Mental Blueprints of Relationships: The Attachment Internal Working Model Explained
Attachment theory has been gaining popularity ever since its development in the 1950s. Nowadays, it’s common to discuss how early attachment shapes adult relationships and to refer to attachment styles in adults – especially in the context of romantic love.
Yet, a part of attachment theory has remained less popular, even though it’s highly significant when it comes to human development and behavior – the internal working model.
This page will explore what an internal working model in attachment theory is and how attachment patterns shape this “blueprint” of relationships and how the world works. It also covers:
- How early attachment shapes adult relationships
- Insecure attachment and internal models
- Internal working model and emotional regulation
- Attachment-based therapy to rewire internal models
- Where to find professional support for attachment repair
What Is an Internal Working Model in Attachment Theory?
The meaning of internal working models in attachment theory is that our first social experiences in relationships with caregivers build something similar to a “blueprint” in our minds. These blueprints help us understand how the social world works and how we fit into it.6 As we move forward in life, we can use the valuable information from these as a reference point whenever we need to.
This way, we don’t have to decipher each and every situation from zero, every time we communicate. Instead, using these blueprints or “mental maps,” we can build expectations and interpret events more quickly and based on our personal evidence base.
The internal working model contains information on two domains – our views of ourselves and of others. The view of self is closely related to the concept of self-worth; Am I lovable and worthy of care, attention, and connection? When it comes to the view of others, the model answers the question, Are others reliable when I need them, and will they take care of my needs and provide security?6
The following section takes a closer look at how the different types of attachment can influence internal working models and our views of ourselves and others.
How Attachment Patterns Form Internal Working Models
Secure patterns were observed in children who reconnected with their caregiver quickly and successfully after separation. Insecure attachment was noticed in children who either resisted connection after separation (avoidant attachment) or reacted heavily to the separation by rejecting soothing attempts of the parent (anxious attachment). A further style was later identified in response to a category of children who showed contradictory or fearful behavior on reunion with their caregiver (disorganized attachment).
Insecure attachment patterns are related to insecure internal models that include maladaptive beliefs regarding the self, others, or both. Such negative beliefs are built on the child’s repeated negative experiences when interacting with their attachment figures.
This information is not to say that parents were necessarily negative, abusive, or ill-intentioned towards their child. However, if the child perceived their caregivers to be inconsistent or unavailable and unable to provide security in times of need, this likely contributes to negative beliefs. As a result, they may form an insecure internal working model.
It is also worth noting that children see their environments differently based on their individual traits and characteristics. Therefore, we cannot assume that the same situation would have the same developmental effect on two different children.8
How Early Attachment Shapes Adult Relationships
Since these early studies, research around attachment patterns in adults and romantic relationships has consistently corresponded to the patterns seen in infants within their first social bonds. For example, the evidence successfully categorizes securely attached adults (who communicated openly and comfortably with others) and insecurely attached adults (who experienced more relationship issues and lower satisfaction with their love lives).9
In other words, the way we attach within the first years of our lives can shape the patterns of thinking and behaving we use in relationships later on. However, while attachment styles are stable traits, they’re not set in stone. Therefore, if our early internal model of relationships is insecure, we can still develop a more secure one after healing experiences.
Insecure Attachment and Internal Models
There are three insecure attachment styles, and they are all related to certain negative beliefs. We discuss each of these and their internal working models in more detail in the following sections.:6, 9, 10
Anxious Attachment:
Known as “anxious-ambivalent” in childhood and “anxious-preoccupied” in adulthood.
- Model of self: Negative – feeling insufficient, unworthy of love and care, and needy for external validation
- Model of others: Positive or mixed – sometimes even idealized. However, the love of others has to be “earned” as it is only available occasionally, and there’s a fear of abandonment
- Typical characteristics and patterns: Heightened fear of abandonment, clinginess, hypervigilance to signs of rejection, and emotional highs and lows
Avoidant Attachment:
Known as “anxious-avoidant” in childhood and “avoidant-dismissive” in adulthood.
