642 
While working in a home for maladjusted 
and delinquent boys in the 1930s, John 
Bowlby was struck by the boys’ difficulty 
in forming close emotional bonds with oth -
ers. Some of the boys came across as cold, 
aloof, and compulsively self-  reliant; others 
seemed clingy and unsure of themselves. 
After studying the family histories of the 
children, Bowlby learned that a dispropor -
tionate number of the boys had experienced 
severe disruptions in their early home lives. 
His observations led him to conclude that 
early parent–  child relationships serve an im -
portant organizing role in human develop -
ment, and that disruptions in these relation -
ships can have profound consequences for 
behavior, not only in the short term, but in 
the long term as well (Bowlby, 1944).
To better understand the significance 
of early relationships and how they shape 
human development, Bowlby turned to a 
variety of literatures, including those per -
taining to psychodynamic theory (Freud, 
1933/1965, 1940), the emerging ethological 
models of the 1950s and 1960s (e.g., Hinde, 
1966), cognitive-  developmental psychology 
(e.g., Piaget, 1953), and the principles of control systems (e.g., Craik, 1943; Young, 
1964). Over the next few decades he inte -
grated ideas from each of these domains to 
forge a theoretical perspective now known as 
“attachment theory” (Bowlby, 1969/1982, 
1973, 1980).
Bowlby’s attachment theory has had an 
enormous impact on psychological science, 
in large part because it speaks to many of 
the enduring subjects that psychologists 
wish to understand: personality, emotions, 
relationships, love and loss, nature and nur -
ture, and development. Moreover, it does 
so in a way that has multidisciplinary ap -
peal, bringing together ideas and observa -
tions from social psychology, developmental 
psychology, behavioral neuroscience and 
psychobiology, animal behavior, and clini -
cal psychology. Indeed, by many standards, 
attachment theory is a strong candidate for 
being considered a “Grand Theory” in con -
temporary psychology (Gillath, Karantzas, 
& Fraley, 2016).
Despite the theory’s influence on psycho -
logical science more generally, it was slow to 
be embraced by personality psychologists. 
But over the last decade, this has begun to CHAPTER 30
Attachment Theory and Its Place 
in Contemporary Personality Theory 
and Research
R. Chris Fraley  
Phillip  R. Shaver