Insecure Attachment and Emotion Dysregulation András Láng, MA Institute of Educational Psychology University of Pécs

Structure of the Presentation Introduction Introduction Attachment and Emotion Regulation Attachment and Emotion Regulation –Attachment and Alexithymia –Attachment and Anxiety Study Study –Method –Results Discussion Discussion

Introduction Bowlby and Ainsworth – attachment theory Bowlby and Ainsworth – attachment theory Framework for understanding personality development Framework for understanding personality development From 1980s adult attachment „boom” From 1980s adult attachment „boom”

Four-category bidimensional model of adult attachment Griffin & Bartholomew (1994) High avoidance Low avoidance Low anxiety High anxiety DISMISSIVE (+,-) SECURE (+,+) FEARFUL (-,-) PREOCCUPIED (-,+)

Attachment and Emotion Regulation I. Definition – Gross (1998, p. 275): „Emotion regulation refers to the process by which individuals influence which emotions they have, when they have them, and how they experience and expree these emotions.”

Attachment and Emotion Regulation II. Two of five aspects of the definition (in connection with attachment theory): This definition – self-regulation, BUT others highlight interpersonal regulation This definition – self-regulation, BUT others highlight interpersonal regulation Emotion regulation spectrum Emotion regulation spectrum –Controlled to unconscious

Attachment and Emotion Regulation III. Bowlby’s original interest in emotion and affect regulation: Investigation of species in emotionally important life situations (separation, loss etc.) – emotional situations Investigation of species in emotionally important life situations (separation, loss etc.) – emotional situations Protective function of attachment is not only survival but self-regulation (well- being) Protective function of attachment is not only survival but self-regulation (well- being)

Attachment and Emotion Regulation IV. For studying emotion regulation two constructs were chosen: Alexithymia Alexithymia Anxiety Anxiety

Attachment and alexithymia I. Parker et al. (1989) alexithymia as a normal (non-clinical) construct Parker et al. (1989) alexithymia as a normal (non-clinical) construct –Considered as a personality dimenision (trait) Definition: „construct that refers to emotion-relevant differences and is characterized by the following two core features: (a) difficulty identifying one’s feelings and distinguishing them from bodily sensations and (b) communicating one’s emotions to others” (Le et al., 2002) Definition: „construct that refers to emotion-relevant differences and is characterized by the following two core features: (a) difficulty identifying one’s feelings and distinguishing them from bodily sensations and (b) communicating one’s emotions to others” (Le et al., 2002)

Attachment and alexithymia II. Connection – men and PT Connection – men and PT Men tend to avoid psychological help seeking – mediated by traditional masculinity ideology & alexithymia Men tend to avoid psychological help seeking – mediated by traditional masculinity ideology & alexithymia Men in our culture mainly represent avoidant attachment Men in our culture mainly represent avoidant attachment → Hypothesis: connection between attachment avoidance and alexithymia

Attachment and anxiety I. Examining anxious states imoprtant for Bowlby – especially anxiety coming from separation Examining anxious states imoprtant for Bowlby – especially anxiety coming from separation Ainsworth and collegues (1978) Ainsworth and collegues (1978) –Strange Situation –Separation anxiety in both insecure groups –Two different ways to deal with anxiety

Attachment and anxiety II. Avoidant- supresses affects Avoidant- supresses affects - highly organized and rigid strategy - “deactivates” affects that would be disturbing for him Anxious - overwhelmed with affect Anxious - overwhelmed with affect - relative absence of structures for regulating affects - “hyperactivates” affects to assure comfort and care → Hypothesis: connection of anxiety with both dimensions, more strongly with attachment anxiety

Study – Method I. Participants –51 female and 39 male students (n=90) at University of Pécs –age from 18 to 31 yrs (M=21,6) Procedure –Self-report packages were distributed by lecturers in teacher training and were returned by students via internal mail. –90 out of 120 packages were returned

Study – Method II. INSTRUMENTS INSTRUMENTS Demographic Questionnaire Demographic Questionnaire - personal data - personal data - information on adult romantic relations Attachment dimensions Attachment dimensions ECR-S (Brennan et al., 1998) - two dimensions measured are in accordance with model of Griffin & Bartholomew (1994): –attachment avoidance –attachment anxiety

Study – Method III. Alexithymia Alexithymia TAS-20 (Bagby et al., 1994). This scale has three sub- scales: –difficulty describing feelings –difficulty identifying feelings –externally oriented thinking Anxiety Anxiety - 20 items regarding trait anxiety from STAI (Spielberger et al., 1970) to measure participants experience of anxiety as a personality trait. - Collection of 13 somatic symptoms of anxiety derived from DSM-IV (1994). Participants indicated frequency of bodily symptoms (e.g. headache). These scores intend to indicate a less conscious, more self-focused aspect of anxiety.

