Attachment and emotion regulation: A person‐centred examination and relations with coping with rejection, friendship closeness, and emotional adjustment

Abstract

Guided by attachment theory of emotion regulation (ER), the current study utilized a person‐centred approach to identify clusters of individuals that differed in their attachment representations and ER, and further examined individual differences in socio‐emotional functioning based on these profiles. Participants included 658 emerging adults (M = 19.9, SD = 2.7, 65.5% female) who completed surveys measuring responses to rejection, friendship closeness, and emotional maladjustment. Five clusters were identified: secure regulated (19%), disorganized unregulated (21%), anxious unregulated (16%), emotive (21%), and avoidant suppressor (22%). Each group displayed unique patterns, with the secure regulated group reporting significantly less withdrawal, retribution, rumination, and emotional maladjustment, and the disorganized unregulated group reporting the poorest functioning across all indicators. Significant cluster × sex effects were also found for friendship closeness. These findings suggest the importance of considering attachment and ER, and implications for attachment theory and development are discussed. What is already known on this subject? Insecure attachment representations are a significant risk factor for poorer outcomes across development. Hyperactivating and deactivating strategies are maladaptive responses to coping with emotional threat. These strategies are an extension of the internal working model and positive correlates of poorer functioning. What does this study add? Previous studies have over‐relied on variable‐centred approaches to replicate findings of attachment theory. A person‐centred approach allowing for the joint consideration of patterns of both attachment and ER strategies. The identification of five novel profiles revealing unique differences in three important domains of functioning.

Emotion regulation and support from others: Buffering of body dysmorphic symptoms in adolescent and young adult men but not women

“…The findings for ER partially supported this hypothesis, mitigating the risk of appearance‐RS for young men. These gender‐specific findings were consistent with previous findings indicating that, for example young women, across the breadth of the adolescent period are more likely to be more emotive, unregulated and report less emotional acceptance, access to strategies, emotional clarity and goal‐directed activity than young men (Gardner et al, 2020; Lavell et al, 2018). As our findings revealed, young women may have greater difficulties successfully coping with the distress that accompanies elevated perceptions of appearance‐RS as they may be more likely to place greater value on their appearance as a critical marker for acceptance by their peers.…”

“…While the main aim of the current study was to examine factors that may buffer the risk that appearance‐RS poses for higher BDS, there are also gender differences in youths' perceptions of interpersonal support, appearance‐related stress, ability to cope with such stress, and the resulting emotional distress that are also important to consider (Bowker et al, 2013; Gardner & Webb, 2019; Zimmer‐Gembeck et al, 2018). For example, adolescent girls and young women consistently report greater appearance concerns and appearance‐related difficulties (Bowker et al, 2013; Densham et al, 2017; Ricciardelli & Yager, 2015) less capacity for adaptive ER and coping (Gardner, Zimmer‐Gembeck, & Campbell, 2020; Lavell et al, 2018) and appear to benefit less from supportive interpersonal relationships (O'Connor et al, 2011; Webb & Zimmer‐Gembeck, 2014). In some instances, gender has also moderated associations, where one study, for example, found that the positive association between appearance‐RS and fear of negative evaluation was higher for girls who perceived less acceptance from their peers (relative to those who perceived greater peer acceptance), but was not significant for boys who perceived less peer acceptance (Bowker et al, 2013).…”

Analysis of the mediating effect of mentalization on the relationship between attachment styles and emotion dysregulation

“…This may be due to the fact that disorganized attachments are more difficult to find in the general population. This type of attachment is usually associated with psychopathology and is more frequently observed in clinical populations (Gardner, Zimmer‐Gembeck & Campbell, 2019; Miljkovitch, Deborde, Bernier, Corcos, Speranza & Pham‐Scottez, 2018; Smith & South, 2020).…”

The protective role of secure attachment in the relationship between experiences of childhood abuse, emotion dysregulation and coping, and behavioral and mental health problems among emerging adult Black women: A moderated mediation analysis.

“…This weaker effect may result from the fact that levels of emotion dysregulation may not necessarily vary in the same way that coping skills do across levels of attachment security among women with a history of childhood abuse. A recent study (Gardner et al, 2020) identified profiles based on both adult attachment and emotion regulation among emerging adults; suggesting that individuals can be either regulated or dysregulated at both high and low levels of attachment security. They showed that these profiles were associated with coping responses and mental health issues, which aligns with our assertion that perhaps what is more important when considering mental and behavioral health problems is how emotional states or stressors are coped with, rather than the emotional state of dysregulation itself.…”