engage in
understanding what behaviours lead to this response. The baby will in turn feel
nurtured and deserving of the response displayed by the primary caregiver. This
baby is more likely develop in positive behaviours that will enable them to protect,
help and be available in later life. Moreover, a primary caregiver who is unavailable
by providing a negative, cold response will lead to the baby developing an internal
working model of them as rejecting. This baby is more likely to progress through life
as feeling unworthy of care and view others as unreliable (Bowlby, 1973).

In contrast, Bowlby’s (1969, 1973, 1980) theory of The Internal Working Model is an
environmental explanation solely based on how a primary caregiver responds to
their baby. Many Meta analyses have found that the primary caregiver only accounts
for one third of attachment styles (Gervai, 2009). As a result, many theorists
challenged Bowbly (1969, 1973, 1980) from his lack of focus on the wider
environment and genetic factors (Bowlby, 1969; Bowlby, 1973; Bowlby 1980; Harris,
1998; Field, 1996).

Many studies have demonstrated that multiple wider environmental factors can
include income, parental age and major stressful events. These factors can interfere
and obstruct Bowlby’s theory of The Internal Working Model as they suggest a baby
can sufficiently replace the primary caregiver if external sources meet their
responsive needs (Cummings & Davies, 2002; Zeanah, Danis, Hirshberg et al., 1999).

Friedman and Boyle (2008) conducted a longitudinal study on early childcare with
the aim of understanding wider environmental factors of children’s development.
They did this by identifying the effects of quality, timing, type and extent on
childcare. This study found a high correlation of insecurely attached children when
childcare environments provided low quality non-maternal care, long periods in care
and low maternal sensitivity. This study supports the view that a child’s development
goes far beyond the depth of the primary caregivers response and if wider
environmental factors are not sufficient, they can act as a risk factor for attachment
and security (Friedman & Boyle, 2008).
Furthermore, genetic interactions can be detected in specific environments and
undetected in others. These are influenced by individual choices. This type of
gene/environment interaction can promote certain behaviours and consequently
enable the individual to engage and develop in selected areas that can influence
personality development (Rutter, Moffitt, & Caspi, 2006).

On the other hand, In support of Bowlby’s theory, the primary caregiver’s mental
state has been found to significantly correlate with attachment styles. It was found
that primary caregivers with a negative mental state were more likely to be less
responsive and raise insecure attached children. Whereas primary caregivers with a
positive mental state were more likely to be responsive and displayed a higher
percentage of securely attached children (DeMulder & Radke-Yarrow, 1991; Teti et
al., 1995). Alternately, Bowlby’s theory is also supported by Harlow’s (1958) study on
monkeys, which demonstrated that monkeys who were isolated from their mum
displayed behaviours of aggression and problems interacting, all of which support
behaviours of an insecure attachment type (Harlow, 1958).

Moreover, this model provides a framework for therapy with a precision of

description to explore different areas in ones life. Similarly, The Internal Working
Model is consistent with the ideas from Systems Theory that present introjecting
good or bad objects and self-image. Bowlby (1973) identified The Internal ‘Working’
Model as subject to change as an individual goes through life and experiences
different relationships. However, he noted an individual is more likely to resist
change with age (Bowlby, 1973).

In therapy, when treating an emotionally disturbed individual, the therapist can

firstly identify existing close relationships that may be conscious or unconscious and
secondly, to explore the close relationships revealed to identify the meaning of
them. Alternatively, the therapist can find out how the individual perceives them and
their behaviours. This can act as a significant opening in understanding how they
view the world in their Internal Working Model as this will elicit information about
the individuals experiences in earlier years, commonly known as ‘Transference’. This
opens up a pathway for the therapist to analyse the transference and to identify the
influence of close relationships (Bowlby, 1973). As described by Freud (1915),
transference occurs as the therapist has taken on a caretaking relationship.
Therefore, how an individual views the self and the world is determined in how they
expect the therapist to treat them. This is based on pre-existing models of caretakers
(Freud, 1915).

As I am currently partaking in therapy I can see the approach of my therapist. I can

see a consistent pattern with this model as I have been exploring my close
relationships through the conscious mind by my therapist asking questions based on
what I have already told her. Alternately, I can also see how my therapist has been
exploring our relationship and how I have found therapy to better understand how I
view the world and the self. So far this process has been incredibly effective in
opening my awareness and bringing the unconscious to the conscious. As much as I
am aware with age I may resist change, I believe that by bringing my awareness into
the conscious mind will be effective in changing my Internal Working Model of how I
view the self and the world.

The Internal Working Model can also be seen to provide a framework for how an
individual responds to existential anxieties from how an individual views the self and
the world as a result of the primary caregivers response (Bowlby, 1967; Shaver &
Mikulincer, 2012). Therefore, from an existential perspective, The Internal Working
Model can demonstrate how people view, internalise and deal with the four
existential concerns: lack of freedom, mortality, isolation and meaningless (Shaver &
Mikulincer, 2012).

In line with Bowlby’s Theory that the Internal Working Model is subject to change
throughout life, Sartre (1956) also suggested that through life choices one creates
value and in doing so you create yourself through freedom and responsibility
(Bowlby, 1973; Sartre, 1956). Through these choices an individual gains
understanding about how human beings should behave. Sartre (1956) defined this
understanding as a burden of responsibility that stimulates constant anguish by
being a free man (Sartre, 1956).

