The Adult Attachment Interview

The Adult Attachment Interview is a procedure for assessing adults' strategies for identifying, preventing, and protecting the self from perceived dangers, particularly dangers tied to intimate relationships. The course offered by Dr. Crittenden is based on an expansion of the Bowlby-Ainsworth theory (Crittenden, 1995) and an extension of the Main and Goldwyn procedure (Main & Goldwyn, in press) as applied to the Adult Attachment Interview (George, Kaplan, & Main, 1986, 1996).

The dynamic-maturational approach to the Adult Attachment Interview (AAI) is both a useful research tool and also a potential guide for psychotherapists. Therapists, in particular, learn not only new ways to conceptualize disturbed development, but also ways to identify in adults' distortions of the mental processing of information, particularly information relevant to disorders of feelings, thought, and behavior. The techniques for interpreting speech can be useful even if the therapist does not formally use the interview itself in practice. For those interested in research applications, the 18-day training is usually sufficient to establish reliability on the major classifications and subclassifications.

The Dynamic-Maturational method (Crittenden, 1999) for analyzing Adult Attachment Interviews differs from the Main and Goldwyn method (in preparation) in several ways:

1. Intent: The intent of the Dynamic-Maturational method is to describe the self-protective strategies and patterns of mental processing of speakers; the intent of the Main and Goldwyn method is to predict infants' patterns of attachment.
2. Outcome classifications: The set of outcome classifications is larger in the Dynamic-Maturational method and better suited to differentiating among individuals with psychological disorder than the set of classifications used by the Main and Goldwyn method.
3. Treatment of non-Ainsworth classifications: The Dynamic-Maturational method uses 6 compulsive Type A subpatterns (A3-8) and 6 obsessive Type C subpatterns (C3-8), plus a full array of combinations of these. In the Main and Goldwyn method, most non-normative individuals fall in three classifications (E3, U/E3, and "Cannot Classify").
4. Patterns vs ratings: The Dynamic-Maturational method depends upon patterns within and among memory systems, whereas the Main and Goldwyn system depends upon ratings of constructs.
5. Functions vs defined meanings: The Dynamic-Maturational method uses the function of discourse markers to define meaning, whereas the Main and Goldwyn method assigns meanings to discourse markers.
6. Memory systems: The Dynamic-Maturational method systematically assesses 5 memory systems (procedural, imaged, semantic, episodic, and working), whereas the Main and Goldwyn method considers 3 (semantic, episodic, and working).
7. Modifiers: In the Dynamic-Maturational method, there are four modifiers (depressed, disorganized, reorganizing, and unresolved with regard to trauma or loss), with 8 different forms of lack of resolution of trauma or loss (dismissed, displaced, vicarious, blocked, preoccupied, anticipated, imagined, and hinted); the Main and Goldwyn method has only preoccupied lack of resolution of loss or trauma.
8. Validity: Validity for the Main and Goldwyn method is primarily based on normative samples and prediction from mothers to infants, whereas the validity of the Dynamic-Maturational method is primarily based on clinical samples and differentiation among disorders.

To view/print adult classifications, simply click on model

Training Courses

The training involves 18 days of full-time effort coding transcripts; the days are usually arranged in 2 or 3 segments, separated by about 3-4 months' time. The first 6 days cover most of the Ainsworth-based patterns that form the basis for the Main and Goldwyn system. The second 6 days cover most of the atypical patterns in the dynamic-maturational approach. The third 6 days cover the A/C and AC combinations and the modifiers of patterns, e.g., lack of resolution of trauma and loss, depression, and reorganization. Course participants read, code, and classify two transcripts each day for discussion the following day. The routine, therefore, is 4 hours of training per day followed by independent reading and classifying of the next day's transcripts. Each transcript takes 2-3 hours to prepare. Consequently, participants should be entirely free of other obligations during the training. Between each segment of training, a set of practice transcripts is made available to course participants. Following the training, a set of transcripts is given to each participant for classification; these transcripts constitute a reliability test. As with all courses offered by Dr. Crittenden, participants are given a written and signed statement of their percent agreement with the standard. This reliability can be reported in research articles. Evidence of reliability should be requested if the participant will code data for another researcher.

Studies using the DMM Method of Discourse Analysis with the AA:

Black, K. A., Jaeger, E., McCartney, K. & Crittenden, P. M. (2000). Attachment Models, Peer Interaction Behavior, and Feelings about the Self: Indications of Maladjustment in Dismissing/Preoccupied (Ds/E) Adolescents. In Crittenden, P. M., & Claussen, A. H. (Eds.), The organization of attachment relationships: Maturation, context, and culture (pp. 300-324). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Crittenden, P.M. (1998). Adult Attachment Interview: Coding Manual for the Dynamic-Maturational Method. Unpublished manuscript, available from the author.   (AAI Manual Update)

Crittenden, P.M. (1999). Attaccamento in et&Mac226; adulta. L'approccio dinamico-maturativo alla Adult Attachment Interview. Edizione Italiana a cura di Graziella Fava Vizziello e Andrea Landini. Milano: Cortina.

Gullestad, S.E. (in press). Adult Attachment Interview and psychoanalytic outcome studies. The International Journal of Psychoanalysis.

Hughes, J. (1997). Assessing adult attachment styles using clinically-orientated interviews. Doctoral Dissertation. University of Hull, Hull, U.K.

Heller, M. B. (December, 2001). The dynamic relation between childhood experiences of loss and trauma and chronic post-traumatic stress disorder in adults. A thesis submitted to fulfil the requirements of the University of Teesside for the degree of Top-up Doctorate in Clinical Psychology.

Rindal, G. (2000). Attachment Patterns in Patients Diagnosed with Avoidant Personality Disorder (Maskespill, Tilknytningsmxxnster Hos Pasienter med Unnvikende Personlighetsforstyrrelse) Dissertation presented to the Institue of Psychology, University of Oslo, ISBN 82-569-1568-4. [Click here for abstract]

Ringer, F. (2001). Early attachment and eating disorders: A comparative study between anorexia nervosa and bulimia nervosa. Doctoral dissertation, Edith Cowan University, Perth, Western Australia. [Click here for abstract]

Seefeldt, L. (1997). Models of parenting in maltreating and non-maltreating mothers. Dissertation presented to the Faculty of the School of Nursing, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. Milwaukee, USA.