No abstract

No abstract

Social and relational research assessing adult attachment often appears to be based on the assumption that adults operate, in their interpersonal relationships, with a single internal working model of attachment. The current investigation explored attachment from an alternative perspective. We hypothesized that most adults will rate their attachment orientations differently depending on the relationship context in which the ratings are taken. We also expected that general measures of attachment, taken outside the context of specific relationships, would vary from attachment ratings adults report when they are referring to specific attachment relationships. Two hundred and twenty-four participants responded to a survey containing standardized measures (RQ: Bartholomew, 1990; Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991) assessing Secure, Fearful, Preoccupied, and Dismissing attachment styles in four self-identified attachment relationships. The RQ was also used to measure general attachment orientations. Results indicated that the majority of adults rated themselves differently on each of the Secure, Fearful, Preoccupied, and Dismissing dimensions of the RQ across their various attachment relationships and that attachment ratings measured in response to specific attachment relationships were not equivalent to the attachment ratings measured outside the context of specific attachment relationships. This study sheds light on the associations between specific and general attachment tendencies and raises some concerns about conceptualization and measurement of adult attachment.

No abstract

Assumptions about dimensions underlying the four prototype model of adult attachment were explored in two studies. In the first {N = 225), associations between attachment prototype ratings and standardized measures of self and others in relationships were examined. In a second study (N = 246), measures of anxiety and avoidance were added to the analyses. Findings from correlational and hierarchical regression analyses provided support for the notion, contrary to assumptions of the model, that qualitatively different self and other dimensions underlie different attachment styles. Results are discussed in terms of the lack of equivalency in measures of "self and "other" proposed to underly each of the four attachment style ratings, the need to view attachment styles as complementary rather than mutually exclusive, and the need to continue exploration of the dimensions informing attachment. ResumeLes hypoth&ses relatives aux dimensions qui sous-tendent le modfele h quatre prototypes de styles d'attachement chez l'adulte a fait l'objet de deux etudes. Dans une premifere etude (N = 225) les associations entre les evaluations des styles d'attachement et les mesures standardisees des representations de soi et des autres ont ete examinees. Dans une seconde etude, des mesures d'anxiete et d'evitement ont ete ajoutees aux analyses. Les resultats des analyses de correlation et des analyses de regression hierarchique appuient la conclusion, contraire aux hypotheses postuiees par le module, que des dimensions qualitativement differentes de la representation de soi et de l'autre sous-tendent differents styles d'attachement. Les resultats sont discutes en termes de defaut d'equivalence des mesures de soi et de l'autre proposees pour evaluer les quatre styles d'attachement. La discussion insiste egalement sur la necessite de poursuivre l'exploration des dimensions qui fondent l'attachement, en considerant les styles d'attachement comme compiementaires plutot que mutuellement exclusifs.