中華心理衛生協會

Purpose: Bartholomew has integrated Bowlby's theory of internal working models in a four category classification scheme. Four prototypical adult attachment styles were measured in this study, including secure, preoccupied, fearful, and dismissing attachment styles. However, in the past, most of adult attachment researches ignored the difference between with-specific-object and without-specific-object measures. Therefore, the past results of adult attachment category had been criticized their over-evaluated or underevaluated trend. This study attempted to compare the difference between the two ways of measuring the adult attachment styles: relationship character approach (with specific objects, e.g., father, mother, or a dating partner) and individual character approach (without specific objects). Based on the hypothetical continuum of adult attachment (Bartholomew & Shaver, 1998) and the model of attachment transfer processes (Hazan & Shaver, 1994), this study also tried to investigate the one-way continuum correlation between the results of the different measurements, and the correlation among the results from dating relationship attachment styles, individual attachment styles, and parental attachment styles. The figure of hypothetical continuum of adult attachment indicated that when appropriate comparisons were drawn, one would find considerable evidence for convergence across various measures of adult attachment. This study supposed that the results of the measurements of adult attachment category with specific objects would be different from the measurements of adult attachment category without specific objects. Besides, according to the model of attachment transfer processes, the results of category in parental attachment styles would be positive correlated with the results of category in dating relationship attachment styles, and the results of category in parental attachment styles would be also positive correlated with the results of category in personal attachment styles. Methods: The study sample consisted of 185 college students, including 59 males and 125 females, and their average age was 19.95 years. None of them were from single family, and 61.6% students were living with their parents. Bartholomew's paragraph-long description form was used to categorize adult attachment styles. In addition, we conducted chi-square test and MDS to analyze the data. Results: First, there were differences between the results of the measurements of adult attachment category with specific objects and the measurements of adult attachment without specific objects. Second, the hypothetical continuum of adult attachment measures was not supported by MDS. Finally, there were positive correlations between dating relationship attachment styles and parental attachment styles, and between personal attachment styles and parental attachment styles. Conclusions: The article concluded with a discussion of unclear questions about adult attachment that rose from various measurement perspectives. First, this study supported that insecure parental attachment would be over-evaluated if without specific-object measurement of attachment styles was used to measure with-specific-object attachment styles. There is no 'best choice' between the two measured approaches. If one adult attachment research investigates specific situation (e.g., love relationship, peer relationship, mentor relationship, or parental relationship), the research will suggest that the way of measuring the adult attachment styles should use relationship character approach (with specific objects). Second, according to the model of attachment transfer processes, attachment style in personal character and in dating relationship were both positive correlate with attachment styles in parental relationships. More specifically, the insecure attachment style in personal character was positive related to the insecure attachment style in parental attachment, and the secure style in dating relationship was positive related to the secure style in parental attachment. In addition, implication for adult attachment measures in adult relationships was discussed. Research limitation was also explicated.