IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v17y2020i20p7648-d431816.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Fostering Attachment Security: The Role of Interdependent Situations

Author

Listed:
  • Francesca Righetti

    (Department of Experimental and Applied Psychology, VU Amsterdam, 1081BT Amsterdam, The Netherlands)

  • Daniel Balliet

    (Department of Experimental and Applied Psychology, VU Amsterdam, 1081BT Amsterdam, The Netherlands)

  • Catherine Molho

    (Institute for Advanced Study in Toulouse, 31080 Toulouse, France)

  • Simon Columbus

    (Department of Psychology, University of Copenhagen, 1353 Copenhagen, Denmark)

  • Ruddy Faure

    (Department of Experimental and Applied Psychology, VU Amsterdam, 1081BT Amsterdam, The Netherlands)

  • Yaprak Bahar

    (Department of Experimental and Applied Psychology, VU Amsterdam, 1081BT Amsterdam, The Netherlands)

  • Muhammad Iqmal

    (Department of Experimental and Applied Psychology, VU Amsterdam, 1081BT Amsterdam, The Netherlands)

  • Anna Semenchenko

    (Department of Experimental and Applied Psychology, VU Amsterdam, 1081BT Amsterdam, The Netherlands)

  • Ximena Arriaga

    (Department of Psychological Sciences, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN 47907-2081, USA)

Abstract

This work adopts an Interdependence Theory framework to investigate how the features of interdependent situations that couples face in their daily life (i.e., situations in which partners influence each other’s outcomes) shape attachment security toward their current partners. An experience sampling study examined attachment tendencies and features of interdependent situations that people experience with their partner in daily life to predict satisfaction and trust in their relationship, and changes in attachment avoidance and anxiety toward their partner over time. Results revealed that encountering situations with corresponding outcomes (i.e., situations in which both partners have the same preferences) and with information certainty (i.e., situations in which there is clear knowledge of each partner’s preferences) assuage people’s insecurity. On the contrary, situations of mutual current and future interdependence (i.e., situations in which each person’s current or future outcomes are dependent on their partner’s behavior) undermined security for anxiously attached individuals. Power (i.e., the asymmetry in partners’ dependence) was not related to attachment security. This work underscores the importance of studying the role of the situations that partners experience in their daily life and the way they are related to relationship feelings and cognitions.

Suggested Citation

  • Francesca Righetti & Daniel Balliet & Catherine Molho & Simon Columbus & Ruddy Faure & Yaprak Bahar & Muhammad Iqmal & Anna Semenchenko & Ximena Arriaga, 2020. "Fostering Attachment Security: The Role of Interdependent Situations," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(20), pages 1-13, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:20:p:7648-:d:431816
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/20/7648/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/20/7648/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Simon Columbus & Catherine Molho & Francesca Righetti & Daniel Balliet, 2021. "Interdependence and cooperation in daily life," Post-Print hal-03169758, HAL.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Arno Riedl & Ingrid M. T. Rohde & Martin Strobel, 2021. "Free Neighborhood Choice Boosts Socially Optimal Outcomes in Stag-Hunt Coordination Problem," CESifo Working Paper Series 9012, CESifo.
    2. repec:cup:judgdm:v:16:y:2021:i:4:p:823-843 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Anthony M. Evans & Christoph Kogler & Willem W. A. Sleegers, 2021. "No effects of synchronicity in online social dilemma experiments: A registered report," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 16(4), pages 823-843, July.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:20:p:7648-:d:431816. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.