1999
DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.76.6.1022
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Adult attachment style and the perception of others: The role of projective mechanisms.

Abstract: In 3 reported studies the authors examined attachment-style differences in the perception of others and the hypothesis that projective mechanisms underlie these differences. In these studies, participants reported on their attachment style and generated actual-self-traits and unwanted-self-traits. Then, a 2nd session was conducted, in which impression formation about new persons (Study 1), the ease of retrieval of memories about known persons (Study 2), or memory inferences about learned features of fictional … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

13
96
2
1

Year Published

2003
2003
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 126 publications
(112 citation statements)
references
References 34 publications
13
96
2
1
Order By: Relevance
“…In a way, this permits individuals to retreat to safe havens by reducing the range of their action and seeking refuge in close social networks while at the same time directing individual and group aggression toward perceived threats. However, a related negative consequence of this shift toward self-protectiveness is that negative affect and information often are projected onto others (Mikulincer & Horesh, 1999;Pyszczynski, Greenberg, & Solomon, 1999), resulting in increased black-and-white thinking, stereotyping, and polarization among in-groups and out-groups (e.g., Paulhus & Lim, 1994). Erikson (1984) referred to these ways of simplifying psychological complexity as pseudo-speciation -the exclusion of others from the circle of humanity in which one includes oneself.…”
Section: Dynamic Integration Of Affect Optimization and Affect Complementioning
confidence: 99%
“…In a way, this permits individuals to retreat to safe havens by reducing the range of their action and seeking refuge in close social networks while at the same time directing individual and group aggression toward perceived threats. However, a related negative consequence of this shift toward self-protectiveness is that negative affect and information often are projected onto others (Mikulincer & Horesh, 1999;Pyszczynski, Greenberg, & Solomon, 1999), resulting in increased black-and-white thinking, stereotyping, and polarization among in-groups and out-groups (e.g., Paulhus & Lim, 1994). Erikson (1984) referred to these ways of simplifying psychological complexity as pseudo-speciation -the exclusion of others from the circle of humanity in which one includes oneself.…”
Section: Dynamic Integration Of Affect Optimization and Affect Complementioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, researchers of close relationships have observed that people project not only self-views onto their partners but also their general attitudes toward the relationship (Aron, Aron, Tudor, & Nelson, 1991;Murray, Holmes, & Griffin, 1996), and Mikulincer and Horesh (1999) demonstrated that people's attachment styles affect what self-views they are projecting onto others. Finally, Feshbach (1963) and Goldings (1954) reported on the projection of emotions (i.e., general action tendencies) onto others.…”
Section: Goal Projectionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Similarly, the projection of an undesirable goal onto similar others might reduce felt responsibility for possessing this goal and thus should foster looking down on others. Furthermore, Mikulincer and Horesh (1999) suggested that projecting an undesirable or negative goal onto others may fulfill an underlying tendency to distance oneself from others. Ultimately, then, the projection of undesirable goals may lead to a deterioration of group cohesiveness for the in-group or to greater distinction between the in-group and the out-group.…”
Section: Implications For Interpersonal Behaviormentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Así, el tipo de apoyo proporcionado por el cuidador (a) influirá en el establecimiento de relaciones afectivas con los pares y en parejas futuras (Penagos, Rodríguez y Carrillo, 2005); en ese sentido la investigación sobre el apego en las relaciones de pareja adultas delimita tres principales tipos de vínculos afectivos (Hazan y Shaver, 1987): a) El apego seguro tiene características de un cuidador disponible, receptivo y cálido, que le genera confianza en sí mismo y en los demás, manteniendo relaciones de pareja duraderas y satisfactorias; b) el apego inseguro (ansioso-ambivalente) presenta a un cuidador insensible, intrusivo e inconsistente, ocasionando en el individuo la capacidad de mantener una relación afectiva a largo plazo anteponiendo sus deseos personales y profesionales, y c) el apego evitativo que representa a una persona segura debido a que se logra desprender fácilmente de una madre que manifestó conductas de rechazo, rigidez, hostilidad y aversión al contacto durante su cuidado; lo que conforma a una persona que trata de mantener una distancia emocional con su pareja (Márquez, Rivera y Reyes, 2009;Mikulincer y Horesh, 1999).…”
Section: La Teoría Del Apego Y Las Relaciones De Pareja En Adolescentesunclassified