Study – Results I. Total Alexi- thymia Scores Alexithymia Subscales Vegetative Symptoms of Anxiety TraitAnxiety DifficultyDescribingFeelingsDifficultyIdentifyingFeelings Externally Oriented Thinking Attachment Avoidance r=0,437p<0,001r=0,449p<0,001r=0,184n.s.r=0,258p<0,05r=0,095n.s.r=0,225p<0,05 Attachment Anxiety r=0,277p<0,01r=0,219p<0,05r=0,413p<0,001r=0,06n.s.r=0,304p<0,0050,510p<0,001

Study – Results II. ATTACHMENT AVOIDANCE correlated with: Alexithymia (TAS-20) total scores Alexithymia (TAS-20) total scores Difficulty Describing Feelings (TAS-20 subscale) Difficulty Describing Feelings (TAS-20 subscale) Externally Oriented Thinking (TAS-20 subscale) Externally Oriented Thinking (TAS-20 subscale) Trait Anxiety scores of STAI Trait Anxiety scores of STAI ATTACHMENT ANXIETY correlated with: Alexithymia (TAS-20) total scores Alexithymia (TAS-20) total scores Difficulty Describing Feelings (TAS-20 subscale) Difficulty Describing Feelings (TAS-20 subscale) Difficulty Identifying Feelings (TAS-20 subscale) Difficulty Identifying Feelings (TAS-20 subscale) Trait Anxiety scores of STAI Trait Anxiety scores of STAI Somatic Symptoms of Anxiety scores Somatic Symptoms of Anxiety scores

Limitations Non-clinical subjects Non-clinical subjects Methodological restraints Methodological restraints –Self-report questionnaire – conscious emotion regulation strategies –Correlational statistics – no casual relations

Discussion I. Both attachment dimensions ~ alexithymia → both connected with problems in dealing with emotions Both attachment dimensions ~ alexithymia → both connected with problems in dealing with emotions Different subscale patterns → different sources of emotion regulation problems Different subscale patterns → different sources of emotion regulation problems Attachment avoidance ~ externally oriented thinking → not only avoidance of anxiety rising from IP relations, BUT avoidance of emotions at all, since distracting from everyday life. Attachment avoidance ~ externally oriented thinking → not only avoidance of anxiety rising from IP relations, BUT avoidance of emotions at all, since distracting from everyday life. Attachment anxiety ~ difficulties in appropriatly identifying feelings → anxious persons seem to be concerned with feelings and emotions, problem is filtering. Attachment anxiety ~ difficulties in appropriatly identifying feelings → anxious persons seem to be concerned with feelings and emotions, problem is filtering. Both findings in accordance with AAI theory Both findings in accordance with AAI theory

Discussion II. Both avoidant and anxious ~ trait anxiety only anxious ~ somatic symptoms Both avoidant and anxious ~ trait anxiety only anxious ~ somatic symptoms Difference = possible different attribution of source of anxiety Difference = possible different attribution of source of anxiety Avoidant – external (e.g. IP relations) Avoidant – external (e.g. IP relations) Anxious – internal (bodily symptoms) Anxious – internal (bodily symptoms) Avoidance = better mental health, since external sources easier avoidable → adaptive strategy in adulthood Avoidance = better mental health, since external sources easier avoidable → adaptive strategy in adulthood Anxiety – dependence = struggle for a regulating partner ← mutual dyadic sources of self- regulation (Beebe & Lachmann, 2002). Anxiety – dependence = struggle for a regulating partner ← mutual dyadic sources of self- regulation (Beebe & Lachmann, 2002).

Discussion III. Methodological perspective – answer for a long debate? Methodological perspective – answer for a long debate? AAI categories = categories obtained from self-report measures ? AAI categories = categories obtained from self-report measures ? These findings are one more argument on the side of those who suggest that the overlap is notable. These findings are one more argument on the side of those who suggest that the overlap is notable.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION!