ArticlePDF Available

Attachment Theory and Concern for Others'Welfare: Evidence That Activation of the Sense of Secure Base Promotes Endorsement of Self-Transcendence Values

Authors:

Abstract

Three studies examined the effects of chronic and contextual activation of the sense of having a secure base on the endorsement of self-transcendence values. The sense of secure base was primed by asking Israeli undergraduates to recollect personal memories or watch a pictorial representation of supportive others, and this condition was compared against the priming of attachment-unrelated positive affect and the priming of neutral issues. Then, participants reported on the importance of two self-transcendence values-benevolence and universalism (Studies 1-2)-or spontaneously generated their most important values (Study 3). In addition, the chronic sense of attachment security was assessed along the dimensions of avoidance and anxiety. Secure-base priming and lower scores of attachment avoidance were significantly associated with heightened endorsement of self-transcendence values. These effects could not be explained by induced or reported mood. The findings emphasize the relevance of attachment theory for understanding reactions to others' needs and value orientation.
Attachment theory (Bowlby, 1969, 1973) is viewed as a valid
conceptual framework for explaining variations in mental
health, emotion regulation, and interpersonal relations. Re-
search has found that the sense of having a secure base (ex-
pectations that significant others would be available and sup-
portive in times of need) seems to be a crucial factor
underlying emotions, cognitions, goals, and behaviors in in-
terpersonal situations (see Feeney, 1999 for a review). There
is also evidence that this sense of attachment security is
closely associated with a person’s concern for others’ wel-
fare, caregiving behaviors, and support provision to relation-
ship partners (e.g., Collins & Feeney, 2000; Kunce & Shaver,
1994). In the series of studies reported here, we follow this
line of research and examine whether the observed link be-
tween the sense of attachment security and positive reactions
to others’ needs is manifested in the endorsement of global,
prosocial values. Specifically, we examine the effects of the
chronic and contextual activation of the sense of having a se-
cure base on the endorsement of self-transcendence values—
values that motivate people to transcend their own personal
interests and to protect/enhance the welfare of others
(Schwartz, 1992, 1994).
ATTACHMENT THEORY AND RESEARCH
According to Bowlby’s theory (Bowlby, 1969, 1973), the at-
tachment system is phylogenetically designed to maintain
proximity to significant others (attachment figures) as a
means for dealing with stress-inducing events and managing
distress. These figures function as a “haven of safety” that
individuals search for support and relief in times of stress as
well as a “secure base” from which they can explore the
world and pursue other attachment-unrelated goals. Bowlby
(1988) assumed that the attachment system is active over the
entire life span and manifested in proximity-related thoughts
and behaviors during interpersonal interactions.
In terms of attachment theory (Bowlby, 1973, 1988), in-
teractions with significant others who are available and
supportive in times of stress facilitates the formation of a
cognitive-affective schema labeled the “sense of secure
base” or “attachment security”. This cognitive construct con-
tains declarative information about the self and others in
BASIC AND APPLIED SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 25(4), 299–312
Copyright © 2003, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Attachment Theory and Concern for Others’ Welfare:
Evidence That Activation of the Sense of Secure Base
Promotes Endorsement of Self-Transcendence Values
Mario Mikulincer, Omri Gillath, Yael Sapir-Lavid, Erez Yaakobi,
Keren Arias, Liron Tal-Aloni, and Gili Bor
Department of Psychology
Bar-Ilan University
Three studies examined the effects of chronic and contextual activation of the sense of having
a secure base on the endorsement of self-transcendence values. The sense of secure base was
primed by asking Israeli undergraduates to recollect personal memories or watch a pictorial
representation of supportive others, and this condition was compared against the priming of at-
tachment-unrelated positive affect and the priming of neutral issues. Then, participants re-
ported on the importance of two self-transcendence values—benevolence and universalism
(Studies 1–2)—or spontaneously generated their most important values (Study 3). In addition,
the chronic sense of attachment security was assessed along the dimensions of avoidance and
anxiety. Secure-base priming and lower scores of attachment avoidance were significantly as-
sociated with heightened endorsement of self-transcendence values. These effects could not be
explained by induced or reported mood. The findings emphasize the relevance of attachment
theory for understanding reactions to others’ needs and value orientation.
Requests for reprints should be sent to Mario Mikulincer, Department
of Psychology, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan 52900, Israel. E-mail:
mikulm@mail.biu.ac.il
stress-inducing situations and procedural rules organized as
an interpersonal script (Waters, Rodrigues, & Ridgeway,
1998). The script is assumed to consist of the following if-
then propositions: “If I encounter an obstacle and/or become
distressed, I can approach a significant other for help; he or
she is likely to be available and supportive; I will experience
relief and comfort as a result of proximity to this person; I
can then return to other activities.Attachment theory and
research suggest that this sense of attachment security en-
hances well-being, promotes effective support-seeking in
times of need, sustains positive “working models” of self and
others, encourages curiosity, openness and exploration, and
fosters interaction goals organized around closeness and in-
terdependence (e.g., Collins & Read, 1994; Mikulincer &
Florian, 2001; Shaver & Hazan, 1993).
Although the sense of having a secure base may be quite
global and stable and may reflect a person’s history of inter-
actions with attachment figures, meaningful interactions
with a specific partner might affect his or her beliefs about
others’ availability and supportiveness (e.g., Baldwin, Keelan,
Fehr, Enns, & Koh Rangarajoo, 1996; Mikulincer & Arad,
1999). In fact, people could develop a relationship-specific
sense of secure base organized around actual experiences
with a supportive partner, even if this within-relationship
schema does not necessarily fit with a more general, chronic
sense of not having a secure base (Collins & Read, 1994).
Moreover, the sense of having a secure base can be contextu-
ally activated by actual or imagined encounters with available
and supportive others, even among persons who have chronic
doubts about their secure base (e.g., Baldwin, 1992; Mikulincer,
Birnbaum, Woddis, & Nachmias, 2000).
A large number of studies have examined the psycholog-
ical effects of the sense of having a secure base in adulthood.
These studies have been guided by two research strategies.
The first and most frequently used strategy is to assess a per-
son’s chronic and global sense of secure base. Specifically,
this line of research has focused on a person’s attachment
style—stable patterns of relational cognitions and behaviors—
and has compared persons who report a secure style with
those who report more insecure styles (see Feeney, 1999 for
a review). In these studies, a secure style reflects a positive
history of attachment interactions and the internalization of
the sense of having a secure base. In contrast, attachment in-
security reflects a negative history of attachment interactions
and doubts about the sense of having a secure base, which
seems to be organized around two basic dimensions—
avoidance and anxiety (Brennan, Clark, & Shaver, 1998).
Whereas attachment avoidance refers to negative views of
others and a tendency to avoid closeness and dependency, at-
tachment anxiety refers to negative views of the self and a
tendency to worry about abandonment. Although this strat-
egy has contributed to the understanding of attachment-style
differences, it is correlational in nature and has aroused
controversy concerning measurement issues (e.g., Brennan
et al., 1998).
The second strategy is to examine the psychological ef-
fects of the contextual activation of what might be called the
secure base schema (e.g., Baldwin, 1994; Pierce & Lydon,
1998). This line of research is guided by basic principles of
cognitive psychology and relies on well-validated priming
techniques. Despite the problem of artificiality, inherent in
laboratory research, it allows testing cause-effect links in
well-controlled settings, at the same time avoiding problems
related to the measurement of attachment style. In these
studies, we adopted a combination of the two research
strategies, taking advantage of the strengths of each as well
as compensating for the limitations of either strategy used
alone.
Several studies have provided extensive support to the hy-
pothesis that the sense of a secure base is positively related
to psychological well-being and support seeking. Studies us-
ing self-reports of attachment style have found that persons
endorsing a secure style react to stressful events with lower
levels of reported distress and higher reliance on support-
seeking strategies than persons who score high on either at-
tachment avoidance or anxiety (see Mikulincer & Florian,
1998, 2001 for reviews). Accordingly, studies in which the
sense of secure base has been contextually activated have
shown that subliminal exposure to semantic or pictorial rep-
resentations of the secure base schema, guided imagination
of a prototypical secure base script, or visualization of a sup-
portive other increases positive affect, attenuates negative af-
fect in stressful situations, and promotes support-seeking
(e.g., Mikulincer, Hirschberger, Nachmias, & Gillath, 2001;
Mikulincer & Shaver, in press; Pierce & Lydon, 1998).
Adult attachment studies have also supported the hypoth-
esized association between the sense of a secure base and
perceptions of others and the self. Secure persons perceive
others more positively than persons scoring high on attach-
ment avoidance, hold more positive expectations about their
partners, and explain partner behaviors in more positive
terms (e.g., Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991; Collins, 1996;
Hazan & Shaver, 1987). Attachment-style differences in
self-image have also been found, with secure persons report-
ing more positive self-views than persons scoring high on at-
tachment anxiety (e.g., Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991;
Mikulincer, 1998). Compatible with these findings, contex-
tual priming of the secure base schema causes people to per-
ceive relationship partners in more positive terms (Mikulincer
& Arad, 1999), to react in a less negative manner to out-
group members (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2001) and to make
more positive self-evaluations (Baldwin, 1994).
It is important to mention that Pierce and Lydon (1998),
Mikulincer and Arad (1999), and Mikulincer and Shaver
(2001) found no significant interaction between secure-base
priming and attachment style in affecting emotional re-
sponses, representations of others, and reactions to out-
group members. That is, attachment style did not affect sus-
ceptibility to the contextual activation of the sense of secure
base. In fact, such activation produced similar responses in
300 MIKULINCER ET AL.
persons who had reported high or low attachment anxiety
and avoidance in close relationships.
ATTACHMENT THEORY AND CONCERN FOR
OTHER’S WELFARE
Attachment theory also suggests that the sense of secure
base is highly relevant for understanding individual varia-
tions in concern for others’ welfare. In his classic book on at-
tachment and loss, Bowlby (1969) viewed this concern
as part of a psychoevolutionary system—the caregiving
system— that is designed to provide help and comfort to
others in times of need. Bowlby (1969) also contended that
attachment theory provides an ideal framework for studying
concern for other’s welfare, because distress-regulation and
the need for sensitive care are core components of both the
attachment and caregiving systems. Along this reasoning,
Collins and Feeney (2000) argued that if the sense of secure
base affects the ways people maintain or restore their own
welfare, it should also have implications for the ways people
regulate others’ welfare. Accordingly, if the sense of secure
base includes information about the likelihood of receiving
care from others, it should also be related to beliefs about
providing care to others.