- Model of self: Positive – feeling self-sufficient, confident, and self-reliant. This positive self-view is often a defence mechanism for low self-worth
- Model of others: Negative – believing that others will not show up at times of need, and that others are not to be trusted to provide safety
Typical characteristics and patterns: Emotional distance, fears of rejection, discomfort with dependence, reluctance to seek closeness, high value on independence
Disorganized Attachment:
Known as “disorganized” in childhood and “fearful-avoidant” in adulthood.
- Model of self: Negative – feeling unworthy and unlovable
- Model of others: Negative – others are not to be trusted, they can be a source of fear, rejection, and even trauma
- Typical characteristics and patterns: Push–pull dynamics in relationships, emotional turbulence, simultaneous longing for and fear of intimacy (often linked to early trauma or frightening caregiving).
It is also valuable to demonstrate what a secure internal working model looks like, as this could serve as a reference point and as a goal of healing and therapy.6,9,10
The secure internal working model is associated with a positive, balanced view of self that is centered around the idea of positive self-worth and the self being acceptable and worthy of love. Others, on the other hand, are perceived as reliable, predictable, and consistent.
In moments of distress, a secure person feels they can safely reach out to their attachment figures, and these attachment figures will be there and provide support and reassurance. In such a dynamic, emotional distress is easily dissolved, and internal balance is quickly restored.
This type of co-regulation is not about dependency. Rather, it’s about feeling safe to reach for support when feeling challenged or unwell.
The Internal Working Model and Emotional Regulation
An interesting and very important aspect of internal working models is how they affect our ability to regulate our emotions. This connection between internal working models, attachment, and emotion regulation is heavily backed up by science.11-14
For instance, research continuously shows that when early caregiving is consistent and attuned, a child learns that distress can be shared, soothed, and resolved. This reflects a secure internal model that supports flexible emotional regulation – the ability to calm down, think clearly, and get back to the task at hand after an emotional challenge.
In contrast, insecure internal models typically make emotional regulation harder. Negative beliefs about the self can contribute to emotional distress and the inability to self-soothe. Further, negative beliefs about others can cause frustration and an inability to take advantage of social support when upset.
To break emotional regulation down for each of the insecure styles, anxious models often heighten emotional intensity, leaving someone more vulnerable to spiraling in fear, worry, or frustration.
In contrast, avoidant models tend to suppress emotional expression, which may protect against short-term discomfort. However, they will likely limit someone’s ability to use an attachment figure as a secure base that can support them in regulating distress.
Finally, disorganized models can produce rapid swings between emotional shutdown and emotional overwhelm, often linked to early attachment trauma.
Attachment-Based Therapy to Rewire Internal Models
The most effective way to update a rigid or insecure internal working model is through new, repeated experiences of safe connection.16 This is the heart of attachment-based therapy; creating a secure, reliable environment where new beliefs can grow and stabilize. In other words, emotional proximity can eventually feel safe, needs can be met, and distress can be resolved and regulated.16
Several well-researched therapeutic approaches focus directly on rewiring internal working models, including:
-
Emotionally Focused Therapy (EFT):
Emotionally focused therapy can help both individuals and couples communicate their needs, identify patterns and issues, and learn to be attuned to each other.17
-
Attachment-Based Family Therapy (ABFT):
This form of therapy can significantly restore parent-child relationships through what is called “corrective attachment experiences.” Individual and shared sessions are oriented towards self-reflection (from each party) regarding their beliefs and experiences. They also encourage open communication between family members that fosters the repair of trust ruptures and the cultivation of empathy, respect, and collaboration.16
-
Schema Therapy:
Schema therapy can help someone target “attachment schemas,” which relate to the concepts and beliefs of self as well as to those of others – and of relationships in general. During the course of therapy, people can learn to recognize their core unmet needs, confront their schemas, and alter maladaptive responses (coping styles).18
Rewiring internal working models is not about forgetting or simply letting go of past experiences. It’s about uncovering patterns and beliefs that might have stayed in the dark. And more importantly, it’s about learning new beliefs and having new experiences, which the working models can adapt to. Internal models of safety and attachment security can then positively impact someone’s emotion regulation, relationships, and overall quality of life.
Mission Connection: Support with Internal Working Model Healing Strategies
At Mission Connection, we understand that someone’s internal working model and ability to maintain mutually satisfying relationships are closely linked. For this reason, we are in a good place to help anyone struggling with their insecure attachment and internal models. While changing the internal working model through therapy might take time and intentional effort, it is possible and achievable.
Our team can offer mental health treatment for attachment schema, as well as advise and support someone in need of improving their internal working model and emotional regulation skills.
If you or someone you care about struggles with insecure attachment, attachment trauma, and negative internal models, therapy for changing attachment internal working models can be helpful. If you’re ready for healing experiences, don’t hesitate to reach out. We’re available 24/7 to listen and provide internal working model healing strategies targeted specifically to your needs.
Remember, although attachment and internal working models develop early in life, it’s never too late to change and build the relationships – with yourself and others – that you deserve to have.
References
- Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and loss: Vol. 1. Attachment. New York: Basic Books.
- Bowlby, J. (1973). Attachment and loss: Vol. 2. Separation: Anxiety and anger. New York: Basic Books.
- Bowlby, J. (1979). The making and breaking of affectional bonds. London: Tavistock.
- Bowlby, J. (1980). Attachment and loss: Vol. 3. Loss: Sadness and depression. New York: Basic Books.
- Craik, K. (1943). The nature of explanation. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
- Pietromonaco, P. R., & Barrett, L. F. (2000). The internal working models concept: What do we really know about the self in relation to others? Review of General Psychology, 4(2), 155–175.
- Ainsworth, M. D. S., Blehar, M. C., Waters, E., & Wall, S. (1978). Patterns of attachment: A psychological study of the strange situation. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
- Sherman, L. J., Rice, K., & Cassidy, J. (2015). Infant capacities related to building internal working models of attachment figures: A theoretical and empirical review. Developmental Review, 37, 109-141.
- Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. R. (1987). Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52(3), 511–524.
- Bartholomew, K., & Horowitz, L. M. (1991). Attachment styles among young adults: A test of a four-category model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61(2), 226–244.
- Shaver, P. R., & Mikulincer, M. (2007). Adult attachment strategies and the regulation of emotion. Handbook of emotion regulation, 446, 465.
- Mikulincer, A., & Shaver, P. R. (2019). Attachment orientations and emotion regulation. Current Opinion in Psychology, 25, 6-10. doi:10.1016/j.copsyc.2018.02.006.
- Mikulincer, M., Shaver, P. R., & Pereg, D. (2003). Attachment theory and affect regulation: The dynamics, development, and cognitive consequences of attachment-related strategies. Motivation and Emotion, 27, 77-102. doi:10.1023/A:1024515519160
- Gardner, A. A., Zimmer‐Gembeck, M. J., & Campbell, S. M. (2020). Attachment and emotion regulation: A person‐centred examination and relations with coping with rejection, friendship closeness, and emotional adjustment. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 38(1), 125-143.
- Bretherton, I. (1999). Updating the ‘internal working model’construct: Some reflections. Attachment & Human Development, 1(3), 343-357.
- Diamond, G., Diamond, G. M., & Levy, S. (2021). Attachment-based family therapy: Theory, clinical model, outcomes, and process research. Journal of affective disorders, 294, 286-295.
- Johnson, S. M. (2009). Attachment theory and emotionally focused therapy for individuals and couples. Attachment theory and research in clinical work with adults, 410-433.
- Martin, R., & Young, J. (2010). Schema therapy. Handbook of cognitive-behavioral therapies, 317-346.
