Attachment Style and the Regulation of Negative Affect: Exploring Individual Differences in Mood Congruency Effects on Memory and Judgment

Abstract

Three studies examined the role that attachment style plays in moderating the effects of induced negative affect on memory and judgment. Israeli undergraduates completed an attachment style scale and were exposed to a negative or neutral affect induction. In Study 1, incidental recall of negative and positive information was assessed; in Study 2, the attribution of negative and positive relational events was studied; and in Study 3, findings of Study 1 were replicated using a different affect induction procedure. Whereas securely attached persons reacted to induced negative affect with an affect-incongruent pattern of cognitions (better recall of positive information, more unstable/specific attribution of negative event), anxiously attached persons reacted with an affect-congruent pattern (worse recall of positive information, more stable/global attribution of negative event). Persons scoring high on attachment avoidance showed no significant cognitive effect of negative affect. The discussion emphasizes the role that attachment strategies play in the affect-cognition link.

Attachment and Individuation of Deaf/Hard-of-Hearing and Hearing Young Adults

“…''Attachment style characterizes individuals from the crib to the grave'' (Bowlby, 1979, p. 129). Secure attachment has demonstrated associations with better ability to explore the environment during early childhood; more satisfying relationships with friends and particularly with spouses (Blatt & Blass, 1990); better vocational and professional adjustment (Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991); better ability to cope with stressful situations and negative affects (Mikulincer, Florian, & Hirschberger, 2003;Mikulincer, Shaver, & Pereg, 2003;Pereg & Mikulincer, 2004); better self-image (Mikulincer, 1995); and a stronger sense of wellbeing (Diehl, Elnick, Bourbeau, & Labouvie-Veif, 1998;Grotevant & Cooper, 1998;Hazan & Shaver, 1990).…”

Pathways Linking Childhood Maltreatment and Adolescent Sexual Risk Behaviors: The Role of Attachment Security

“…Also, we inquired about CM at Time 1, but the items were retrospective and participants were susceptible to bias recall (overestimation or underestimation). Moreover, attachment might have influenced recall of CM because avoidant individuals tend to idealize their caregivers and cannot recall negative experiences in their childhood (Mikulincer & Orbach, 1995;Pereg & Mikulincer, 2004). A second set of limitations concerns exclusion criteria.…”

Razlike U Percepciji Bračnog Kvaliteta Među Parovima Različitih Kombinacija Obrazaca Partnerske Afektivne Vezanosti

“…Nasuprot početnoj pretpostavci da će na dimenziji Konsenzus izostati razlike između sigurno i nesigurno vezanih, razlike su ipak ustanovljene. Ovi rezultati su u skladu sa istraživanjima sprovedenim prethodne decenije (Collins, Ford, Guichard, & Allard, 2006;Pereg & Mikulincer, 2004), u kojima su razlike u donoše-nju odluka o važnim pitanjima zabeležene u većoj meri kod osoba sa nesigurnim obrascima. Naime, pretpostavlja se da će osobe sa nesigurnim obrascima usled negativnog modela sebe ili drugih, teže uspostavljati kompromis sa partnerom, i verovatno negativno konotirati neslaganja u različitim oblastima funkcionisanja, što će dovesti do procene smanjenog kvaliteta ovog bračnog domena.…”

“…Creasey & Hesson-McInnis, 2001;Tran & Simpson, 2009), te pozitivnih emocija tokom seksualnih aktivnosti, pozitivnih seksualnih iskustava, zadovoljstva svojim seksualnim odnosima (Shaver & Mikulincer, 2007;Shaver, Hazan, & Bradshaw, 1988) i učestalosti obostrano iniciranog seksualnog odnosa (Brennan & Shaver, 1995;Feeney, Noller, & Patty, 1993); a negativne korelacije nesigurnih obrazaca afektivne vezanosti sa ovim indikatorima; pretpostavlja se da će osobe sa sigurnim obrascem partnerske afektivne vezanosti imati više skorove na dimenzijama Zadovoljstvo, Afektivno-seksualna usaglašenost i Kohezivnost, u odnosu na nesigurno vezane. U odnosu na prethodna istraživanja u kojima su nesigurni obrasci afektivne vezanosti dovođeni u vezu sa neslaganjem u donošenju odluka o važnim pitanjima i negativnom interpretacijom partnerovog ponašanja (Collins, Ford, Guichard, & Allard, 2006;Pereg & Mikulincer, 2004), u jednoj meta-studiji (Li & Chan, 2012) se izvodi zaključak da ova tendencija može postojati i kod sigurno i kod nesigurno vezanih partnera, te očekujemo izostanak razlika na dimenziji Konsenzus između sigurno i nesigurno vezanih osoba.…”