Although Bowlby did not delineate the specific links be-
tween the attachment and caregiving systems, his ideas about
the dynamic interplay of behavioral systems provide a con-
ceptual framework for formulating tentative hypotheses
about the association between attachment security and con-
cern for others’ welfare. Bowlby (1969) argued that the expe-
rience of distress and the disruption of the sense of attach-
ment security activates the attachment system and inhibits
other behavioral systems (e.g., affiliation, exploration, care-
giving). In this case, people mainly turn to others in search
for support and they are occupied with regulating their own
distress. As a result they have less available resources for en-
gaging in affiliation, exploration, and/or caregiving activities.
However, when relief is attained and the sense of secure base
is restored, people could direct attention and energy to other
activities, and, then, could perceive others as partners for af-
filiation or exploration activities or as needing help and care.
Along this reasoning, one can hypothesize that variations
in attachment security would be manifested in concern for
others’ welfare. On one hand, persons who hold a chronic
sense of secure base or persons whose sense of secure base
is contextually activated in a specific situation would have
more available resources to attend to others’ needs and to
provide adequate help and care. These persons would per-
ceive others not only as a source of security and support, but
also as human beings that may need help and comfort. On
the other hand, doubts about having a secure base may in-
hibit concern for others’ welfare. Insecurely attached per-
sons may be so egoistically self-focused on their own attach-
ment needs and distress that they may lack the necessary
resources to attend to others’ needs and to engage in caring
behaviors. Moreover, they may hold negative views of others
(Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991), which may inhibit the
perception of others as deserving help and care.
This basic hypothesis has received extensive support in
studies examining parental responsiveness to children’s
needs. Using the Adult Attachment Interview, Crowell and
Feldman (1988, 1991) found that securely attached mothers
displayed more caring and supportive responses to their
preschool child’s needs in laboratory-structured interactions
than insecure mothers. This finding was replicated among
mothers of behaviorally disturbed children (Crowell,
O’Connor, Wollmers, & Sprafkin, 1991) and extended to
maternal sensitivity of infants’ needs (e.g., Haft & Slade,
1989; Ward & Carson, 1995) and to fathers’ responses to
their child’s needs (e.g., Cohn, Cowan, Cowan, & Pearson,
1992; Pearson, Cohn, Cowan, & Cowan, 1994). Using a self-
report measure of attachment style, Rholes, Simpson, and
Blakely (1995) found that mothers’ secure attachment was
positively related to the amount of support they provided to
their child in a teaching task.
Conceptually parallel findings have been found in studies
examining reactions to a romantic partner’s needs. Specifi-
cally, self-reports of attachment security have been found to
be significantly associated with relatively high levels of re-
ported sensitivity and responsiveness to a romantic partner’s
needs (e.g., Carnelley, Pietromonaco, & Jaffe, 1996; Feeney,
1996; Kunce & Shaver, 1994). In observational studies,
Simpson, Rholes, and Nelligan (1992) and Rholes, Simpson,
and Orina (1999) found that securely attached men provided
more support to a female dating partner in an anxiety-
inducing situation than insecure men. This finding was repli-
cated among dating couples that were videotaped while
discussing stressful events (Collins & Feeney, 2000) as well
as in a field study of couples separating at an airport (Fraley
& Shaver, 1998).
THE CURRENT STUDIES
The current studies follow this line of research and explore
the link between secure attachment and concern for others’
welfare, while dealing with basic limitations of previous
studies and extending this link to another relevant, but not
yet explored, psychological territory. One basic problem of
previous studies is that they did not attempt to contextually
activate the sense of having a secure base. As a result, they
could not provide any evidence on the possible causal effects
of attachment security on concern for others’ welfare. In
fact, this concern may have positive psychological outcomes
(Cialdini et al., 1987), and then the sense of attachment se-
curity may be a consequence rather than an antecedent of a
sensitive attitude towards others’ needs. Moreover, these
studies could not provide any evidence that the sense of se-
cure base was active before and/or during the assessment of
ATTACHMENT SECURITY AND SELF-TRANSCENDENCE VALUES 301
the dependent variables. Hence, the observed effects can be
explained by factors other than the sense of a secure base. In
attempting to overcome this limitation, we would assess at-
tachment style and manipulate the accessibility of the sense
of secure base, providing the opportunity to examine the
unique and interactive effects of chronic and contextual acti-
vation of attachment security on concern for others’ welfare.
Another limitation of past studies is that they have exclu-
sively focused on reactions to the needs of a specific rela-
tionship partner (offspring or romantic partner). No data
have been collected on global concern for the welfare of peo-
ple, even if they are not relationship partners. Thus it is pos-
sible that the reviewed findings reflect the closeness and
commitment that securely attached persons feel in their rela-
tionships (Shaver & Hazan, 1993) rather than their global at-
titudes towards others’ needs. In attempting to overcome this
limitation, we would be examining the effects of chronic and
contextual activation of the sense of secure base on the en-
dorsement of global values that reflect a concern for the wel-
fare of close and distant others. The decision to research val-
ues was encouraged by (a) Schwartz’s (1992, 1994)
definition of human values as desirable goals that serve as
standards to guide the selection or evaluation of behavior,
and (b) theoretical statements that the observed behavioral
effects of the sense of secure base reflect underlying varia-
tions in the desirable goals a person pursues over time and
across situations (Collins & Read, 1994). On this basis, the
main goal of these studies is to examine whether the link be-
tween attachment security and behavioral reactions to oth-
ers’ needs would be manifested in the endorsement of values
that underlie these caregiving reactions.
In this study, we focus on what Schwartz (1992, 1994)
labeled as self-transcendence values and hypothesize that
the sense of secure base would promote the endorsement of
these values as guiding principles of interpersonal behavior.
According to Schwartz (1992, 1994), one basic dimension
that organizes the structure of human values goes from self-
enhancement values to self-transcendent values. This di-
mension reflects the distinction between values oriented
toward the pursuit of self-interest and values related to the
concern for others’ welfare. In Schwartz’s (1992) own
terms, “It arrays values in terms of the extent to which they
motivate people to enhance their own personal interests
(even at the expense of others) versus the extent to which
they motivate people to transcend selfish concerns and pro-
mote the welfare of others, close and distant, and of nature”
(p. 43). On the self-transcendence pole, Schwartz (1992)
aligned values of universalism (understanding, apprecia-
tion, tolerance, and protection of the welfare of all people)
and benevolence (preservation and enhancement of the wel-
fare of close persons). Whereas universalism reflects a gen-
uine concern for the welfare of all the people in the world,
benevolence reflects the adoption of a sensitive caregiving
attitude toward those persons with whom one is in frequent
personal contact.
There is some indirect evidence supporting our hypothe-
sis on the association between attachment security and self-
transcendence values. First, Schwartz, Sagiv, and Boehnke
(2000) found that lack of self-worth worries was positively
related to the endorsement of benevolent and universalism
values. Hence attachment security would also promote the
endorsement of self-transcendence values, because it pro-
motes positive self-representation and makes people less
preoccupied with self-enhancement issues (e.g., Bartholomew
& Horowitz, 1991, Mikulincer, 1998). Second, research has
found that expectations regarding others’ goodwill are asso-
ciated with the adoption of a more selfless and caring value
orientation (e.g., Kelley & Stahelski, 1970; Kuhlman &
Wimberley, 1976). As a result, attachment security can be
viewed as an antecedent of self-transcendence values, be-
cause it promotes expectations that others would behave in a
trusting and benevolent manner (e.g., Bartholomew &
Horowitz, 1991). However, one should remember that these
studies did not directly examine the association between at-
tachment security and the endorsement of self-transcen-
dence values. This is the main goal of these studies.
STUDY 1
In Study 1 we examined the possible effects of priming the
secure base schema and the chronic accessibility of this
schema (attachment style) on self-transcendence values.
Participants’ attachment style was assessed by the Experi-
ence in Close Relationships scale (Brennan et al., 1998), tap-
ping the attachment dimensions of anxiety and avoidance,
and the endorsement of self-transcendence values was as-
sessed by the benevolent and universalism subscales of
Schwartz’ Value Survey (SVS, Schwartz, 1992). The secure
base schema was primed by asking the participants to re-
trieve and describe a personal experience containing the pro-
totypical if-then sequence of the secure base script: arousal
of distress; support seeking; availability and supportiveness
of significant others; and distress reduction resulting from
significant others’ assistance. Mikulincer and Arad (1999)
have already used this procedure for priming attachment-
related schemas. We compared the effects of this priming
procedure with the effects of two conditions. In one control
condition, participants were asked to recall a neutral, emo-
tionally irrelevant, personal experience (neutral priming). In
another control condition, participants were asked to recall a
personal experience that made them laugh (positive affect
priming). This second control condition was included be-
cause the secure base schema seems to have a positive affec-
tive connotation (e.g., Mikulincer & Shaver, 2001). Then in
order to delineate the unique effects of secure base priming,
we needed to compare this condition with positive affect
priming.
Participants were randomly divided into three conditions
according to a personal episode they were asked to recall:
302 MIKULINCER ET AL.
secure base episode, positive affect episode, and neutral
episode. Then, participants answered a brief mood scale, a
self-report scale tapping the endorsement of universalism and
benevolence values, and, after a distracting task, the Experi-
ence in Close Relationships (ECR) scale tapping attachment
anxiety and avoidance. The predictions were as follows:
1. Participants in the secure base priming condition
would be more likely to attach more personal importance to
universalism and benevolence values than participants in the
positive affect priming and neutral priming conditions.
2. The lower participants’ attachment anxiety and avoid-
ance (more secure attachment style), the higher their
endorsement of benevolence and universalism values.
Study 1 also explores the possible interplay of contextual
and chronic accessibility of the sense of secure base. Specif-
ically, we examine the interactive effects of secure base
priming and participants’ attachment style on the endorse-
ment of universalism and benevolence values.
Method
Participants. Seventy-two Israeli Jewish undergradu-
ate students (51 women and 21 men ranging in age from 20
to 38, median = 25) from various Israeli universities partici-
pated in this study without any monetary reward. Participants
were randomly divided into three conditions, with 24 partic-
ipants in each. No significant difference was found between
the three conditions in any of the assessed sociodemographic
variables.
1
Materials and procedure. This study was conducted
on an individual basis and was presented as a research study
on social cognition.
2
Then, participants were asked to recall
a personal experience and to think about it for 2–3 min.
