Have you ever wondered why you’re drawn to certain people, why some relationships feel safe and effortless, while others feel like constant push and pull? Love is often seen as a mystery, something magical that happens when two people “click”. Most of us think love is just chemistry and coincidence, but beneath the surface, there’s something much deeper shaping our choices in romantic lives: our internal working models.
These models aren’t something we consciously create; rather, they’re shaped quietly and powerfully through our earliest emotional experiences, especially with our past caregivers, and then carried into adulthood, like invisible blueprints for how we expect love to feel. We do this without even realising it; we tend to develop subconscious rules about what exactly is love, how much of it we deserve, and whether others can be trusted with our hearts. The influence of these unintentionally created models is so big that we form perceptions based on them. We often seek out relationships that feel familiar, even if they’re unhealthy, because they match the emotional blueprint we subconsciously know.
Recent studies have deepened our understanding of how these subconscious models not only affect how we act in relationships but also how we predict and interpret love. Whether our belief in love conditional? That people leave? That we need to earn affection and love? These beliefs often determine how we attach to others, and how we behave when that love feels threatened, or we feel threatened. In this article, we’ll explore the science behind working models, examine how they shape our romantic instincts, and uncover how greater awareness can help us rewrite these scripts to build much healthier and more fulfilling connections.
What are Internal Working Models?
Internal Working Models (IVM) are nothing but mental representations of self and others that are formed in early childhood, particularly through interactions with primary caregivers. This concept, being central to attachment theory, subconsciously shapes our expectations about love, safety, trust, and closeness.
If a child successfully receives consistent emotional care, they develop a secure working model, believing they are worthy of love and that others can be trusted. On the other hand, inconsistent or neglectful care leads to insecure models, drowning the child in fear of abandonment, emotional avoidance, and hypervigilance. They can evolve being non-static but continue to influence our adult romantic relationships in subtle and often subconscious ways.
These internal working models are best activated during emotionally significant interactions, often without our awareness. For instance, someone with an anxious attachment style may interpret a delayed text as rejection, even when no such intent exists. The reaction doesn’t need to be purely emotional; it can be predictive, based on previous patterns.
Subconscious scripts in Romantic relationships
When people talk about having a “type” or why they are drawn to certain partners, they are often referencing their internal working models. These mental scripts influence not only who we choose, but also how we respond in romantic contexts. We selectively notice, recall, and emotionally react to experiences in ways that confirm these internal models. Thus, this can create what we call a feedback loop. Under this loop, we let our expectations shape our behaviour, which in turn reinforces the beliefs we hold about love.
For instance, someone with a dismissive-avoidant internal model may avoid emotional intimacy because subconsciously they believe that closeness leads to dependence or vulnerability, which is perceived as a threat to them. As a result, they may choose emotionally unavailable partners, which can further reinforce their internal prediction that love is risky or unreliable.
Internal working models predicting Relationship outcomes
Internal working models not only shape but also predict relationship satisfaction, partner compatibility, and emotional regulation. Different adult attachment style pairings, built on internal working models, can impact romantic relationship satisfaction even after considering external factors like communication quality and conflict. Individuals tend to interpret relationship events through the lens of their internal working models, and not only respond to real-time events that are occurring.
For instance, someone with an anxious attachment style may expect rejection and therefore perceive neutral partner behaviour as threatening. This subconscious prediction influences emotional reactions and relationship dynamics, showing how internal working models actively shape the way people experience love and intimacy. Understanding this mechanism reveals how internal working models are not passive memories but predictive mental frameworks guiding romantic expectations and satisfactions.
How life experiences modify love predictions
It wouldn’t be wrong to mention that while internal working models are relatively stable, they are not permanently fixed. Both positive and negative significant life experiences can reshape how we subconsciously predict love. There is evidence explaining how critical life events like insecure/secure relationships, therapy, or trauma can influence internal working models. People who experienced emotional growth and healing were able to revise their internal models, leading to healthier relationship patterns.
It is important to note that such adaptability can be crucial. It means that while early attachment plays a foundational role, individuals can develop new predictive models based on later experiences. For example, someone who grew up with neglect may still learn to trust and love securely through a stable romantic partner or therapeutic intervention.
Cultural layers of prediction
While psychology explains the mechanics of internal working models, cultural perspectives can add depth to our understanding of love’s predictive nature. Individualism and self-worth influence the expectations we carry into relationships. Our philosophies about ourselves or the world shape our internal working model. Cultural norms, such as beliefs about gender roles or emotional vulnerability, also influence the models we internalise and, consequently, the predictions we make in love.
Conclusion
To conclude, love may sometimes feel spontaneous, but it is deeply guided by a forecast we form long before we ever fall for someone. Our internal working models can operate like emotional algorithms, where we gather data from past relationships, childhood attachments, and emotional experiences to predict future relationship outcomes. This can also be a defence mechanism that we unconsciously adapt to save ourselves from rejection, which is perceived a threatening. They influence who we are attracted to, how we respond to conflict, and whether we believe love is safe or dangerous.
We can try to rewrite our scripts with new experiences, awareness, and support, choosing partners who help us in forming secure bonds and further challenge limiting irrational beliefs. Love can be a pattern we learn, unlearn, and reshape. By understanding the psychology behind internal working models, we not only uncover how we subconsciously predict love but also gain the power to choose differently.
References +
- Bretherton, I., & Munholland, K. A. (2008). Internal working models in attachment relationships: Elaborating a central construct in attachment theory. In J. Cassidy & P. R. Shaver (Eds.), Handbook of attachment: Theory, research, and clinical applications (2nd ed., pp. 102–127). Guilford Press.
- Braunstein, V., Gross, J. J., & Gotlib, I. H. (2021). Adult attachment styles and emotional regulation: The role of interoceptive awareness and alexithymia in attachment-related emotion regulation difficulties. Personality and Individual Differences, 168, 110331.
- Collins, N. L., Guichard, A., Ford, M. B., & Feeney, B. C. (2004). Working models of attachment: New developments and emerging themes. In W. S. Rholes & J. A. Simpson (Eds.), Adult attachment (pp. 196–239). Guilford Press.
- Foddis, W. (2016). Branden’s Self-Esteem Theory within the Context of Academic Psychology. The Journal of Ayn Rand Studies, 16(1–2), 187–206. https://doi.org/10.5325/jaynrandstud.16.1-2.0187
- Fraley, R. C., & Roisman, G. I. (2018, February 24). The development of adult attachment styles: Four lessons. ScienceDirect. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352250X18300113
- Konieczny, P., & Cierpiałkowska, L. (2022, June 30). Positive and negative life experiences and changes in internal working models of attachment – A comparative study. Psychiatria Polska.
- Phillips, A., & You, D. (2018, April 1). The impact of attachment style pairings on romantic relationship satisfaction. JIRIRI. https://www.jiriri.ca/the-impact-of attachment-style-pairings-on-romantic-relationship-satisfaction/
Leave feedback about this