Implicit security: A social cognitive model and assessment of attachment security in romantic relationships

被引:1
作者
Robinson, Michael D. [1 ]
Persich, Michelle R. [2 ]
Towers, Crystal M. [1 ]
Sjoblom-Schmidt, Simone [1 ]
Penzel, Ian B. [3 ]
机构
[1] North Dakota State Univ, Fargo, ND USA
[2] Univ Arizona, Tucson, AZ 85721 USA
[3] Univ N Carolina, Greensboro, NC USA
关键词
Attachment; Security; Individual differences; Situation; Relationship quality; PERSONALITY-TRAITS; ADULT ATTACHMENT; RELIABILITY; VALIDITY; BEHAVIOR; QUALITY; STYLES; SCALES; FORM; TOOL;
D O I
10.1016/j.paid.2020.110530
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
Theoretical perspectives of the attachment system emphasize the situation-contingent nature of its operations. The present investigation sought to model these dynamic components through the use of situational descriptions of relationship-related events and challenges. After several stages of scenario development, participants in Study 1 (n = 148) were asked how they would respond to a series of situations and the relevant responses were then matched to a prototype of the securely attached relationship partner, resulting in implicit security index (ISI) scores. Participants who obtained higher scores were more satisfied with their relationships and reported lesser disagreement with their partners. Such findings were bolstered by Study 2, which showed that participants (n = 174) with higher ISI scores had romantic partners (n = 174) who were more satisfied and involved with them. Altogether, the findings provide support for a novel way of thinking about, and assessing, individual differences in attachment security.
引用
收藏
页数:9
相关论文
共 56 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2009, HDB RES ADULT LEARNI
[2]  
[Anonymous], 2017, Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: a regression-based approach
[3]  
[Anonymous], 1999, Handbook of personality: Theory and research
[4]   The Invisible Harm of Downplaying a Romantic Partner's Aggression [J].
Arriaga, Ximena B. ;
Capezza, Nicole M. ;
Goodfriend, Wind ;
Allsop, Katherine E. .
CURRENT DIRECTIONS IN PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE, 2018, 27 (04) :275-280
[5]   A PARTIAL VALIDATION OF 2 SHORT-FORM PARTNER ABUSE SCALES [J].
ATTALA, JM ;
HUDSON, WW ;
MCSWEENEY, M .
WOMEN & HEALTH, 1994, 21 (2-3) :125-139
[6]  
Banse R., 2013, The Oxford Handbook of Close Relationships, P475
[7]   When proportion consensus scoring works [J].
Barchard, Kimberly A. ;
Hensley, Spencer ;
Anderson, Emily .
PERSONALITY AND INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES, 2013, 55 (01) :14-18
[8]  
Bartholomew K., 1994, PSYCHOL INQ, V5, P23, DOI DOI 10.1207/S15327965PLI0501_2
[9]  
Belsky Jay, 2002, Attach Hum Dev, V4, P166
[10]  
Block J., 1961, Q SORT METHOD PERSON