Attachment to God Predicts Self-Control and Self-Regulation Emma C. Deihl, David M. Njus, and Nathan Abbott Luther College Presented at the 2019 Annual Meeting of the Midwestern Psychological Association, Chicago, IL Self-control refers to the ability to override a dominant response in a given situation—such as refraining from the temptation to lash out toward someone who has slighted you. Self-regulation involves self-control in a longer-term context—one monitors and alters one’s behaviors to accomplish a longer-term goal, such as working toward a desired career. Previous research suggests attachment as a factor that may strengthen one’s levels of self-control and self-regulation. Those with secure attachment relationships, who receive consistent and adequate support from their attachment figures, are more likely to have higher levels of self-control and self-regulation than those with insecure attachment relationships (Orehek, Vazeou-Niewuwenhuis, Quick, & Weaverling, 2017). Kirkpatrick (2005) proposed that for theists, a representation of God can serve as an attachment figure—a safe haven in times of distress and a secure base from which one can venture into the world. He further proposed that the two dimensions of adult attachment (anxiety and avoidance) also apply to the attachment relationship with God. The present study explores whether God attachment is related to self-control and specifically whether God attachment explains variability in self-control beyond that accounted for by adult attachment. four adult attachment variables (anxious and avoidant attachment to romantic partner and friend) were entered in Step 1, and anxious and avoidant God attachment were entered in Step 2. As can be seen in Table 2, adult attachment did not account for a significant amount of variability in self-control. The overall regression equation was significant when God attachment was added in Step 2, and God attachment accounted for an additional 4.8% of the variability in self-control, which approached traditional levels of statistical significance (p < .06). Table 3 shows results from the regression on self-regulation scores. Adult attachment accounted for a significant amount of variability in self-regulation (9.1%). Adding God attachment in Step 2 accounted for an additional, significant 6.8% of variability. Discussion Both self-control and self-regulation were negatively correlated with anxious attachment in romantic relationships and anxious attachment in friendships. Self-control and self-regulation were also negatively correlated with God attachment avoidance, but only self-regulation was negatively associated with God attachment anxiety. Of more importance for the present research, God attachment explained variability in self-control and self-regulation after controlling for romantic and friendship attachment. Specifically, God attachment avoidance was negatively related to both self-control and self-regulation after controlling for adult attachment. Zell and Baumeister (2013) assert that religiosity is positively associated with elements of self-control. In addition to providing a clear standard of right and wrong that can guide behavior, religion facilitates monitoring of behaviors and the development of the willpower and motivation to control one’s behavior. Individuals securely attached to God may have developed greater self-control and self-regulation of their behavior based on years of a relationship with a deity with whom they feel a close connection. The present study provides evidence that God attachment has a relationship with self-control and self-regulation that is unique and distinct from the relationship that adult attachment has with those two variables. Subsequent research should explore the degree to which these relationships hold in more diverse, non-student populations. Table 1. Pearson Product-Moment Correlation Coefficients 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1. Self-Control --   2. Self-Regulation .73** 3. Romantic Anxiety -.28** -.29*** 4. Romantic Avoidance -.02 -.15 .38*** 5. Friend Anxiety -.26** -.19* .47*** .29*** 6. Friend Avoidance -.08 -.10 .20* .48*** .53*** 7. ATG Anxiety -.21* .32*** .10 .27** .23* 8. ATG Avoidance -.29** .08 .18 .07 .01 *p < .05 **p < .01 ***p < .001 Method Participants Participants were recruited from psychology courses at a private, liberal arts college in the Midwest and received course credit for participating. After eliminating non-theists and participants who failed the attention/lie scales, subjects included 87 females and 28 males ranging in age from 17 to 24 ( 𝑋 = 18.9). Most participants (98.2%) identified as Christian. Measures Attachment. Subjects completed the Experiences in Close Relationships-Relationship Structures questionnaire (ECR-RS; Fraley, Heffernan, Vicary, & Brumbaugh, 2011), which taps avoidant and anxious attachment to one’s best friend and romantic partner. Subjects also completed the Attachment to God Inventory (AGI; Beck & McDonald, 2004), which measures avoidant and anxious attachment to God using two 14-item subscales. Self-Control and Self-Regulation. The Brief Self-Control Scale (Maloney, Grawitch, & Barber, 2012) is a 13-item measure of self-control. Participants rated each item on a 1 (not at all like me) to 5 (very much like me) scale. The Short Self-Regulation Scale (Neal & Carey, 2005) consists of 21 items, and subjects rated self-regulation items on a 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) scale. References Beck, R., & McDonald, A. (2004). Attachment to God: The Attachment to God Inventory, tests of working model correspondence, and an exploration of faith group differences. Journal of Psychology and Theology, 32(2), 92-103. Fraley, R. C., Heffernan, M. E., Vicary, A. M., & Brumbaugh, C. C. (2011). The Experiences in Close Relationships-Relationship Structures questionnaire: A method for assessing attachment orient- ations across relationships. Psychological Assessment, 23, 615-625. Kirkpatrick, L. A. (2005). Attachment, evolution, and the psychology of religion. Guilford Press. Maloney, P.W., Grawitch, M.J., & Barber, L. K.  (2012).  The multi- factor structure of the Brief Self-Control Scale:  Discriminant validity of restraint and impulsivity. Journal of Research in Personality, 46, 111-115. Neal, D. J., & Carey, K.B. (2005). A follow-up psychometric analysis of the Self-Regulation Questionnaire. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 19, 414-422. Orehek, E., Vazeou-Nieuwenhuis, A., Quick, E., & Weaverling, G. C. (2017). Attachment and self-regulation. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 43(3), 365-380. Zell, A. L., & Baumeister, R. F. (2013). How religion can support self- control and moral behavior. In R. F. Paloutzian and C. L. Park, (Eds.), Handbook of the Psychology of Religion and Spirituality (2nd Ed.) (pp. 498-516). New York: Guilford Press. Table 2. Variance Accounted for in Self-Control R2 ∆R2 Subscale Beta Equation F ∆R2 F Step 1 .07 Romantic Anx. -.17 2.06 Romantic Avd. .008 Friend Anxiety -.197 Friend Avoid. .069 Step 2 .118* .048† God Anxiety -.149 2.41* 2.94† God Avoid. -.175† †p < .06 *p < .05 Table 3. Variance Accounted for in Self-Regulation R2 ∆R2 Subscale Beta Equation F ∆R2 F Step 1 .091* Romantic Anx. -.168 2.77* Romantic Avd. -.166 Friend Anxiety -.062 Friend Avoid. .017 Step 2 .159** .068* God Anxiety -.081 3.41** 4.37* God Avoid. -.256** *p < .05 **p < .01 Results Correlations among study variables are presented in Table 1. Two hierarchical multiple regression analyses were performed, one on self-control and one on self-regulation. In each analysis, the