Dictionary of Arguments

Screenshot Tabelle Begriffe

 
Author Item Summary Meta data
Corr I 239
Appraisal theory/attachment theory/Shaver/Mikulincer: Adult attachment research has provided extensive evidence concerning the role of attachment working models in a person’s appraisals of the self and others. Numerous studies have shown that insecure >working models (>Terminology/Bowlby) are associated with negative appraisals of other people. Specifically, individuals scoring higher on attachment anxiety or avoidance have been found to hold a more negative view of human nature (Collins and Read 1990)(1), use more negative traits to describe relationship partners (e.g., Feeney and Noller 1991)(2), perceive these partners as less supportive and trustworthy (e.g., Collins and Read 1990(1); Davis, Morris and Kraus 1998(3)), and believe that their partners do not truly know them (Brennan and Bosson 1998(4)). Both anxiety and avoidance are also associated with negative expectations concerning a partner’s behaviour (e.g., Baldwin, Fehr, Keedian et al. 1993(5)).


1. Collins, N. L. and Read, S. J. 1990. Adult attachment, working models, and relationship quality in dating couples, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 58: 644–63
2. Feeney, J. A. and Noller, P. 1991. Attachment style and verbal descriptions of romantic partners, Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 8: 187–215
3. Davis, M. H., Morris, M. M. and Kraus, L. A. 1998. Relationship-specific and global perceptions of social support: associations with well-being and attachment, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 74: 468–81
4. Brennan, K. A. and Bosson, J. K. 1998. Attachment-style differences in attitudes toward and reactions to feedback from romantic partners: an exploration of the relational bases of self-esteem, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 24: 699–714
5. Baldwin, M. W., Fehr, B., Keedian, E., Seidel, M. and Thompson, D. W. 1993. An exploration of the relational schemata underlying attachment styles: self-report and lexical decision approaches, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 19: 746–54


Phillip R. Shaver and Mario Mikulincer, “Attachment theory: I. Motivational, individual-differences and structural aspects”, in: Corr, Ph. J. & Matthews, G. (eds.) 2009. The Cambridge Handbook of Personality Psychology. New York: Cambridge University Press


_____________
Explanation of symbols: Roman numerals indicate the source, arabic numerals indicate the page number. The corresponding books are indicated on the right hand side. ((s)…): Comment by the sender of the contribution.
The note [Author1]Vs[Author2] or [Author]Vs[term] is an addition from the Dictionary of Arguments. If a German edition is specified, the page numbers refer to this edition.
Attachment Theory
Corr I
Philip J. Corr
Gerald Matthews
The Cambridge Handbook of Personality Psychology New York 2009


Send Link
> Counter arguments against Attachment Theory
> Counter arguments in relation to Appraisal Theory

Authors A   B   C   D   E   F   G   H   I   J   K   L   M   N   O   P   Q   R   S   T   U   V   W   Z  


Concepts A   B   C   D   E   F   G   H   I   J   K   L   M   N   O   P   Q   R   S   T   U   V   W   Z  



Ed. Martin Schulz, access date 2019-02-17
Legal Notice   Contact   Data protection declaration