A neurobiological basis of social attachment

Abstract

S ince Bowlby's seminal contributions (1), attachment and separation have become familiar theoretical components of ego psychology, developmental psychology, and psychodynamic theory. In spite of the important roles these concepts have played in studies of psychological development, relatively little is known about their neurobiological basis. If one considers that abnormal social attachments characterize virtually every form of psychopathology, it seems especially remarkable that the chemistry, the anatomy, and the physiology of social bond formation remain largely unexplored. To be sure, there is a considerable literature on the neurobiology and psychobiology of separation (2), but this work may not prove instructive for understanding social bond formation. Attachment is not simply the absence of separation. Accordingly, there is no obvious reason why attachment and separation should be subserved by the same neural pathways.Attachment, of course, is not a thing but a process (3). More specifically, it is a social process and thus not likely to be defined by a single neurochemical pathway nucleus or represented in a single anatomic nucleus. As Harlow noted throughout his insightful writings on this subject (4), attachment includes several quite different processes depending on the social context: parent-infant, filial, and pair (male-female) bond formation are all forms of attachment. All of these forms involve seeking proximity and all involve a response to separation, but the strategy for and the consequences of achieving proximity vary depending on the relationship. None of these forms of attachment is uniquely human, suggesting that the neural basis can be investigated in animal models. It is also possible (and experimentally testable) that these various forms of attachment use similar neural pathways, suggesting that, biologically, attachment is a singular process that is manifested with different behaviors depending on the external (e.g., social) or internal (e.g., endocrine) context. This review will describe research on two neuropeptides, oxytocin and vasopressin, that have been implicated in the central mediation of attachment. I will de-

Plasma Oxytocin Levels in Untreated Adult Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder Patients

“…Although it is difficult to make any firm hypothesis, we would suggest with caution that OT might differently regulate the romantic attachment in the two sexes, at least in OCD patients. In addition, according to us, our finding provides another support to the relationship between OT and attachment processes [47,48,49,50,51,52]. …”

“…Therefore, given the paucity of direct data in humans, in the present study we explored plasma OT levels and their possible relationships with clinical features. In addition, given the link between OT and attachment [47,48,49,50,51,52], and our observations of the relationship between OT and romantic attachment [53], as well as of the differences in romantic attachment subscales and styles between healthy control subjects and OCD patients [54], another aim of this study was to investigate whether this difference might be related to OT levels.…”

Personality Disorders, Attachment and Psychodynamic Psychotherapy

“…In the current paper, we will focus on the role of the neuropeptide oxytocin in social cognition and attachment behavior. Extrapolating from studies of pair bonding in monogamous rodents such as prairie voles, maternal behavior in sheep [53,54,55] and grooming behavior in maternal rats toward their pups, oxytocin was hypothesized to play a critical role in human bonding as well. In a growing body of literature, the neuropeptides oxytocin and vasopressin have been noted to play a central role in social cognition, stress responses and interaction in human studies [9,56,57,58,59] and are increasingly seen as fundamental to the development of the attachment behaviors which, in turn, are critical in structuring adaptive responses to interpersonal stressors.…”

Attachment Fertility Theory: Complex Systems of Mechanisms Simplify Sex, Mating, and Sexual Risks

“…Although the specific patterns of links among caregiving, pair-bonding, and mate selection mechanisms may be unique to a given species (Insel, 1997; Insel, 1999), among similar species (e.g., voles) there are differing patterns of mating preferences, sexual circuitry, parental behavior, and infant attachment depending upon whether these species are promiscuous versus monogamous (also see Carter, 1992; Carter, et al, eds. (2005); Carter & Getz, 1993; Getz & Carter, 1996; Young, Nilsen, Waymire, MacGregor, & Insel, 1999 for additional work consistent with this work).…”