The Primary Attachment Style Questionnaire: A Brief Measure for Assessing Six Primary Attachment Styles before and after Age Twelve

Abstract

Objective: This article describes development and initial validation studies of the Primary Attachment Style Questionnaire (PASQ), a brief self-report for delineating six styles of attachment to a primary caregiver. Theoretically cued to Ainsworth's original infant classifications, the questionnaire is designed to map attachment patterns during two developmental periods (before and after age 12) and is intended for use in both clinical and non-clinical populations. Method: Pilot studies of the PASQ were conducted with a total of 441 college undergraduates. Over this period, test-retest analyses and factor analyses reduced the number of questionnaire items to the current 42-item version. Participants also responded to a variety of additional measures intended to assess the PASQ's validity. Results: In the first of three validity studies, investigators found moderate correlations between 120 college undergraduates' predominant attachment styles on the PASQ Before 12 and romantic attachment styles on Brennan, Clark, and Shaver's ECR. In the second study, 167 respondents' Axis I and Axis II scores on the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory supported the hypothesis that particular insecure attachment styles before age 12 would be related to specific personality disorders and to PTSD. The third validity study demonstrated the PASQ's sensitivity to shifts in attachment security between childhood and adolescence in the presence of three types of events that might generate attachment-related distress: mother's death, parents' divorce, and disruption of mother's ability to provide adequate caregiving. Conclusion: Findings support the utility of the PASQ for use in attachment research and in clinical practice.

Self‐report measures of secure attachment in adulthood: A systematic review

“…The lack of evidence for structural validity for the remaining measures ultimately resulted in their findings being “indeterminate.” It is however noted that Cronbach's alpha was >.7 for the ACIQ, T‐RSQ, Childhood Attachment and Relational Trauma Screen (CARTS; Frewen et al, 2013), Attachment Style Questionnaire (ASQ; Van Oudenhoven et al, 2003), Measure of Attachment Qualities (MAQ; Carver, 1997), PASQ (Salzman et al, 2013), AAS‐EM, AS, and MOAS. Cronbach's alphas for the CATS were inconsistent.…”

“…No measures were found to have sufficient evidence of test–retest reliability. With the exception of the RSQ, all measures reviewed (AAS‐EM, ACIQ, ASQ, CATS, MAQ, PASQ, T‐RSQ, Primary Attachment Style Questionnaire [PASQ; Salzman et al, 2013], and the Parent‐Adult Attachment Scale [P‐AASQ; Lopez & Hsu, 2002]) received an “indeterminate” rating as individual studies did not report an ICC or weighted Kappa. The findings for the RSQ were insufficient as ICC = .63.…”

Exposure to Domestic Violence during Adolescence: Coping Strategies and Attachment Styles as Early Moderators and their Relationship to Functioning during Adulthood

“…Primary Attachment Style Questionnaire. The Primary Attachment Style Questionnaire (PASQ) measures the quality of individuals' attachment to their primary caregiver before or after 12 years old (Salzman, Kunzendorf, Saunders, & Hulihan, 2013).…”

“…Example of an item in each category is, "My primary caregiver was there for me when I needed him/her" and "I learned to protect myself because my primary caregiver didn't want me to lean on him/her", respectively. A higher category mean score for secure attachment indicates a better quality of DOMESTIC VIOLENCE EXPOSURE DURING ADOLESCENCE 14 attachment, and a higher score for insecure attachment indicates a poorer quality of attachment to their primary caregiver during adolescence, retrospectively (Salzman et al, 2013). Depression, Anxiety, and Stress.…”

Investigating the role of residential migration history on the relationship between attachment and sense of belonging: A SEM approach

“…Insecure attachment styles are subdivided into avoidant, anxious‐ambivalent, and disorganized/disoriented. More recently, Salzman et al ( 2013 ) have built upon it by expanding the notion of secure attachment by adding two relatively secure attachment styles: secure/avoidant and secure/ambivalent attachment.…”