Specifically, they were asked to think about the sequence of
events, their own behavior and others’ behavior in the re-
called situation, and the thoughts and feelings that this situa-
tion aroused. At this time, participants were divided into
three experimental conditions according to the personal ex-
perience they were asked to recall. In the secure base prim-
ing condition, participants were asked to recall and describe
a situation consisting of the prototypic sequence of events of
the secure base script. Specifically, they were asked to recall
a situation in which they confronted a problem that they
could not solve on their own. Other close persons assisted
and helped them to solve the problem, and, as a result of their
assistance, the problem was solved. In the positive affect
priming condition, participants were asked to recall and de-
scribe a personal experience that made them laugh. In the
neutral priming condition, participants were asked to recall
and describe a situation in which they were engaged in some
household task. No participant revealed any problem in
recalling the targeted situation and all of them wrote a brief
description of the recalled situation. Due to the brevity of
participants’ responses in the writing task, we were not able
to code or analyze them.
Next, all participants rated their current mood to provide
a check on the affective consequences of the priming proce-
dure. On a 7-point scale ranging from (1) not at all to
(7) very much, participants rated the extent to which they felt
good, happy, bad, and sad. Cronbach alpha for the 4 items
(after reversing the scales of the negative affect items) was
.91, indicating high internal consistency. We, therefore, com-
puted a mood score by averaging the 4 items.
Following the mood assessment, participants received a
32-item questionnaire tapping the endorsement of self-
transcendence values. Each item represented a particular value
and participants were asked to rate its importance as a value
that guided their lives, using a 9-point scale ranging from 7
(supreme importance) to 3 (important) to 0 (not important)
to –1 (opposed to my values). This scale included the 16
items of the universalism and benevolence subscales of
Schwartz’Value Survey (SVS, Schwartz, 1992) and 16 other
filling/distracting items taken from the remaining SVS sub-
scales.
3
The universalism subscale consisted of 8 values re-
flecting a person’s concern for the welfare of people and na-
ture (e.g., social justice, equality, a world at peace). The
benevolence subscale consisted of 8 values reflecting a per-
son’s concern for the welfare of close persons (e.g., helpful-
ness, forgiving, loyalty). The remaining 16 items consisted
of conformity, tradition, power, security, achievement, hedo-
nism, stimulation, and self-directions values (2 items per
category) and were only used as filling/distracting items.
In this sample, a principal component analysis with Vari-
max rotation of the 16 self-transcendence items revealed two
main factors (eigenvalue > 1), which explained 61% of the
variance. The first factor (50% of explained variance, eigen-
value = 9.08) included the 8 benevolence items (loading >
.40) and the second factor (11%, eigenvalue = 1.97) included
the 8 universalism items (loading > .40). Cronbach Alpha
coefficients were acceptable for both the universalism items
(.89) and the benevolence items (.93). On this basis, two
ATTACHMENT SECURITY AND SELF-TRANSCENDENCE VALUES 303
3
We did not include the entire pool of 56 SVS items because we were
afraid that requesting participants to complete such a large scale would
weaken the transient effects of the priming conditions. Moreover, our ra-
tionale and predictions exclusively focused on self-transcendence values.
The possible links between secure-base representations and other value cat-
egories were beyond the scope of these studies.
1
Across all three experiments, there were no significant differences in
gender distribution between priming conditions, χ
2
s < 0.94, ps > .05. More-
over, there were no significant interactions of gender with priming or at-
tachment styles in predicting any of the dependent variables, Fs < 1.07, ps
> .05, η
2
< .01.
2
In all three studies, the experimenter was blind to the priming condi-
tions manipulations and participants’ attachment scores.
scores were computed for each participant by averaging
items belonging to a value category. Higher scores re-
flected higher endorsement of universalism and benevo-
lence values.
Following the value questionnaire, participants answered
a filler scale on life habits and, then, completed a Hebrew
version of the experiences in close relationships scale (ECR;
Brennan et al., 1998) that assesses attachment style.
4
This
self-report scale consisted of 36 items tapping the dimen-
sions of attachment anxiety and avoidance. Participants
rated the extent to which each item was descriptive of their
feelings in close relationships on a 7-point scale ranging
from not at all (1) to very much (7). Eighteen items tapped
attachment anxiety (e.g. “I worry about being abandoned,
“I worry a lot about my relationships”) and 18 items tapped
attachment avoidance (e.g., “I prefer not to show a partner
how I feel deep down,” “I get uncomfortable when a roman-
tic partner wants to be very close”). The reliability and
validity of the scale have been demonstrated in previous
studies (e.g., Brennan et al., 1998).
The ECR was translated into Hebrew by Mikulincer and
Florian (2000), who also validated its two-factor structure in
an Israeli sample. In the current sample, Cronbach alphas
were high for the 18 anxiety items (.88) and the 18 avoidance
items (.91). So, two scores were computed by averaging
items on each subscale. These scores were not significantly
associated, r(70) =.11, supporting Brennan et al.s (1988)
claim about the orthogonality of the anxiety and avoidance
dimensions. Two-way analyses of variance (ANOVA)
yielded no significant effects for priming and gender on the
two attachment scores, Fs < 0.82, ps > .05, η
2
< .01.
Results and Discussion
To examine the effects of the priming procedure and attach-
ment scores, we conducted separate hierarchical regressions
for benevolence and universalism scores. We created two
dummy variables—one contrasting the secure base priming
to the other priming conditions (security base priming con-
trast) and the other contrasting the positive affect priming to
the neutral priming (positive affect priming contrast). Then,
we examined the main effects of the contrasts and attach-
ment scores as well as the 2-way and 3-way interactions be-
tween each of the dummy variables and attachment scores.
The main effects were entered in Step 1 of the regressions,
the 2-way interactions (product terms) were added in Step 2,
and the 3-way interactions were added in Step 3.
The regression conducted on the endorsement of univer-
salism values indicated that the entire model was significant,
F(11, 60) = 4.47, p < .01, explained 35% of the variance,
and yielded the following results (see Table 1).In the first
step, secure base priming and attachment avoidance had sig-
nificant unique effects. Participants in the secure base prim-
ing condition endorsed more universalism values than par-
ticipants in the other two priming conditions. In addition, the
higher the attachment avoidance, the lower the endorsement
304 MIKULINCER ET AL.
4
In all the three studies, participants received the ECR scale only after
the experimental manipulations and the measurement of the main depend-
ent variables. This procedure was intended to avoid any possible effect of
the activation of chronic attachment-related schemas during the priming
manipulations. Of course, ideally this information would have been col-
lected at a separate time. However, this is not a large problem, because we
included a distracting task before the ECR and no significant difference be-
tween experimental conditions was found in the ECR scores, Fs < 0.69, ps
> .05, η
2
< .01 for anxiety, and Fs < 1.45, ps > .05, η
2
< .01 for avoidance.
TABLE 1
Regression Coefficients, Standard Errors, and Significance Tests of the Contributions of Priming Conditions and Attachment Scores to
Self-Transcendent Values (Study 1)
Universalism Values Benevolence Values
Effect B SE(B)
β
T B SE(B)
β
T
Step 1
Security Priming 0.89 .33 .32 2.72** 1.09 .36 .36 3.07**
Positive Priming 0.16 .34 .05 0.46 0.43 .37 .14 1.18
Anxiety –0.20 .14 –.18 –1.43 –0.24 .16 –.15 –1.47
Avoidance –0.58 .14 –.41 –4.14** –0.63 .15 –.42 –4.15**
Step 2
Anx × Avo 0.14 .17 .46 0.85 –0.12 .18 –.37 –0.66
Security × Anx –0.36 .37 –.44 –0.99 –0.27 .40 –.30 –0.67
Security × Avo 0.49 .33 .49 1.52 0.57 .36 .47 1.61
Positive × Anx –0.53 .39 –.51 –1.31 –0.26 .42 –.32 –0.62
Positive × Avo –0.03 .37 –.04 –0.10 0.36 .40 .37 0.90
Step 3
Sec × Anx × Avo 0.05 .43 .16 –1.04 –0.67 .47 –2.22 –1.42
Pos × Anx × Avo –0.70 .45 –2.17 –1.53 –0.53 .49 –2.08 –1.09
Note. Security = Secure Base Priming; Positive = Positive Affect Priming; Anx = Anxiety; AVO = Avoidance; Sec = Secure Base Priming; Pos = Positive
Affect Priming. The values in the table were taken from the steps at which variables were entered.
*p < .05. **p < .01.
of universalism values. The main effects of positive affect
priming and attachment anxiety were not significant. In the
second and third steps, the regression yielded no significant
interaction effects. That is, secure base priming and attach-
ment avoidance had significant unique and independent ef-
fects on the endorsement of universalism values.
The regression conducted on the benevolence score indi-
cated that the entire model was significant, F(11, 60) = 4.13,
p < .01, explained 32% of the variance, and yielded a similar
pattern of findings. In the first step, the regression yielded
significant unique main effects for secure base priming and
attachment avoidance. Participants in the secure base prim-
ing condition endorsed more benevolence values than partici-
pants in the other two priming conditions. In addition, the
higher the attachment avoidance, the lower the endorsement of
benevolence values. The main effects of positive affect prim-
ing and attachment anxiety were not significant. In the second
and third steps, no interaction was statistically significant.
In order to examine the possible mediating role of re-
ported mood, we adopted Baron and Kenny’s (1986) analytic
strategy. In their view, a variable acts as a mediator if (a) the
independent variable is significantly associated with the out-
come as well as the mediator, (b) there is a significant asso-
ciation between this mediator and the dependent variable
controlling for the independent variable; and (c) when the
mediator is controlled, the strength of the association be-
tween the independent and dependent variables is notably re-
duced and no longer significant.
Statistical analyses revealed that the first criterion was
partially fulfilled. A one-way ANOVA revealed a significant
main effect for priming condition on reported mood, F(2,
69) = 3.59, p < .05, η
2
=.10. Scheffé tests indicated that
positive affect priming led to more positive mood (M = 5.80,
SD = 0.91) than secure base priming (M = 5.15, SD = 0.98)
and neutral priming (M = 5.04, SD = 1.25). In addition, par-
tial correlations (residualized for the two priming dummy
variables) revealed that reported mood was significantly and
inversely associated with attachment anxiety, r(68) = –.37,
p < .01, but not with attachment avoidance, r(68) = –.01,
p > .05. However, reported mood failed to fulfill Baron and
Kenny’s second and third criteria. Partial correlations (resid-
ualized for the two priming dummy variables and attachment
scores) revealed that reported mood was not significantly as-
sociated with universalism, r(66) = .04, p > .05, and benevo-
lence scores, r(66) = .11, p > .05. Moreover, hierarchical re-
gressions controlling for reported mood and its interactions
with secure base priming, positive affect priming, and attach-
ment scores replicated the significant contributions of secure
base priming (β = .30, p < .01 for universalism, β = .31, p <
.01 for benevolence) and attachment avoidance (β = –.41, p
< .01 for universalism, β = –.42, p < .01 for benevolence). In
fact, Sobel’s (1982) tests revealed that the differences in the
contribution of secure base priming and avoidance to univer-
salism and benevolence before and after the control for
mood were not significant, all Zs < 0.87, ps > .05. That is,
reported mood could not explain the effects of secure base
priming and attachment avoidance on self-transcendent values.