Moreover, reactions to mortality can be viewed as individual differences based on

childhood experiences (Mikulincer & Florian, 2000). Bowlby’s (1973) description of
proximity seeking can also be seen existentially as a system that reduces existential
concerns from attaining feelings of safety and security (Bowlby, 1973; Shaver &
Mikulincer, 2012). Likewise, an individual of a responsive caregiver is more likely to
learn coping mechanisms to reduce existential concerns that will restore feelings of
morality, security, autonomy, meaning and relatedness. This response will also
reduce the feeling of isolation by feeling stable and connected to others. However,
an unresponsive caregiver can cause an individual to feel insecure and more prone
to anxieties about morality and feelings of meaningless that result in less
constructive ways of dealing with existential concerns. This response can also cause
an individual to feel deprived of security and therefore elicit isolated concerns such
as loneliness (Shaver & Mikulincer, 2012).

On the other hand, Heidegger’s ‘Being-in-the-world’ was described in many different

ways to define positives and negatives of everyday life. He described curiosity as a
dominance of existence as what we interact with is absorbed in our memory and in
turn, shapes an individuals understanding of the environment they are in. This
interaction creates internal tools as an extension of the self. These tools are utilised
in specific environments. However, when they fail to work they become visible to the
conscious eye (LeMahieu, 2015). All of which are in line with and similar to Bowlby’s
theory of The Internal Working model (Bowlby, 1969; Bowlby, 1973; Bowlby 1980).

In Conclusion, the Internal Working Model provides a solid foundation in

understanding how individuals behave, based on how they see ‘the self’ and ‘the
world’. The model focuses and identifies such major variables as the presence or
absence of a primary caregiver and how the baby interprets the primary caregiver’s
response to their needs (Bowlby, 1969; Bowlby, 1973; Bowlby 1980). Bowlby (1973)
identified the significance that the model has flexibility to change, however this
becomes increasingly difficult with age (Bowlby, 1973). In contrast, many studies
challenged this approach and found other variables to have a significant importance
to The Internal Working Model such as environmental factors and genetic factors
(Cummings & Davies, 2002; Zeanah, Danis, Hirshberg, Benoit, Miller, & Heller, 1999;
Friedman & Boyle, 2008; Rutter, Moffitt, & Caspi, 2006). Additionally, many studies
supported this approach and found similar results in the correlation between
attachment styles and primary caregivers attitudes (DeMulder & Radke-Yarrow,
1991; Harlow, 1958).

Overall, this Model has provided a significant importance to the field of Attachment.
However, this essay has demonstrated additional factors that can be taken into
consideration when identifying and working with The Internal Working Model. The
model provides a clear direction for therapy and demonstrates an opportunity to
modify The Internal Working Model. Additionally, this model demonstrates an
overlap in Existentialism from a similar viewpoint that an individual is subject to
change as they go through life, based on individual choices in the environment they
chose to engage with.

References
Ainsworth, M. B. (1970). AHACHMENT, EXPLORATION, AND SEPARATION:. Child
Development , 49-67.
Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and Loss: Volume I: Attachment. London: London: The
Hogarth Press and the Institute of Psycho-Analysis.
Bowlby, J. (1973). Attachment and Loss: Volume II: Separation, Anxiety and Anger.
London: The Hogarth Press and the Institute of Psycho-Analysis.
Bowlby, J. (1980). Attachment and Loss: Volume III: Loss, Sadness and Depression.
1980: The Hogarth Press and the Institute of Psycho-Analysis.
Cummings, E., & Davies, P. (2002). Effects of marital conflict on children: recent
advances and emerging themes in process-oriented research. Journal of Child
Psychology and Psychiatry , 31-63.
DeMulder, E., & Radke-Yarrow, M. (1991). Attachment with affectively ill and well
mothers: Concurrent behavioral correlates. Development and Psychopathology ,
227-242.
Field, T. (1996). ATTACHMENT AND SEPARATION IN YOUNG CHILDREN. Annual
Review of Psychology , 541-61.
Freud, S. (1915). Observations on transference love. London: Penguin Books.
Friedman, S., & Boyle, D. (2008). Attachment in US children experiencing
nonmaternal care in the early 1990s. Attachment & Human Development , 225-61.
Gervai, J. (2009). Environmental and genetic influences on early attachment. Child
and adolescent psychiatry and mental health , 1753-2000.
Harlow, H. (1958). The Development of Affectional Responses in Infant Monkeys.
Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society , 501-509.
Harris, J. R. (1998). The nurture assumption: Why children turn out the way they do.
New York: Free Press.
Lee, E. (2003, December). The Attachment System Throughout the Life Course:
Review and Criticisms of Attachment Theory. Retrieved January 2, 2020 from
www.personalityresearch.org: http://www.personalityresearch.org/papers/lee.html
LeMahieu, L. (2015). Being-Here: Heidegger in the 21st century. New Media &
Society , 470-475.
Mikulincer, M., & Florian, V. (2000). Exploring individual differences in reactions to
mortality salience: does attachment style regulate terror management mechanisms?
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 260-273.
Plomin, R., & Daniels, D. (2011). Why are children in the same family so different
from one another? 563–582.
Rutter, M., Moffitt, T., & Caspi, A. (2006). Gene-environment interplay and
psychopathology: multiple varieties but real effects. Journal of Child Psychology and
Psychiatry , 226-61.
Sartre, J. (1956). Being and Nothingness: An Essay on Phenomenological Ontology.
New York: New York Philosophical Library.
Shaver, P., & Mikulincer, M. (2012). An Attachment Perspective on Coping with
Existential Concerns. Retrieved January 07, 2019 from portal.idc.ac.il:
http://portal.idc.ac.il/en/symposium/hspsp/2011/documents/cshaver-
mikulincer11.pdf
Teti, D., Gelfand, D., Messinger, D., & Isabella, R. (1995). Maternal Depression and
the Quality of Early Attachment:. Developmental Psychology , 364-376.
Zeanah, C., Danis, B., Hirshberg, L., Benoit, D., Miller, D., & Heller, S. (1999).
Disorganized attachment associated with partner violence: A research note. Infant
Mental Health Journal , 77-86.