Relationship between general and context-specific attachment orientations in a Turkish sample

Journal of Social Psychology

Volumn 146, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 261-274

  Imamoǧlu, Selen ^a   Olcay Imamoglu E ^b  

^a BAHCESEHIR UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

^b MIDDLE EAST TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

Author keywords

Family, peer, and romantic contexts; General and context specific attachment; Turkish university students

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ARTICLE; FAMILY; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN RELATION; MALE; OBJECT RELATION; PEER GROUP; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; QUESTIONNAIRE; STUDENT; TURKEY (REPUBLIC);

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; FAMILY; FEMALE; HUMANS; INTERPERSONAL RELATIONS; MALE; OBJECT ATTACHMENT; PEER GROUP; QUESTIONNAIRES; STUDENTS; TURKEY;

EID: 33745785452     PISSN: 00224545     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3200/SOCP.146.3.261-274     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Ainsworth, M. D. S. (1989). Attachments beyond infancy. American Psychologist, 44, 709-716.
2. Baldwin, M. W., Keelan, J. P. R., Fehr, B., Enns, V., & Koh-Rangarajoo, E. (1996). Socialcognitive conceptualization of attachment working models: Availability and accessibility effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 94-109.
3. Bartholomew, K. (1993). From childhood to adult relationships: Attachment theory and research. In S. Duck (Ed.), Learning about relationships (pp. 30-62). London: Sage.
4. Bartholomew, K., & Horowitz, L. M. (1991). Attachment styles among young adults: A test of a four-category model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 226-244.
5. Berlin, L. J., & Cassidy, J. (1999). Relations among relationships: Contributions from attachment theory and research. In J. Cassidy & P. R. Shaver (Eds.), Handbook of attachment: Theory, research, and clinical applications (pp. 688-712). New York: Guilford.
6. Bowlby, J. (1982). Attachment and loss: Vol. I. Attachment. New York: Basic Books. (Original work published 1969.)
7. Collins, N. L., & Read, S. J. (1994). Cognitive representations of attachment: The structure and function of working models. In K. Bartholomew & D. Perlman (Eds.), Advances in personal relationships (Vol. 5, pp. 53-90). London: Jessica Kingsley.
8. Cozzarelli, C., Hoekstra, S. J., & Bylsma, W. H. (2000). General versus specific mental models of attachment: Are they associated with different outcomes? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 605-618.
9. Crowell, J. A., Fraley, R. C., & Shaver, P. R. (1999). Measurement of individual differ ences in adolescent and adult attachment. In J. Cassidy & P. R. Shaver (Eds.), Handbook of attachment: Theory, research, and clinical applications (pp. 434-465). New York: Guilford.
10. Freeman, M. A. (1997). Demographic correlates of individualism and collectivism: A study of social values in Sri Lanka. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 28, 321-341.
11. Furman, W., Simon, V. A., Shaffer, L., & Bouchey, H. A. (2002). Adolescents' working models and styles for relationships with parents, friends, and romantic partners. Child Development, 73, 241-255.
12. Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. (1987). Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 511-524.
13. Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture's consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
14. Imamoǧlu, E. O. (2003). Individuation and relatedness: Not opposing but distinct and complementary. Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs, 129, 367-402.
15. Imamoǧlu, E. O., Küller, R., Imamoǧlu, V., & Küller, M. (1993). Social psychological worlds of Swedes and Turks in and around retirement. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 24, 26-41.
16. Kobak, R. (1994). Adult attachment: A personality or relationship construct? Psychological Inquiry, 5, 42-44.
17. LaGuardia, J. G., Ryan, R. M., Couchman, C. E., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Within-person variation in security of attachment: A self-determination theory perspective on attachment, need fulfillment, and well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 367-384.
18. Lewis, M. (1994). Does attachment imply a relationship or multiple relationships? Psychological Inquiry, 5, 47-51.
19. Main, M. (1990). Cross-cultural studies of attachment organization: Recent studies, changing methodologies, and the concept of conditional strategies. Human Development, 33, 48-61.
20. Mikulincer, M., & Arad, D. (1999). Attachment working models and cognitive openness in close relationships: A test of chronic and temporary accessibility effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 710-725.
21. Ross, L. R., & Spinner, B. (2001). General and specific attachment representations in adulthood: Is there a relationship? Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 18, 747-766.
22. Rothbaum, F., Weisz, J., Pott, M., Miyake, K., & Morelli, G. (2000). Attachment and culture: Security in the United States and Japan. American Psychologist, 55, 1093-1104.
23. Sümer, N., & Güngör, D. (1999). Yetişkin baǧlanma stilleri ölçeklerinin Türk örneklemi üzerinde psikometrik deǧerlendirmesi ve kültürlerarasi bir karşilaştirma. (Psychometric evaluation of adult attachment measures on Turkish samples and a cross-cultural comparison). Turk Psikoloji Dergisi (Turkish Journal of Psychology), 14, 71-109.
24. Trinke, S. J., & Bartholomew, K. (1997). Hierarchies of attachment relationships in young adulthood. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 14, 603-625.
25. Van Ijzendoorn, M. H., & Sagi, A. (1999). Cross-cultural patterns of attachment: Universal and contextual dimensions. In J. Cassidy & P. R. Shaver (Eds.), Handbook of attachment: Theory, research, and clinical applications (pp. 434-465). New York: Guilford.