Attachment Style Differences and Depression in African American and European American College Women: Normative Adaptations?

Abstract

This study examined ethnic differences in attachment styles and depression among African American and European American college women. African American women reported less favorable views of others, which suggests that attachment styles emphasizing caution in relationships may be normative and adaptive for these women. There were no differences between groups in views of self or reports of depressive symptoms. implications for long-term relationships and counseling are discussed.Este estudio examinó las diferencias étnicas en estilos de apego y depresión entre estudiantes universitarias Afroamericanas y Euroamericanas. Las mujeres Afroamericanas expresaron una visión menos favorable sobre los demás, lo que sugiere que los estilos de apego que enfatizan la precaución en las relaciones pueden ser normativos para estas mujeres, y el resultado de su adaptación. no hubo diferencias entre los grupos en cuanto a la visión de sí mismas o expresión de síntomas depresivos. Se discuten las implicaciones para las relaciones a largo plazo y la consejería.

Attachment Orientations: Predicting Psychological Distress in German and Turkish Samples

“…Our results further supported the notion that cultural practices influence attachment styles (Keller, 2013) and the relationship between attachment styles and adjustment (Cooley & Garcia, 2012). Researchers view psychological development as a function of cultural practices and biological systems (e.g., Greenfield et al, 2003 Markus & Kitayama, 1991; Miller, 2011).…”

“…As noted by previous researchers (e.g., Cooley & Garcia, 2012; Keller, 2013; Rothbaum et al, 2000 and as tested in the Turkish and German samples in the present study, attachment orientations showed some variations across cultures. In addition, our findings provide support for the cultural moderation hypothesis in that culture moderated the relationship of attachment orientations and psychological distress.…”

“…However, we found further support for important cultural variations in the relationships of attachment avoidance and anxiety with psychological distress (Cooley & Garcia, 2012; Simpson & Belsky, 2008; Wei et al, 2011 Wei, Russell, Mallinckrodt, & Zakalik, 2004) when we examined the results for the German and Turkish samples. Attachment avoidance in the German sample and attachment anxiety in the Turkish sample were not significantly related to psychological distress.…”

“…In summary, in light of recent developments, we examined attachment theory within Turkish and German cultural contexts and whether culture moderated the relationship of attachment avoidance and anxiety with psychological distress. We predicted that secure attachment would be associated with similar benefits across cultures, but we anticipated differing pathways from insecure attachment orientations to psychological health (Cooley & Garcia, 2012;Keller, 2013;Rogoff, 2003;Rothbaum & Morelli, 2005;Simpson & Belsky, 2008;Turan & Erdur-Baker, 2014). Three main hypotheses were examined: (a) High levels of attachment avoidance and anxiety will predict higher psychological distress; (b) German participants will report higher levels of attachment avoidance compared with Turkish participants, who will report higher levels of attachment anxiety; and (c) culture will moderate the relationship between attachment avoidance and anxiety with psychological distress.…”

“…In contrast, individuals with an anxious‐type orientation perceive life adversities as irreversible and uncontrollable and have difficulty calming their concerns about relationship conflicts when the actual threat has ended (Mikulincer & Florian, 1998); these individuals experience higher levels of psychological distress (Conradi & de Jonge, 2009; Currier, Holland, & Allen, 2012). However, the causal link between insecure attachments and psychological distress is subject to many other factors (see Mikulincer & Shaver, 2007), with one of the more important factors being the cultural context (Cooley & Garcia, 2012; Keller, 2013; Rogoff, 2003; Rothbaum & Morelli, 2005; Simpson & Belsky, 2008; Turan & Erdur‐Baker, 2014).…”