Assessing adult attachment: Relation and validity of two dynamic-maturational model approaches

Q2 Social Sciences

Interpersona Pub Date : 2018-12-21 DOI:10.5964/IJPR.V12I2.318

A. Pace, Rodger K Bufford

{"title":"Assessing adult attachment: Relation and validity of two dynamic-maturational model approaches","authors":"A. Pace, Rodger K Bufford","doi":"10.5964/IJPR.V12I2.318","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Assessing attachment is essential yet challenging. The Adult Attachment Interview (AAI) provides the best appraisal of adult attachment but is time-intensive and costly. Likewise, concerns have been raised regarding the Berkeley-AAI coding and classification method. Meanwhile, self-report measures of adult attachment are time-efficient and low-cost, but their validity is questionable. The Dynamic-Maturational Model approach to the AAI (DMM-AAI) and a novel self-report measure – the Attachment Relationship Questionaire (ARQ) – may offer a solution. However, additional investigations regarding the validity of DMM-AAI are needed and the ARQ’s psychometric properties have not be tested. The validity of the DMM approach to the AAI and the predictive relationship between the ARQ and DMM-AAI classification were examined for 212 participants living the UK. Results indicated a strong positive relationship between high numbered attachment classification on the DMM-AAI and psychological treatment status, χ²(6) = 56.07, p < .001; Cramer’s V = .371, p < .001. Binomial logistic regressions between the ARQ and DMM-AAI found both single-statement and multi-statement predictive models were statistically significant. However, the ARQ accounted for only a small amount of the variance (R² ≤ 0.15). In conclusion, the DMM-AAI demonstrated strong construct validity, whereas the ARQ is not useful for assessment of adult attachment. Further investigation with a revised version of the ARQ that addresses psychometric concerns is suggested.","PeriodicalId":37776,"journal":{"name":"Interpersona","volume":"324 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Interpersona","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5964/IJPR.V12I2.318","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 3

Abstract

Assessing attachment is essential yet challenging. The Adult Attachment Interview (AAI) provides the best appraisal of adult attachment but is time-intensive and costly. Likewise, concerns have been raised regarding the Berkeley-AAI coding and classification method. Meanwhile, self-report measures of adult attachment are time-efficient and low-cost, but their validity is questionable. The Dynamic-Maturational Model approach to the AAI (DMM-AAI) and a novel self-report measure – the Attachment Relationship Questionaire (ARQ) – may offer a solution. However, additional investigations regarding the validity of DMM-AAI are needed and the ARQ’s psychometric properties have not be tested. The validity of the DMM approach to the AAI and the predictive relationship between the ARQ and DMM-AAI classification were examined for 212 participants living the UK. Results indicated a strong positive relationship between high numbered attachment classification on the DMM-AAI and psychological treatment status, χ²(6) = 56.07, p < .001; Cramer’s V = .371, p < .001. Binomial logistic regressions between the ARQ and DMM-AAI found both single-statement and multi-statement predictive models were statistically significant. However, the ARQ accounted for only a small amount of the variance (R² ≤ 0.15). In conclusion, the DMM-AAI demonstrated strong construct validity, whereas the ARQ is not useful for assessment of adult attachment. Further investigation with a revised version of the ARQ that addresses psychometric concerns is suggested.

查看原文本刊更多论文

成人依恋评估:两种动态-成熟模型方法的关系与有效性

评估依恋是必要的，但也是具有挑战性的。成人依恋访谈(AAI)提供了对成人依恋的最佳评估，但耗时且昂贵。同样，对Berkeley-AAI编码和分类方法也提出了担忧。与此同时，成人依恋的自我报告测量是省时和低成本的，但其有效性值得怀疑。依恋关系的动态-成熟模型方法(DMM-AAI)和一种新的自我报告测量方法——依恋关系问卷(ARQ)可能提供一个解决方案。然而，关于DMM-AAI的有效性还需要进一步的研究，而ARQ的心理测量特性尚未得到测试。对居住在英国的212名参与者进行了DMM方法对AAI的有效性以及ARQ与DMM-AAI分类之间的预测关系的研究。结果显示，DMM-AAI依恋分类数高与心理治疗状态呈正相关，χ 2 (6) = 56.07, p < 0.001;Cramer’s V = .371, p < .001。ARQ和DMM-AAI之间的二项逻辑回归发现单语句和多语句预测模型具有统计学意义。然而，ARQ只占方差的一小部分(R²≤0.15)。综上所述，DMM-AAI具有较强的结构效度，而ARQ对成人依恋的评估不具有实用价值。建议对ARQ的修订版进行进一步调查，以解决心理测量学方面的问题。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Interpersona Social Sciences-Cultural Studies

CiteScore

1.00

自引率

0.00%

发文量

审稿时长

38 weeks

期刊介绍： 1) Interpersona aims at promoting scholarship in the field of interpersonal relationships based on different methodologies and stemming from several disciplines, including Psychology, Family Studies, Sociology, Anthropology, Communication Studies, Economics, Management Science, Biology, Health Sciences, History, and others. Interpersona aims at contributing to the collective construction of an Interpersonal Relationship Science. 2) Manuscripts examining a wide range of relationships, including close or intimate relationships and weak or temporary ties, are welcome. Some examples are indicated below: Biology - Biological foundations of human relationships: physiological and neurobiological phenomena related to interpersonal interactions. The evolutionary foundations of interpersonal relationships including comparative and animal studies of social interactions. Psychology and Family Studies: close or intimate relations including romantic relationships, family relationships and friendship. Family relationships encompass spouses, parents and children, siblings, and other relations among nuclear and extended family members.[...] 3) In addition to original empirical (qualitative or quantitative) research, theoretical or methodological contributions, integrative reviews, meta-analyses, comparative or historical studies, and critical assessments of the status of the field are welcome as submissions. 4) Interpersona is a totally free access journal and readers may read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles without any charge. All papers are peer-reviewed by members of the editorial board or ad-hoc reviewers under the supervision of an editor. [...] 5) All Interpersona content is available in full text with no charge. All submitted papers are reviewed by at least two referees before being accepted for publication.