No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
Attachment strategies across sex, ontogeny, and relationship type
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 12 February 2009
Abstract
We propose that middle childhood female ambivalent attachment, given the adaptive problem of uncertainty of future investment, is designed to evoke immediate investment from current caregivers, rather than new investment sources. We suggest greater specificity of strategic attachment solutions to adaptive problems that differ by sex, time, and relationship type.
- Type
- Open Peer Commentary
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009
References
Belsky, J. (1997a) Attachment, mating and parenting: An evolutionary interpretation. Human Nature 8:361–81.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Belsky, J. (1999) Modern evolutionary theory and patterns of attachment. In: Handbook of Attachment: Theory, research and clinical applications, ed. Cassidy, J. & Shaver, P. R., pp. 141–61. Guilford.Google Scholar
Benenson, J. & Christakos, A. (2003) The greater fragility of females' versus males' closest same-sex friendships. Child Development 74:1123–29.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bowlby, J. (1969/1982) Attachment and loss. Vol. 1. Attachment, 2nd edition. Basic Books. (Original work published 1969).Google Scholar
Buss, D. M. & Greiling, H. (1999) Adaptive individual differences. Journal of Personality 67:209–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoier, S. (2003) Father absence and age at menarche: A test of four evolutionary models. Human Nature 14:209–33.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Quinlan, R. J. (2003) Father absence, parental care, and female reproductive development. Evolution and Human Behavior 24:376–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trivers, R. L. (1971) The evolution of reciprocal altruism. Quarterly Review of Biology 46:35–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar