IndexAbstractIntroductionConclusionWorks CitedAbstractRelationship science has aided our understanding of human behavior and is the foundation of human conditions. Many theorists have contributed to the field of relationship science (most notably Bowlby's (1969) attachment theory). Attachment theory is fundamentally based on the idea that human beings need intimacy to form close relationships (Hazan and Shaver, 1990).Research shows that one's childhood attachment experience can have an effect on adult relationships with significant others. However, there are limitations to this statement key to attachment theory (both in infants and adults) and its contribution to relationship science Say no to plagiarism Get a custom essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Relationship science can be defined as the science of intimate relationships. Relational intimacy is generally used to define sexual familiarity with significant others as well as strong emotional attachments (e.g. love) (Jamieson, 2007). Over the years, relationship science has had difficulty finding its voice among other sciences. Many questions have been asked about whether psychology and relationship science is a “real” science. The main benefit of relationship science is that it has helped improve our understanding of human behavior. Relationships are the foundation of human conditions as we continually live our relational lives and contribute greatly to one's quality of life (Berscheid, 1999). According to Kelley et al. (1983), relationship science is an essential science as it is necessary for the further development of the social, behavioral and biological sciences. The social sciences have played an important role in helping us understand behavior in natural environments (i.e. how people behave in their relationships). It has been criticized that relationship science is based on psychological myths and therapeutic techniques with little empirical evidence. Bradbury (2002) argues that a key issue with relationships is that they are a complex subject to try to understand, which therefore means that they are difficult to define. Lilienfeld (2012) noted that many people may misunderstand psychological principles in their personal lives and tend to make assumptions about actual human experiences. However, Fincham and Beach (2010) argued that relationship science is useful for incorporating human concepts. There are many different theories that have supported further research and development of relationship science. Bowlby's (1969) attachment theory is a highly regarded theory that has provided the basic foundation for development in the field of relationship science as it aims to explore the intimacy of relationships in one's life. This theory states that humans need intimacy to have close bonds within their relationships. It has been useful for understanding the dynamics of behavior in intimate relationships (e.g., caregivers and close partners). Attachment begins in childhood and continues throughout life. John Bowlby's (1969) attachment theory is fundamentally based on the idea that humans (as well as other species) need emotional intimacy from childhood to adulthood. Bowlby (1969) stated that humans are born with the attachment behavioral system and this motivates humans to seek closeness to otherssignificant nurturing qualities experienced in parent-child relationships and the belief that parents are a secure base of protection for children (Bowlby, 1969). The three main systems associated with Bowlby (1969) are attachment, sex and nurturing. Mary Ainsworth (1969) attachment theory derived from Bowlby(1969) and also contributed to the field of relationship science. He observed attachment styles in children and separated attachment into three main categories; secure (the child uses the caregiver as a secure base to explore his or her environment), anxious-ambivalent (the child usually has very clingy and dependent behavior but rejects the caregiver's attachment when attempting to interact) and anxious-avoidant (the child is emotionally and physically independent from the caregiver). Mary Ainsworth (1969) performed a laboratory procedure called the Strange Situation. It was designed to examine the balance between attachment and exploratory behaviors under low- and high-stress conditions in one-year-olds. In this experiment, the mother and child were introduced to a laboratory playroom where they were joined by an unknown woman. While the stranger played with the child, the mother left the room briefly and then returned shortly after. This was repeated several times. Ainsworth found that infants explored the playroom and toys with greater energy in the mother's presence than in the stranger's presence. Babies considered anxious-ambivalent cried and wanted contact but did not cuddle their mother when she picked them up. Instead, they showed ambivalence by kicking or hitting their mothers. The anxious-avoidant group of children avoided their mother when she returned to the room (even if they looked for her while she was away). The data showed that those children who had been ambivalent or avoidant towards their mother had a less harmonious relationship with their mother. at home than those who had interactions or contact with their mothers when they reunited (Ainsworth, Bell & Stayton, 1974). There were some limitations to this experiment because it may be considered unethical to distress children at such a young age. Another consideration is that just because children reacted a certain way to being reunited with their mothers, that doesn't necessarily mean they don't have a good relationship at home. It could simply mean that they reacted that way because of their feelings about the situation at the time. Another limitation is that this experiment relies on separations in stressful situations rather than in non-stressful situations. Separation and reunion behaviors should not be the only factors that can be used to define attachment. One limitation of Bowlby and Ainsworth's attachment theories is that both theorists base their argument on the idea that the mother is the primary caregiver of children. However, children have more than one person who cares for them during childhood (e.g. fathers and siblings). Harris (1998) argues that a child's peers have more influence on him than his parents. He argues that the care a parent gives to their child when they are born does not necessarily have an effect on their attachment styles later in life. He believes that parents do not shape a child's personality and character as children tend to learn more things from their peers (as they want to fit into society), than from their caregivers. A child's attachment style at age one is not necessarily how they attach in later life (i.e. the stability of attachment depends on the stability of their environment). Attachment researchershave identified four main attachment styles in adults (Bartholomew and Horowitz, 1991). These are; secure (positive beliefs about self and close others), fearful-avoidant (low feelings of self and negative expectations about others), preoccupied (feeling that others are not invested in them in the same way they are with others) , rejecting-avoidant (denying the importance of close relationships and having a strong commitment to independence). The work of Bowlby (1969) and Ainsworth et al. (1978), has become the foundation for the study of attachment and intimacy in adults. While children are assumed to have an innate tendency to bond with those who care for them, adults have some control over the degree to which they become attached to others. Bowlby (1969) suggested that early interactions with significant others give rise to expectations and beliefs that potentially shape social perceptions and behaviors about what relationships should be like in adulthood. Avoidance in adulthood reflects the degree to which individuals are comfortable with closeness and emotional intimacy in relationships. People who score higher on avoidance tend to be less involved in their relationships and strive to be more psychologically and emotionally independent of their partners. According to Hazan and Shaver (1987), working models of attachment continue to guide and shape close relationship behavior throughout life. . When people build new relationships, they rely in part on prior expectations about how others might behave and feel toward them. The theory suggests that early caregiving experiences may partly influence how people behave in their adult romantic relationships. Satisfying intimate relationships tend to be the most important source of many people's happiness. Likewise, isolation and loneliness can contribute to psychological and physical disorders (Bartholomew, 1990). People tend to develop emotional bonds with their partners in adulthood and are motivated to maintain these relationships over time. Attachment theory shows that although most securely attached individuals find it relatively easy to trust their partners in adulthood (particularly due to the love and affection they received in childhood), many individuals with insecure attachment they find it rather difficult to trust their partners (due to the lack of affection received in childhood). Avoidance may arise from a fear of intimacy or a lack of interest or motivation in becoming intimate with others (Butzer & Campbell, 2008). In childhood, attachment behavior is adaptive only if someone (e.g. a parent) is available to provide protection and support. A parent provides protection and care for the child. However, in adult relationships, these roles (attachment and nurturing) are more difficult to separate. Both partners may be characterized, at one time or another, as stressed, threatened, or helpless and therefore in need of responsive care and support from the other. Likewise, both partners can be characterized as more helpful, empathetic, or protective. In a long-term relationship, attachment and nurturing roles are often exchanged. One of the main limitations of Bowbly's (1969) attachment theory was that it was studied primarily on infants. Hazan and Shaver (1990) further developed this aspect of relationship science and explored adult relationships and attachment. They found that adults who lacked attachment also lacked intimacy. One criticism of this theory is that in non-Western societies, less, 52(3), 511-524.