What's sex got to do with it? Attachment, love schemas, and sexuality

Abstract

This study measured the effects of adult attachment styles on sexual behavior using Hatfield and Rapson's unified love schema theory. According to this theory, there are six love schemas, or adult attachment types. Four types parallel other four-category adult attachment schemas, and two types not measured in previous research are uninterested in romantic relationships. Clear differences were found in sexual desires and behaviors of people possessing five of the love schemas. The results suggest the importance of pursuing the effects of attachment style on sexual behavior, as well as the utility of an attachment schema that allows individuals to classify themselves as disinterested in romantic relationships.

The Importance and Meaning of Sexual Fantasies in Intimate Relationships

“…Accordingly, a number of studies have also investigated the link between relationship status, attachment style, and fantasy preference. For example, securely attached individuals in romantic relationships are less likely to report extradyadic fantasies than individuals with insecure attachment styles (Stephan and Bachman 1999). Additionally, regardless of relationship status, Birnbaum (2007) found that attachment avoidance was negatively associated with fantasies that indicated a desire for intimacy, and affectionate and passionate themed fantasies (Birnbaum 2007).…”

Adult attachment and sexual behavior

“…Given that people higher in avoidance tend to be emotionally distant and aloof, tend to lack trust in others, and are disinclined to form long-term relationships (Hazan & Shaver, 1987), it is not surprising that these people may have a large number of (short-term) partners. It is also interesting to note that Stephen and Bachman (1999), using a new model of attachment, provided preliminary evidence that insecure undergraduates have an elevated interest in casual sex. Finally, research indicates that, relative to those with stronger parental bonds, those who form weak bonds with their parents tend to engage in a variety of externalizing behaviors (e.g., Grych & Finchman, 1990;Loeber & Dishon, 1983), one of which is promiscuity (Robins, 1966).…”

Are men universally more dismissing than women? Gender differences in romantic attachment across 62 cultural regions

“…For example, Kirkpatrick (1998) has suggested that the psychology of dismissing romantic attachment is conceptually similar to the psychology of shortterm mating, perhaps even synonymous with it (see also Belsky, 1999;Simpson, 1999). Adults who report higher levels of dismissing romantic attachment tend to have more accepting attitudes toward casual sex, and engage in more promiscuous and indiscriminate sex, than people with more secure attachment styles (Bogaert & Sadava, 2002;Brennan & Shaver, 1995;Feeney, Noller, & Patty, 1993;Schmitt, 2003a;Stephan & Bachman, 1999). In a recent cross-cultural study involving more than 50 nations, Schmitt (2003b) documented that short-term mating tendencies are linked with higher levels of dismissing attachment, more so than with any other form of romantic attachment.…”