Three studies were conducted to examine the correlates of adult attachment. In Study 1, an 18-item scale to measure adult attachment style dimensions was developed based on Kazan and Shaver's (1987) categorical measure. Factor analyses revealed three dimensions underlying this measure: the extent to which an individual is comfortable with closeness, feels he or she can depend on others, and is anxious or fearful about such things as being abandoned or unloved. Study 2 explored the relation between these attachment dimensions and working models of self and others. Attachment dimensions were found to be related to self-esteem, expressiveness, instrumentality, trust in others, beliefs about human nature, and styles of loving. Study 3 explored the role of attachment style dimensions in three aspects of ongoing dating relationships: partner matching on attachment dimensions; similarity between the attachment of one's partner and caregiving style of one's parents; and relationship quality, including communication, trust, and satisfaction. Evidence was obtained for partner matching and for similarity between one's partner and one's parents, particularly for one's opposite-sex parent. Dimensions of attachment style were strongly related to how each partner perceived the relationship, although the dimension of attachment that best predicted quality differed for men and women. For women, the extent to which their partner was comfortable with closeness was the best predictor of relationship quality, whereas the best predictor for men was the extent to which their partner was anxious about being abandoned or unloved.It is generally believed that the nature and quality of one's close relationships in adulthood are strongly influenced by affective events that took place during childhood, particularly within the child-caretaker relationship. Yet, only recently have social psychologists begun to integrate work on adult love relationships with developmental theory and research on the nature and functioning of parent-child relations (Hartup & Rubin,

No abstract

In this target article, we argue that personality processes, personality structure, and personality development have to be understood and investigated in integrated ways in order to provide comprehensive responses to the key questions of personality psychology. The psychological processes and mechanisms that explain concrete behaviour in concrete situations should provide explanation for patterns of variation across situations and individuals, for development over time as well as for structures observed in intra-individual and inter-individual differences. Personality structures, defined as patterns of covariation in behaviour, including thoughts and feelings, are results of those processes in transaction with situational affordances and regularities. It cannot be presupposed that processes are organized in ways that directly correspond to the observed structure. Rather, it is an empirical question whether shared sets of processes are uniquely involved in shaping correlated behaviours, but not uncorrelated behaviours (what we term 'correspondence' throughout this paper), or whether more complex interactions of processes give rise to population-level patterns of covariation (termed 'emergence'). The paper is organized in three parts, with part I providing the main arguments, part II reviewing some of the past approaches at (partial) integration, and part III outlining conclusions of how future personality psychology should progress towards complete integration. Working definitions for the central terms are provided in the appendix.

The authors suggest that decisions made from multiple pieces of evidence are performed hy mechanisms of parallel constraint satisfaction, which are related to cognitive consistency theories. Such reasoning processes are bidirectional--decisions follow from evidence, and evaluations of the evidence shift toward coherence with the emerging decision. Using a factually complex legal case, the authors observed patterns of coherence shifts that persisted even when the distribution of decisions was manipulated (Study 1) and influenced by the participants' attitudes (Study 2). The evaluations of the evidence cohered with the preferred decision even when participants changed their preference (Study 3). Supporting the bidirectionality of reasoning. Study 4 showed that assigning participants to a verdict affected their evaluation of the evidence. Coherence shifts were observed also in related background knowledge. This research suggests that cognitive consistency theories should play a greater role in the understanding of human reasoning and decision making.

This article studies the impact of explanatory coherence on the evaluation of explanations. Tested were 4 principles of P. Thagard’s (1989) model for evaluating the coherence of explanations. Study 1 showed that Ss preferred explanations that accounted for more data (breadth) and that were simpler (simplicity or parsimony). Study 2 demonstrated that Ss thought an explanation was stronger when it could, in turn, be explained. Study 3 showed that the evaluation of explanations is comparative, affected by the availability of good alternatives. These results were then successfully simulated using Thagard’s connectionist implementation of his model of explanatory coherence. The data and the simulation, taken together, strongly support the model. Two issues are then discussed: (a) the role of explanatory coherence in social explanation and (b) the relevance of parallel constraint satisfaction processes to social reasoning.