We also applied Baron and Kenny’s (1986) analytic strat-
egy to examine the possibility that an undifferentiated bias in
the endorsement of values could explain the observed effects
of secure base priming and attachment avoidance on self-
transcendence values. For this purpose, we computed a total
score by averaging a participant’s ratings across the 16 filler
value items and performed Baron and Kenny’s steps.
Statistical analyses indicated that the total value score did
not fulfill Baron and Kenny’s criteria and could not explain
the effects of secure base priming and attachment avoidance
on self-transcendence values. First, the independent vari-
ables were not significantly associated with the total value
score. A one-way ANOVA yielded no significant priming
effect on the total value score, F(2, 69) = 0.71, p > .05, η
2
=.01,
and partial correlations (residualized for priming dummy
variables) revealed that this score was not significantly asso-
ciated with attachment anxiety, r(68) = .04, p > .05, and
avoidance, r(68) = .01, p > .05. Second, partial correlations
(residualized for priming dummy variables and attachment
scores) revealed that the total value score was not signifi-
cantly associated with universalism, r(66) = .10, p > .05, and
benevolence scores, r(66) = .13, p > .05 .13. Third, hierar-
chical regressions controlling for the total value score and its
interactions with secure base priming, positive affect prim-
ing, and attachment scores replicated the original significant
effects of secure base priming and attachment avoidance on
universalism (
β
= .29, p < .01;
β
= –.32, p < .01, respec-
tively) and benevolence scores (
β
= .28, p < .01,
β
= –.33,
p < .01, respectively).
Overall, the findings partially supported our predictions.
On one hand, the findings revealed significant unique effects
of secure base priming and attachment avoidance on the en-
dorsement of self-transcendence values. On the other hand,
they failed to reveal the predicted significant contribution of
attachment anxiety to these values. Importantly, the effects
of secure base priming and attachment avoidance could not
be attributed to mood variations. As compared to neutral
priming, positive affect priming had no significant effect on
the endorsement of self-transcendence values. Moreover, the
mood score was not significantly related to the endorsement
of universalism and benevolence values and did not signifi-
cantly mediate the effects of secure base priming and attach-
ment avoidance on these values.
These findings should be viewed as an initial and tenta-
tive step in unfolding the link between attachment security
and self-transcendence values. For several reasons, these
findings should be regarded cautiously. First, they were
based on a single priming technique and should be replicated
with other priming procedures. Second, they were based on a
single assessment technique of self-transcendence values
and should be replicated with other instruments. Studies 2
and 3 attempted to replicate findings of Study 1while deal-
ing with these limitations.
ATTACHMENT SECURITY AND SELF-TRANSCENDENCE VALUES 305
306 MIKULINCER ET AL.
STUDY 2
Study 2 attempted to replicate and extend the findings of
Study 1, while using a different procedure for priming the
secure base schema. Instead of asking participants to recall a
personal experience containing the prototypical if-then se-
quence of the secure base script, we exposed participants to
pictorial representations of the secure base schema (e.g., a
distressed person being helped and comforted by an
opposite-sex partner). Mikulincer, Hirschberger, Nachmias,
and Gillath (2001) have already used pictorial representa-
tions to prime the secure base schema. As in Study 1, the
effects of this procedure were compared against a picture
that elicited attachment-unrelated positive affect (positive
affect priming) and an affectively neutral picture (neutral
priming). On this basis, participants were asked to view a
picture and were randomly divided into three conditions ac-
cording to the picture they received: secure base picture,
positive affect picture, and neutral picture. Then, participants
answered the mood scale, the 32-item value scale, and the
ECR scale described in Study 1. The predictions were the
same as in Study 1.
Method
Participants. Another independent sample of 60
Israeli Jewish undergraduate students (41 women and 19 men
ranging in age from 20 to 35, median = 23) from various
Israeli universities participated in this study without any
monetary reward. Participants were randomly divided into
three conditions, with 20 participants in each. No significant
difference was found between the three conditions in any of
the assessed sociodemographic variables.
Materials and procedure. This study was conducted
on an individual basis and was presented as a research study
on social cognition. After receiving general instructions, par-
ticipants were presented with a picture, were instructed to
examine the picture until they could vividly visualize it in
their mind, and were told that they would be asked questions
about the picture during the experiment. At this time, partic-
ipants were divided into three experimental conditions ac-
cording to the picture they received. In the secure base prim-
ing condition, participants received a picture depicting a
distressed person (same-sex as the participant) being physi-
cally helped and comforted by an opposite-sex other. In the
positive affect priming condition, participants received a pic-
ture depicting a dog wearing a colorful pullover and a
woolen hat. In the neutral priming condition, participants re-
ceived a picture depicting a country view.
To validate the categorization of the three pictures, an-
other sample of 20 Israeli undergraduate students were pre-
sented with the secure base, positive affect, and neutral pic-
tures and were asked to rate each picture along seven
dimensions. Ratings were made on 7-point scales, ranging
from (1) not at all to (7) very much. For each participant, we
computed two total scores: (a) the extent to which a picture
aroused positive affect (average of happy, good and bad rat-
ings after reversing the negative affect item), and (b) the ex-
tent to which a story aroused attachment security feelings
(average of warmth, love, closeness, and trust ratings).
ANOVAs for repeated measures revealed that the positive
affect and secure base pictures were rated as arousing more
positive affect (M = 4.33, SD = 0.82; M = 4.32, SD = 0.60)
than the neutral picture (M = 3.00, SD = 1.93); F(2, 38) =
4.95, p < .05, η
2
= .11. In addition, the secure base picture
was rated as arousing more attachment security feelings
(M = 4.18, SD = 0.72) than both the neutral picture (M = 2.35,
SD = 0.97) and the positive affect picture (M = 3.25, SD =
1.10), F(2, 38) = 14.36, p < .01, η
2
= .19. These findings
validated our categorization.
Next, all participants rated their mood using the 4-item
scale described in Study 1. Alpha for the 4 mood items was
adequate (.81), so a mood score was computed by averaging
the 4 items. Following the mood assessment, participants
completed the 32-item value scale described in Study 1. In
this sample, Cronbach Alphas were high for the universalism
items (.81) and the benevolence items (.84). So, we com-
puted two total scores by averaging the items that belonged
to each value category. Following this scale, participants an-
swered the filler scale on life habits and, then, completed the
Hebrew version of the ECR scale described in Study 1. In
this sample, Cronbach alphas were high for the anxiety items
(.89) and the avoidance items (.88). So two scores were com-
puted by averaging items on each subscale. These scores
were not significantly associated, r(58) = –.10, p > .05, and
no significant main and interactive effects for priming con-
dition and gender were found on these two scores, all Fs<
0.49, ps > .05, η
2
< .01.
Results and Discussion
The data were analyzed by the hierarchical regressions de-
scribed in Study 1. The entire regression model was signifi-
cant for both universalism, R
2
= .25, F(11, 48) = 2.75, p <
.01, and benevolence , R
2
= .15, F(11, 48) = 2.14, p < .05. As
can be seen in Table 2, the regression models yielded identi-
cal results for universalism and benevolence and replicated
the findings of Study 1. First, secure base priming had sig-
nificant unique main effects on universalism and benevo-
lence, with participants in the secure base priming condition
endorsing more self-transcendent values than participants in
the other two priming conditions. Second, attachment avoid-
ance also had significant unique main effects on universal-
ism and benevolence, with higher attachment avoidance pre-
dicting lower endorsement of self-transcendent values.
Third, the positive affect priming and attachment anxiety did
not have any significant unique effect on the endorsement of
self-transcendent values. Fourth, all the interactions were not
significant.
With regard to the possible role of mood as a mediator, we
conducted the analytical steps described in Study 1. The
findings generally replicated those of Study 1. First, a one-
way ANOVA revealed a significant difference between prim-
ing conditions in reported mood, F(2, 57) = 3.21, p < .05,
η
2
= .10. Scheffé tests indicated that positive affect priming
and secure base priming led to more positive mood (M =
5.40, SD = 1.25; M = 5.47, SD = 1.26, respectively) than
neutral priming (M = 4.55, SD = 1.33). Second, partial cor-
relations (residualized for priming dummy variables)
revealed that reported mood was significantly and inversely
associated with attachment anxiety, r(56) = –.46, p < .01,
but not with attachment avoidance, r(56) = –.17, p > .05.
Third, partial correlations (residualized for priming dummy
variables and attachment scores) revealed that reported
mood was not significantly associated with universalism,
r(54) = .03, p > .05, and benevolence values, r(54) = .17,
p > .05. Fourth, hierarchical regressions replicated the sig-
nificant unique effects of secure base priming (η = .32, p <
.01 for universalism, β = .42, p < .01 for benevolence) and
attachment avoidance (β = –.42, p < .01 for universalism,
β = –.42, p < .01 for benevolence) even after controlling for
reported mood and its interactions with secure base priming,
positive affect priming, and attachment scores. Overall, re-
ported mood did not significantly contribute to the endorse-
ment of self-transcendence values and did not significantly
mediate the effects of secure base priming and attachment
avoidance on these values.
As in Study 1, we computed an undifferentiated total
value score by averaging a participant’s ratings across the
16 filler value items and performed the analytical steps
described in Study 1. The findings replicated those of Study 1.
A one-way ANOVA yielded no significant priming effect on
the total value score, F(2,57) = 0.54, p > .05, η
2
< .01, and
partial correlations (residualized for priming dummy vari-
ables) revealed that this score was not significantly associ-
ated with attachment anxiety, r(56) = .07, p > .05, and avoid-
ance, r(56) = –.04, p > .05. Accordingly, this score was not
significantly associated with benevolence, r(54) = .01,
p > .05, and universalism values, r(54) = –.09, p > .05. The
regressions replicated the significant unique effects of se-
cure base priming and attachment avoidance on universalism
(β = .32, p < .01; β = –.42, p < .01) and benevolence values
(β = .40, p < .05, β = –.41, p < .01) even after controlling for
the total value score and its interactions with priming proce-
dures and attachment scores. That is, variations along undif-
ferentiated endorsement of values could not explain the
effects of secure base priming and attachment avoidance on
self-transcendence values.
Overall, the findings of Study 2 strengthened the replica-
bility of the findings of Study 1 across priming techniques.
Using a different priming procedure, Study 2 revealed that
the priming of secure base representations and lower scores
on attachment avoidance significantly contributed to higher
endorsement of self-transcendence values.
STUDY 3
Study 3 attempted to replicate and extend findings of Stud-
ies 1 and 2 by using a different assessment procedure of self-
transcendence values. In Studies 1 and 2, participants re-
ceived a list of values and rated the personal importance of
the listed values. In Study 3, they were asked to freely
ATTACHMENT SECURITY AND SELF-TRANSCENDENCE VALUES 307
TABLE 2
Regression Coefficients, Standard Errors, and Significance Tests of the Contributions of Priming Conditions and Attachment Scores to
Self-Transcendent Values (Study 2)
Universalism Values Benevolence Values
Effect B SE(B)
β
T B SE(B)
β
T
Step 1
Security Priming 0.96 .29 .44 3.36** 1.02 .29 .47 3.49**
Positive Priming 0.48 .30 .21 1.55 0.42 .30 .18 1.42
Anxiety –0.12 .12 –.11 –0.98 0.02 .13 .02 0.15
Avoidance –0.50 .13 –.45 –3.86** –0.40 .13 –.36 –3.01**
Step 2
Anx × Avo –0.05 .14 –.18 –0.33 0.01 .15 .02 0.03
Security × Anx 0.17 .41 .24 0.41 –0.14 .43 –.20 –0.33
Security × Avo –0.25 .34 –.38 –0.73 –0.25 .36 –.41 –0.72
Positive × Anx –0.21 .29 –.32 –0.71 –0.11 .41 –.18 –0.36
Positive × Avo –0.38 .34 –.46 –1.12 –0.37 .36 –.65 –1.03
Step 3
Sec × Anx × Avo 0.22 .60 1.07 0.36 0.04 .63 .19 0.06
Pos × Anx × Avo 0.34 .38 1.81 0.89 0.31 .40 1.66 0.77
Note. Security = Secure Base Priming; Positive = Positive Affect Priming; Anx = Anxiety; AVO = Avoidance; Sec = Secure Base Priming; Pos = Positive
Affect Priming. The values in the table were taken from the steps at which variables were entered.
*p < .05. **p < .01.
generate the most important values guiding their lives. In
this way, we examined the effects of secure base priming and
attachment scores on the number of universalism and benev-
olence values that the participants generated as the most im-
portant values guiding their lives.
In Study 3, participants were asked to retrieve a personal
experience and were randomly divided into three conditions
according to the episode they were asked to recall: secure
base episode, positive affect episode, and neutral episode.
This procedure was identical to that of Study 1. Following
this procedure, participants answered a brief mood scale and
were asked to generate the most important ten values that
guided their lives. Then, after a delay/distracting task, they
completed the ECR scale. The predictions were the same as
in Study 1.
Method
Participants. Another independent sample of 66
Israeli Jewish undergraduate students (41 women and 25 men
ranging in age from 19 to 40, median = 24) from various
Israeli universities participated in this study without any
monetary reward. Participants were randomly divided into
three conditions, with 22 participants in each. No significant
difference was found between the three conditions in any of
the assessed sociodemographic variables.
Materials and procedure. This study was conducted
on an individual basis and was presented as a research study
on social cognition. Then, the participants received instruc-
tions identical to those described in Study 1, asking them to
recall and describe a personal experience. At this time, par-
ticipants were divided into the three conditions described in
Study 1—secure base priming, positive affect priming, and
neutral priming—according to the experience they were
asked to recall. No participant revealed any problem in
recalling the targeted situation and all of them wrote a brief
description of the situation.
Next, all participants rated their mood using the 4-item
scale described in Study 1. Alpha for the 4 mood items was
adequate (.79), so a mood score was computed by averaging
the 4 items. Following the mood assessment, participants
completed a value generation task. They received a blank
sheet and were instructed to write the 10 most important val-
ues that guided their lives in an open, free-format. The 10
generated values were coded by two independent judges
(two of the authors who were blind to participants’ assign-
ment to priming condition and attachment scores), who
marked (a) whether or not each value was a universalism
value, and (b) whether or not each value was a benevolence
value. This coding procedure was based on the items of uni-
versalism and benevolence subscales of the SVS as well as
on Schwartz’s (1992, 1994) definition of these value cate-
gories. Interjudge agreement was very high (98%, Cohen’s
Kappa = .81), and the 12 cases in which there was disagree-
ment between judges were dropped from the analyses. On
this basis, two total scores were computed for each partici-
pant: the number of freely generated universalism values and
the number of freely generated benevolence values.
Following the value generation task, participants com-
pleted a filler scale on life habits and, then, completed the
Hebrew version of the ECR scale described in Study 1. In
this sample, Cronbach alphas were high for the anxiety items
(.88) and the avoidance items (.90). So, two scores were
computed by averaging items on each subscale. The scores
were not significantly associated, r(64) = .14, p > .05, and no
significant main and interactive effects for priming and gen-
der were found on these two scores, all Fs < 0.72, ps > .05,
η
2
< .01.
Results and Discussion
The data were analyzed by the hierarchical regressions de-
scribed in Study 1. The entire regression model was signifi-
cant for both universalism, R
2
= .30, F(11, 54) = 3.58, p <
.01, and benevolence, R
2
= .33, F(11, 54) = 3.97, p < .01. As
can be seen in Table 3, the regression models yielded identi-
cal results for universalism and benevolence and replicated
the findings of Studies 1 and 2. First, secure base priming
had significant unique main effects on universalism and
benevolence. Second, attachment avoidance also had signif-
icant unique main effects on universalism and benevolence.
Third, the positive affect priming and attachment anxiety did
not have any significant unique effect on the endorsement of
self-transcendent values. Fourth, all the interactions were not
significant. Overall, the findings indicated that both the
priming of secure base representations and lower scores on
attachment avoidance significantly contributed to higher
generation of universalism and benevolence values.
With regard to the possible role of mood as a mediator, we
conducted the analytical steps described in Study 1. The
findings generally replicated those of Studies 1 and 2. First,
a one-way ANOVA revealed a significant priming effect on
reported mood, F(2, 63) = 3.54, p < .05, η
2
= .11. Schef
tests indicated that positive affect priming led to a more pos-
itive mood (M = 5.62, SD = 0.94) than neutral priming (M =
4.66, SD = 1.27). The secure base priming condition was in
between the other conditions (M = 5.12, SD = 1.36). Second,
partial correlations (residualized for priming dummy vari-
ables) revealed that mood was significantly associated with
attachment anxiety, r(62) = –.36, p < .01, but not with avoid-
ance, r(62) = –.16, p > .05. Third, partial correlations (resid-
ualized for priming manipulation and attachment scores)
revealed that reported mood was not significantly associated
with the generation of universalism, r(60) = .07, p > .05, and
benevolence values, r(60) = .19, p > .05. Fourth, hierarchi-
cal regressions replicated the significant unique effects of
secure base priming (β = .42, p < .01 for universalism,
308 MIKULINCER ET AL.
β = .36, p < .01 for benevolence) and attachment avoidance
(β = –.33, p < .01 for universalism, β = –.41, p < .01 for
benevolence) even after controlling for mood and its interac-
tions with priming procedures and attachment scores. As in
Studies 1 and 2, reported mood did not significantly con-
tribute to self-transcendence values and did not mediate the
effects of secure base priming and attachment avoidance on
these values.
GENERAL DISCUSSION
The findings of the three studies emphasize the relevance of
attachment theory for explaining concern for others’ wel-
fare. Our findings clearly indicated that the contextual acti-
vation of the sense of secure base led the participants to at-
tach more personal importance to the values oriented toward
the pursuit of others’ welfare. Accordingly, the chronic sense
of attachment security, as manifested in lower scores along
the dimension of attachment avoidance, was also signifi-
cantly related to the endorsement of self-transcendence val-
ues. These findings fit previous results on the association be-
tween attachment style and concern for a relationship
partner’s welfare (e.g., Collins & Feeney, 2000; Kunce &
Shaver, 1994), as well as extending them to the effects of the
contextual activation of the sense of secure base and to a
global concern for the welfare of close and distant others.
The findings also chart a new psychological territory—
values priority—in which the attachment system can be
manifested.
In all three studies, secure base priming was significantly
associated with the endorsement of self-transcendence val-
ues. Importantly, this association was replicated across two
priming techniques (recollection of personal experiences,
pictorial representation) as well as across two assessment
techniques (self-report scale, spontaneous generation of val-
ues). It is also important to note that the findings cannot be
attributed to mood variations. First, the priming of positive
affect as compared to neutral priming was not significantly
associated with the endorsement of self-transcendence val-
ues. Second, although secure base priming sometimes led to
mood improvement, this affective variation was not signifi-
cantly related to the endorsement of self-transcendence val-
ues and failed to explain the effects of priming procedures
on these values. However, one should note that our measure
of mood was limited to global positive versus negative af-
fect. It is still possible that secure base priming affects other
aspects of mood, such as feeling pertaining to warmth, con-
tentment, peace, and relaxation. Thus, these findings cannot
fully rule out mood as a mediator. Further studies should as-
sess other more specific aspects of mood and examine
whether secure base priming effects are entirely cognitive in
origin or whether they are driven in part by attachment-
related affect.
The findings also showed that individual variations along
the dimension of attachment avoidance made a unique
contribution to concern for others’ welfare. The lower the
attachment avoidance, the higher the endorsement of self-
transcendent values. That is, persons who did not chronically
mistrust others’ goodwill and did not avoid interdependence
and closeness (those who were low in avoidance) were more
likely to endorse benevolence and universalism values.
Borrowing Bartholomew and Horowitz’s (1991) termi-
nology, the inverse association between attachment avoid-
ance and self-transcendence values can be explained by indi-
vidual variations in working models of others. According to
ATTACHMENT SECURITY AND SELF-TRANSCENDENCE VALUES 309
TABLE 3
Regression Coefficients, Standard Errors, and Significance Tests of the Contributions of Priming Conditions and Attachment Scores to
Self-Transcendent Values (Study 3)
Universalism Values Benevolence Values
Effect B SE(B)
β
T B SE(B)
β
T
Step 1
Security Priming 1.29 .40 .42 3.26** 1.34 .44 .38 3.08**
Positive Priming –0.01 .42 –.01 –0.04 0.16 .45 .04 0.36
Anxiety –0.05 .16 –.04 –0.33 –0.07 .18 –.05 –0.40
Avoidance –0.52 .18 –.34 –2.87** –0.77 .20 –.44 –3.89**
Step 2
Anx × Avo –0.21 .14 –.78 –1.49 0.01 .16 .02 0.05
Security × Anx –0.44 .40 –.47 –1.10 –0.43 .44 –.39 –0.99
Security × Avo –0.12 .44 –.14 –0.28 –0.73 .48 –.80 –1.53
Positive × Anx –0.08 .39 –.10 –0.20 0.63 .42 .68 1.48
Positive × Avo –0.73 .47 –.84 –1.57 –0.33 .51 –.34 –0.66
Step 3
Sec × Anx × Avo 0.32 .38 1.26 0.86 0.42 .43 1.39 0.97
Pos × Anx × Avo 0.39 .31 1.39 1.29 0.52 .35 2.14 1.48
Note. Security = Secure Base Priming; Positive = Positive Affect Priming; Anx = Anxiety; AVO = Avoidance; Sec = Secure Base Priming; Pos = Positive
Affect Priming. The values in this table were taken from the steps at which variables were entered.
*p < .05. **p < .01.
Bartholomew and Horowitz (1991), the dimension of attach-
ment avoidance differentiates people who have positive ver-
sus negative working models of others, with persons scoring
low on attachment avoidance having more positive represen-
tations of others than persons scoring high on this dimen-
sion. It is possible that the formation of a positive model of
others among persons who are low in attachment avoidance
favors the adoption of a benevolent attitude toward others
and the development of a genuine concern for others’ wel-
fare. This line of thinking fits Belsky’s evolutionary inter-
pretation of attachment security (e.g., Belsky, 1997), by
which beliefs of others as benign and supportive promote a
sensitive caregiving orientation and a desire to invest in the
protection of their welfare.
The findings also indicated that attachment anxiety made
no significant contribution to the endorsement of self-
transcendence values. This finding may imply that working
models of self might be less relevant than working models of
others in explaining concern for others’ welfare. According
to Bartholomew and Horowitz (1991), attachment anxiety
differentiates people who have positive versus negative
working models of self, with persons scoring low on anxiety
having more positive self-views than persons scoring high
on this dimension. Therefore, it is possible that the formation
of a positive self-view among persons who are low in anxi-
ety is not sufficient for promoting a genuine concern for oth-
ers’ welfare. That is, a positive self-view may reduce worries
about worth and competences and may lead people to en-
gage in autonomous exploration and risk taking activities,
but it would not necessarily drive them to transcend the self
and contribute to the welfare of people and society. In fact,
such a self-transcendent orientation seems to be more con-
tingent upon the formation of positive models of others and
the adoption of positive attitudes towards closeness and in-
terdependence.
Interestingly, this conclusion somewhat contradicts
Mikulincer and Shaver’s (2001) findings that attachment
anxiety was highly relevant for explaining individual varia-
tions in reactions to out-groups members. In two independ-
ent studies, persons scoring low on attachment anxiety were
found to report more tolerant and positive reactions to out-
group members than persons scoring high on this dimension
(Mikulincer & Shaver, 2001, Studies 1–2). This positive re-
action to out-group members, which may reflect the en-
dorsement of universalism values (Sagiv & Schwartz, 1995),
seems to be at odds with these findings that attachment anx-
iety was not significantly related to these values.
This apparent contradiction can be solved by a social
identity analysis of reactions to out-groups in terms of threat
appraisal and defensive reactions (e.g., Tajfel & Turner,
1986). On one hand, Mikulincer and Shaver’s (2001) re-
sponses were observed in reaction to targets that are typi-
cally viewed as a source of threat (e.g., Stephan & Stephan,
1985). In this case, the observed responses may reflect a re-
duction in threat appraisal and the deactivation of conse-
quent defensive maneuvers. Indeed, Mikulincer and Shaver
(2001, Study 3) found that variations in threat appraisal me-
diated the link between attachment security and responses to
out-groups. On the other hand, the assessment of self-tran-
scendence values in these studies was made without any ref-
erence to specific threatening others, thereby making irrele-
vant individual variations in threat appraisal and defensive
needs. Therefore, one can suggest that positive models of
self among persons who are low in anxiety may result in con-
cern for others’ welfare, mainly when they need to cope with
a potentially threatening other. In this case, positive models
of self may reduce threat appraisal and the consequent need
for self-defense reactions, thereby promoting a more benev-
olent attitude toward potentially threatening others. Further
research should examine more in-depth possible associa-
tions between threat appraisal, defensive reactions, attach-
ment scores, and concern for others’ welfare as well as the
alternative paths by which attachment scores may contribute
to such a concern.
These studies also indicated that the effects of secure base
priming on self-transcendence values did not significantly
depend on a participant’s attachment scores. That is, contex-
tual activation of the secure base schema led to higher en-
dorsement of universalism and benevolence values without
regard to variations in attachment anxiety and/or avoidance.
This finding implies that a situational, temporary activation
of the secure base schema leads even chronically insecure
persons to report more concern for others’ welfare. Because
all human beings possess an attachment-behavioral system
and are potentially responsive to an enhanced sense of secu-
rity, all of them may be susceptible to the effects of secure
base priming regardless of variations in attachment style.
Even for individuals with a secure attachment style, secure
base priming should contextually activate specific represen-
tations of attachment security that spread over the semantic
memory network and add to these individuals’ chronic sense
of secure base.
In our terms, the contextual activation of attachment se-
curity may remind people of similar episodic memories, in-
hibit incongruent memories of attachment insecurity, bring
to mind schemas that are congruent with the sense of a se-
cure base, and inhibit incongruent schemas of attachment
anxiety and avoidance. In this way, the contextual activation
of a particular memory may spread over the entire semantic
memory network, and a person’s responses would be tem-
porarily biased in accordance with the activated memory
even if this memory is inconsistent with his or her chronic
attachment orientation. This line of thinking can also be ap-
plied for persons who are already secure chronically. The
contextually activated sense of attachment security would
compound their chronic security. It is important to note,
however, that our findings suggest that the temporary effect
of activating the secure base schema coexist with the effects
of attachment avoidance. That is, the endorsement of self-
transcendence values can be concurrently affected in
310 MIKULINCER ET AL.
opposite directions by priming the secure base schema, on
one hand, and by chronically accessible schemas of attach-
ment avoidance on the other.
This theoretical integration also contributes to explain the
observed effects of secure base priming. Although secure
base priming might have activated both positive models of
self and others, it seems that models of others were more rel-
evant to explain the heightened endorsement of self-tran-
scendence values. That is, secure base priming might have
made accessible beliefs that others behave in a benevolent
and supportive manner, which, in turn, might have encour-
aged the adoption of self-transcendence values. In opera-
tional terms, recollecting memories of supportive and
benevolent others or watching a pictorial representation of
support provision might have promoted positive models of
others and might have led participants to emphasize concern
for others’ welfare. This possible sequence of events fits pre-
vious findings showing that expectations regarding others’
goodwill are related to the endorsement of a prosocial
orientation (e.g., Kelley & Stahelski, 1970; Kuhlman &
Wimberley, 1976).
Beyond providing further support to the hypothesized ef-
fects of attachment security on concern for others’ welfare,
another important contribution of these studies is the chart-
ing of a new psychological territory in which the attachment
system could be manifested—value priority. However, it is
important to note that our studies are only an initial and ten-
tative step in integrating attachment and value research. In
fact, we exclusively focus on self-transcendence values and
provide no information about the possible associations be-
tween the attachment system and other value categories. Fur-
ther research should examine the entire spectrum of value
categories and then provide a more comprehensive pattern of
associations between attachment security and value priority.
At the theoretical level, we need to construct developmental
models of how the attainment of the sense of having a secure
base contributes to the shaping of a person’s value priority.
Accordingly, more theoretical elaboration is needed to delin-
eate the cognitive paths by which contextual activation of se-
cure-base representations may affect value priority. More-
over, given previous findings about cultural variations in
value priority (e.g., Schwartz, 1992; Schwartz & Sagiv,
1995), it is crucial to study relations between the sense of
having a secure base and self-transcendence values in vari-
ous cultures.
Before ending this discussion, it is important to note
some potential limitations of these studies. In the three stud-
ies reported here, we used explicit priming procedures (e.g.,
asking people to think about a time when they were cared
for, showing them an example of supportive behavior),
which may have created experimental demands and other
cognitive or motivational biases that pose alternative expla-
nations for the findings. For example, participants in the se-
cure base priming condition might have become aware that it
was “good” or “correct” to endorse values reflecting concern
for others. Alternatively, the priming procedure may simply
have reminded people of the importance of caring for others,
and then the results can be explained simply in terms of
memory priming. Further research should attempt to repli-
cate these findings while using more implicit or subliminal
priming procedures and assessing dependent variables that
are less explicitly related to the prime itself.
In addition, we should note that whereas the secure base
primes involved an explicit social interaction, the control
primes involved nonsocial events (e.g., recalling a household
task, viewing a picture of a dog in a sweater). As a result, it
is possible that priming any positive social interaction would
increase interpersonal orientation and, hence, the endorse-
ment of self-transcendent values. Further research should
attempt to replicate these findings while using more
interpersonal—oriented control primes. Research should
also examine whether contextual accessibility of insecure
schemas may affect concern for others’ welfare and whether
these findings can be replicated in field studies that manip-
ulate the sense of a secure base during real-life interper-
sonal interactions with actual persons. Nevertheless, this
series of studies constitutes an important step in demon-
strating the utility of attachment theory for explaining
individual differences in value orientation as well as in
extending the theory to this study of prosocial behavior.
Furthermore, these studies may even provide useful leads
for parents, clinicians, and educators who wish to encour-
age kindness, helping, empathy, and other prosocial feelings
and behaviors.
REFERENCES
Baldwin, M. W. (1992). Relational schemas and the processing of social in-
formation. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 461–484.
Baldwin, M. W. (1994). Primed relational schemas as a source of self-eval-
uative reactions. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 13,
380–403.
Baldwin, M. W., Keelan, J. P. R., Fehr, B., Enns, V., & Koh Rangarajoo, E.
(1996). Social-cognitive conceptualization of attachment working mod-
els: Availability and accessibility effects. Journal of Personality and So-
cial Psychology, 71, 94–109.
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable dis-
tinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and sta-
tistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51,
1173–1182.
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.
Belsky, J. (1997). Attachment, mating, and parenting—An evolutionary
perspective. Human Nature, 8, 361–381.
Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and loss: Vol. 1. Attachment. New York:
Basic Books.
Bowlby, J. (1973). Attachment and loss: Vol. 2. Separation: Anxiety and
anger. New York: Basic Books.
Bowlby, J. (1988). A secure base. New York: Basic Books.
Brennan, K. A., Clark, C. L., & Shaver, P. R. (1998). Self-report measure-
ment of adult attachment: An integrative overview. In J. A. Simpson &
W. S. Rholes (Eds.), Attachment theory and close relationships
(pp. 46–76). New York: Guilford Press.
ATTACHMENT SECURITY AND SELF-TRANSCENDENCE VALUES 311
Carnelley, K. B., Pietromonaco, P. R., & Jaffe, K. (1996). Attachment, care-
giving, and relationship functioning in couples. Personal Relationships,
3, 257–277.
Cialdini, R. B., Schaller, M., Houlihan, D., Arps, K., Fultz, J., & Beaman,
A. (1987). Empathy-based helping: Is it selflessly or selfishly motivated?
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 749–758.
Cohn, D. A., Cowan, P. A., Cowan, C. P., & Pearson, J. (1992). Mothers’ and
fathers’ working models of childhood attachment relationships, parent-
ing styles, and child behavior. Development and Psychopathology, 4,
417–431.
Collins, N. L. (1996). Working models of attachment: Implications for ex-
planation, emotion, and behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psy-
chology, 71, 810–832.
Collins, N. L., & Feeney, B. C. (2000). A safe haven: An attachment theory
perspective on support seeking and caregiving in intimate relationships.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 1053–1073.
Collins, N. L., & Read, S. J. (1994). Cognitive representations of attach-
ment: The structure and function of working models. In K. Bartholomew
& D. Perlman (Eds.), Attachment processes in adulthood (pp. 53–92).
London: Jessica Kingsley.
Crowell, J. A., & Feldman, S. S. (1988). Mothers’ internal models of rela-
tionships and children’s behavioral and developmental status: A study of
mother-child interaction. Child Development, 59, 1273–1285.
Crowell, J. A., & Feldman, S. S. (1991). Mothers’ working models of
attachment relationships and mother and child behavior during separa-
tion and reunion. Developmental Psychology, 27, 597–605.
Crowell, J. A., O’ Connor, E., Wollmers, G., & Sprafkin, J. (1991). Mothers’
conceptualizations of parent-child relationships: Relation to mother-
child interaction and child behavior problems. Development and Psy-
chopathology, 3, 431–444.
Feeney, J. A. (1996). Attachment, caregiving, and marital satisfaction. Per-
sonal Relationships, 3, 401–416.
Feeney, J. A. (1999). Adult romantic attachment and couple relationships.
In J. Cassidy & P. R. Shaver (Eds.), Handbook of attachment:
Theory, research, and clinical applications (pp. 355–377). New York:
Guilford.
Fraley, R. C., & Shaver, P. R. (1998). Airport separations: A naturalistic
study of adult attachment dynamics in separating couples. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 1198–1212.
Haft, W. L., & Slade, A. (1989). Affect attunement and maternal attachment:
A pilot study. Infant Mental Health Journal, 10, 157–172.
Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. R. (1987). Romantic love conceptualized as an
attachment process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52,
511–524.
Kelley, H. H., & Stahelski, A. J. (1970). Social interaction basis of coopera-
tors’ and competitors’ beliefs about others. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 16, 66–91.
Kuhlman, D. M., & Wimberley, D. C. (1976). Expectations of choice be-
havior held by cooperators, competitors, and individualists across four
classes of experimental games. Journal of Personality and Social Psy-
chology, 34, 69–81.
Kunce, L. J., & Shaver, P. R. (1994). An attachment-theoretical approach to
caregiving in romantic relationships. In K. Bartholomew & D. Perlman
(Eds.), Advances in personal relationships (Vol. 5, pp. 205–237).
London, England: Kingsley.
Mikulincer, M. (1998). Adult attachment style and affect regulation: Strate-
gic variations in self-appraisals. Journal of Personality and Social Psy-
chology, 75, 420–435.
Mikulincer, M., & Arad, D. (1999). Attachment, working models, and cog-
nitive openness in close relationships: A test of chronic and temporary
accessibility effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77,
710–725.
Mikulincer, M., Birnbaum, G., Woddis, D., & Nachmias, O. (2000). Stress
and accessibility of proximity-related thoughts: Exploring the normative
and intraindividual components of attachment theory. Journal of Person-
ality and Social Psychology, 78, 509–523.
Mikulincer, M., & Florian, V. (1998). The relationship between adult at-
tachment styles and emotional and cognitive reactions to stressful
events. In J. A. Simpson & W. S. Rholes (Eds.), Attachment theory and
close relationships (pp. 143–165). New York: Guilford.
Mikulincer, M., & Florian, V. (2001). Attachment style and affect regulation—
Implications for coping with stress and mental health. In G. Fletcher &
M. Clark (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of social psychology: Interper-
sonal processes (pp. 537–557). Oxford, England: Blackwell.
Mikulincer, M., Hirschberger, G., Nachmias, O., & Gillath, O. (2001). The
affective component of the secure base schema: Affective priming with
representations of attachment security. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 81, 305–321.
Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2001). Attachment theory and intergroup bias:
Evidence that priming the secure base schema attenuates negative reactions
to out-groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 97–115.
Pearson, J. L., Cohn, D. A., Cowan, P. A., & Cowan, C. P. (1994). Earned-
and continuous-security in adult attachment: Relation to depressive
symptomatology and parenting style. Development and Psychopathol-
ogy, 6, 359–373.
Pierce, T., & Lydon, J. (1998). Priming relational schemas: Effects of con-
textually activated and chronically accessible interpersonal expectations
on responses to a stressful event. Journal of Personality and Social Psy-
chology, 75, 1441–1448.
Rholes, W., Simpson, J. A., & Blakely, B. S. (1995). Adult attachment styles
and mothers’ relationships with their young children. Personal Relation-
ships, 2, 35–54.
Rholes, W. S., Simpson, J. A., & Orina, M. M. (1999). Attachment and anger
in an anxiety-provoking situation. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 76, 940–957.
Sagiv, L., & Schwartz, S. H. (1995). Value priorities and readiness for out-
group social contact. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69,
437–448.
Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values:
Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. In Zanna,
M. (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 25,
pp. 1–65). Orlando, Fl: Academic.
Schwartz, S. H. (1994). Beyond individualism/collectivism: New cultural
dimensions of values. In U. Kim, H. C. Triandis, C. Kagitcibasi, S. C.
Choi, & G. Yoon (Eds.), Individualism and collectivism: Theory, meth-
ods, and Applications. Thousand Oaks, CA.: Sage.
Schwartz, S. H., & Sagiv, L. (1995). Identifying culture-specifics in the
content and structure of values. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology,
26, 92–116.
Schwartz, S. H., Sagiv, L., & Boehnke, K. (2000). Worries and values.
Journal of Personality, 68, 309–346.
Shaver, P. R., & Hazan, C. (1993). Adult romantic attachment: Theory and
evidence. In D. Perlman & W. Jones (Eds.), Advances in personal rela-
tionships (Vol. 4, pp. 29–70). London: Jessica Kingsley.
Simpson, J. A., Rholes, W. S., & Nelligan, J. S. (1992). Support seeking and
support giving within couples in an anxiety-provoking situation: The
role of attachment styles. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
62, 434–446.
Sobel, M. E. (1982). Asymptotic confidence intervals for indirect effects in
structural equation models. In Leinhart, S. (Ed.), Sociological methodol-
ogy (pp. 290–312). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Stephan, W. G., & Stephan, C. (1985). Intergroup anxiety. Journal of Social
Issues, 41, 157–176.
Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup
behavior. In S. Worchel & W. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup re-
lations (pp. 7–24). Chicago: Nelson.
Ward, M. J., & Carlson, E. A. (1995). Associations among adult attachment
representations, maternal sensitivity, and infant-mother attachment in a
sample of adolescent mothers. Child Development, 66, 69–79.
Waters, H. S., Rodrigues, L. M., & Ridgeway, D. (1998). Cognitive under-
pinnings of narrative attachment assessment. Journal of Experimental
Child Psychology, 71, 211–234.
312 MIKULINCER ET AL.
... The few existing studies on parenting and values focused on the effects of attachment styles. These studies found that the individual's secure attachment style was associated with a higher preference for self-transcendence values, while the avoidance attachment style was associated with a lower preference for self-transcendence values (Mikulincer et al., 2003). In addition, securely attached individuals had higher openness to change values scores, whereas insecure individuals had higher scores on conservation values (Monteoliva et al., 2018). ...
... Researchers related these findings to anxiety, which underlies insecure attachment, self-enhancement, and conservation values. On the other hand, secure attachment, self-transcendence, and openness to change values are all characterized by a low level of anxiety (Mikulincer et al., 2003;Schwartz, 2017). These findings are important; however, attachment styles characterize the general, relatively stable pattern of relationships with others that individuals develop through their relationships with parents (Mikulincer et al., 2003). ...
... On the other hand, secure attachment, self-transcendence, and openness to change values are all characterized by a low level of anxiety (Mikulincer et al., 2003;Schwartz, 2017). These findings are important; however, attachment styles characterize the general, relatively stable pattern of relationships with others that individuals develop through their relationships with parents (Mikulincer et al., 2003). In the present study, we investigate the connection between parental bonding, which reflects the individuals' perception of their parents' parenting behavior (Parker et al., 1979), and personal value preferences. ...
Article
Full-text available
This study investigates how parenting and value preferences are connected to emerging adults' attitudes toward romantic relationships. The study was conducted in Israel among young Jews and Arabs looking for a romantic partner (n = 1121, 40% male, age 18-30). Higher preferences for conservation versus openness to change and self-enhancement versus self-transcendence values and higher levels of parental care were associated with positive romantic attitudes. In addition, parental care was associated with higher preferences for self-transcendence versus self-enhancement and conservation versus openness to change values, and autonomy-providing was associated with higher preferences for openness to change versus conservation and self-transcendence versus self-enhancement values. Personal value preferences partially mediated the connection between parental bonding and romantic attitudes. More specifically, high levels of parental care and overcontrol lead to a higher preference for conservation values, which, in turn, lead to more positive romantic attitudes. The obtained results advance our understanding of the connections between parenting, general motivational goals, and romantic relationships among emerging adults.
... Indeed, just as priming attachment security benefits cognitive processes, it likewise benefits socially relevant outcomes. Research on secure-base priming suggests that subliminal or supraliminal reminders of available and encouraging attachment figures have numerous beneficial consequences for social behavior and outcomes, such as in promoting self-transcendent values (Mikulincer et al., 2003), reducing negative reactions to out-groups (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2001), and enhancing positive expectations of relationships (Carnelley & Rowe, 2007). Among studies that examine feelings of attachment security and social outcomes among children, much of the research is longitudinal (e.g., Boldt et al., 2020), meaning little work has specifically examined how short-term (beneficial) changes in child perceptions of parents may alter children's social short-term social outcomes. ...
Article
Full-text available
Interparental interactions have an important influence on child well-being and development. Yet prior theory and research have primarily focused on interparental conflict as contributing to child maladjustment, which leaves out the critical question of how interparental positive interactions—such as expressed gratitude, capitalization, and shared laughter—may benefit child growth and development. In this article, we integrate theory and research in family, relationship, and affective science to propose a new framework for understanding how the heretofore underexamined positive interparental interactions influence children: interparental positivity spillover theory (IPST). IPST proposes that, distinct from the influence of conflict, interparental positive interactions spill over into children’s experiences in the form of their (a) experience of positive emotions, (b) beneficially altered perceptions of their parents, and (c) emulation of their parents’ positive interpersonal behaviors. This spillover is theorized to promote beneficial cognitive, behavioral, social, and physiological outcomes in children in the short term (i.e., immediately after a specific episode of interparental positivity, or on a given day) as well as cumulatively across time. As a framework, IPST generates a host of novel and testable predictions to guide future research, all of which have important implications for the mental health, well-being, and positive development of children and families.
... Pozitívny vzťah medzi bezpečným pripútaním a prosocialitou (hypotézy 1-3) je konzistentný s výsled kami iných výskumov (Aquino et al., 2007;Bowlby, 2010;Kogut, 2013;Laible, 2009;Mikulincer et al., 2003Mikulincer et al., , 2005Sroufe et al., 2005;Th ompson, 2016;Zimmerman, 2004;Xiaoxuan et al., 2020). Podľa Mikulincera a Shavera (2015) môžeme príčinu hľadať v troch základných rovinách. ...
Article
Full-text available
Cieľom príspevku je explorácia vzťahu prosociálnych tendencií voči LGBTQ+ komunite a štýlov pripútania v populácii českých dospelých. Vo výskume boli využité dve metódy dotazníkového charakteru. Prvou metódou bol autorsky pôvodný Dotazník štýlov pripútania (Lenghart & Čerešník, 2022). Druhou metódou bola autorská Škála prosociálnych tendencií voči LGBTQ+ komunite (Lenghart & Čerešník, 2022). Táto metóda meria digitálnu, verejnú a celkovú prosocialitu voči LGBTQ+ komunite. Výskumný súbor tvorilo 500 českých dospelých vo veku 18 až 64 rokov. Priemerný vek participantov bol 29,23 roka (SD = 9,472). Výsledky výskumu ukazujú, že existuje pozitívny vzťah medzi bezpečným pripútaním a prosociálnymi tendenciami a negatívny vzťah medzi vyhýbavým pripútaním a prosociálnymi tendenciami. Regresná analýza zároveň ukázala, že bezpečné, vyhýbavé, úzkostné a dezorganizované pripútania sú signifikantnými prediktormi miery prosociality. Dezorganizované pripútanie nebolo signifikantným prediktorom digitálnej prosociality.
... Pozitívny vzťah medzi bezpečným pripútaním a prosocialitou (hypotézy 1-3) je konzistentný s výsled kami iných výskumov (Aquino et al., 2007;Bowlby, 2010;Kogut, 2013;Laible, 2009;Mikulincer et al., 2003Mikulincer et al., , 2005Sroufe et al., 2005;Th ompson, 2016;Zimmerman, 2004;Xiaoxuan et al., 2020). Podľa Mikulincera a Shavera (2015) môžeme príčinu hľadať v troch základných rovinách. ...
... In other words, children who have emotional, intimate, and secure relationships with their parents, accept their parents' values and rules, and moral self is a regulator of moral behavior [36]. Also, in avoidantly attached people, the ideal of being good and moral is not formed in their self-concept [37], so they do not understand the harmful effect of unethical behaviors on themselves and others, and for this reason, they do not consider the failure to perform ethical behaviors worthy of blame [7]. Also, ambivalent people, due to the fear of being rejected by others, do not have a safe base to gain internal control, free exploration, and the power of reasoning to defend their ideas, therefore to gain the approval of others [38], ethical behaviors should not be their priority because getting the approval of others is the first mental priority of these people. ...
Article
Full-text available
Background and Objectives: Human is a social beings and interpersonal relationships are behavioral characteristics affected by several components. This study aimed to examine the relationship between attachment style, and interpersonal relationship with the mediating role of moral identity. Methods: In this study, 200 residents of West Azerbaijan Province, Iran in 2022 were selected by convenience method and completed online attachment style, interpersonal relationship, and moral identity questionnaires. Results: The results of Pearson coefficient and path analysis with SPSS software, version 24 and Amos software showed that secure attachment style has a positive effect on the interpersonal relationship with mediating of moral identity, avoidant and anxious attachment styles have a negative effect on the interpersonal relationships with the mediating of moral identity (P<0.001). Conclusion: According to the results, attachment styles can affect interpersonal relationships, and moral identity is also affected.
Article
Human interactions with social robots inevitably involve anthropomorphism. Concerns have arisen regarding whether robot anthropomorphism is accompanied by negative human relationships. In particular, limited empirical research suggests that the more humanness people attribute to nonhuman agents (e.g., social robots), the more they deny to humans, thus implying a positive association between robot anthropomorphism and dehumanization. From a motivational perspective, we examined whether social connectedness—the perception of closeness with others—may expand the scope of agents deserving to be treated as having humanness, thereby tempering the possible positive association between robot anthropomorphism and dehumanization. Across three studies (two preregistered) conducted with Chinese participants, we induced social connectedness and measured anthropomorphism of social robots and dehumanization of certain individuals. Robot anthropomorphism negatively predicted dehumanization on human nature traits and the mental capacity to feel among participants induced to feel social connectedness (but not social neutrality or disconnectedness). Although their generalizability across diverse cultures warrants further investigation, our findings offer novel theoretical insights into humanness attribution, and practical implications for promoting social cohesion in the era of intelligent machines.
Article
Purpose This study aims to investigate the influence of CEO’s only-child status on corporate social responsibility (CSR) practices. It seeks to extend the understanding of upper echelon theory by examining unexplored CEO characteristics and their impact on CSR decisions. Design/methodology/approach The paper uses manually collected CEO family information and Chinese Stock and Market Accounting Research data as a basis to examine the influence of CEOs’ early-life experiences on their engagement in CSR activities. The study applies attachment security theory from developmental psychology and uses upper echelon theory, particularly focusing on CEOs’ only-child status. A comparative analysis of philanthropic donations between CEOs who are only children and those who have siblings is conducted. The study also examines the moderating effects of corporate slack resources and CEO shareholdings. Findings Preliminary findings suggest that CEOs who are only children are more likely to engage in CSR compared to their counterparts with siblings. However, the difference in donation amounts between the two groups tends to attenuate with decreased slack resources and increased CEO shareholdings. Originality/value To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this research represents the first attempt to investigate being the only child in one’s family and the CSR-related decision of CEOs, which extends the upper echelon theory by introducing the family science theory into the management domain.
Article
There are substantive theoretical questions about whether personal values affect romantic relationship functioning. The current research tested the association between personal values and romantic relationship quality while considering potential mediating mechanisms related to pro-relational attitudes, communal strength, intrinsic relationship motivation, and entitlement. Across five studies using different measures of value priorities, we found that the endorsement of self-transcendence values (i.e., benevolence, universalism) was related to higher romantic relationship quality. The findings provided support for the mediating roles of pro-relational attitudes, communal strength, and intrinsic relationship motivation. Finally, a dyadic analysis in our fifth study showed that self-transcendence values mostly influence a person's own relationship quality but not that of their partner. These findings provide the first evidence that personal values are important variables in romantic relationship functioning while helping to map the mechanisms through which this role occurs.
Article
Full-text available
Five studies examined the effects of priming the secure base schema on intergroup bias. In addition, Studies 1-2 examined the effects of dispositional attachment style, Studies 2-5 examined a mood interpretation. Study 3 examined the mediating role of threat appraisal, and Studies 4-5 examined the effects of secure base priming while inducing a threat to self-esteem or cultural worldview. Secure base priming led to less negative evaluative reactions toward out-groups than positive affect and neutral control conditions. In addition, whereas the effects of secure base priming did not depend on attachment style and were not explained by mood induction, they were mediated by threat appraisal and occurred even when self-esteem or cultural worldview was threatened. The discussion emphasizes the relevance of attachment theory for understanding intergroup attitudes.
Article
Full-text available
Using an affective priming procedure (S. T. Murphy & R. B. Zajonc, 1993), 7 studies examined the effects of the contextual activation of representations of attachment security (secure base schema) on the evaluation of neutral stimuli under either neutral or stressful contexts. In all the studies, participants also reported on their attachment style. Results indicated that the subliminal priming of secure base representations led to more positive affective reactions to neutral stimuli than did the subliminal priming of neutral or no pictures under both neutral and stressful contexts. Although the subliminal priming of positively valued, attachment-unrelated representations heightened positive evaluations under neutral contexts, it failed to elicit positive affect under stressful contexts. The results also revealed interesting effects of attachment style. The discussion focuses on the affective component of the secure base schema.
Article
Full-text available
This article explores the possibility that romantic love is an attachment process--a biosocial process by which affectional bonds are formed between adult lovers, just as affectional bonds are formed earlier in life between human infants and their parents. Key components of attachment theory, developed by Bowlby, Ainsworth, and others to explain the development of affectional bonds in infancy, were translated into terms appropriate to adult romantic love. The translation centered on the three major styles of attachment in infancy--secure, avoidant, and anxious/ambivalent--and on the notion that continuity of relationship style is due in part to mental models (Bowlby's "inner working models") of self and social life. These models, and hence a person's attachment style, are seen as determined in part by childhood relationships with parents. Two questionnaire studies indicated that relative prevalence of the three attachment styles is roughly the same in adulthood as in infancy, the three kinds of adults differ predictably in the way they experience romantic love, and attachment style is related in theoretically meaningful ways to mental models of self and social relationships and to relationship experiences with parents. Implications for theories of romantic love are discussed, as are measurement problems and other issues related to future tests of the attachment perspective.
Article
Full-text available
In this article, we attempt to distinguish between the properties of moderator and mediator variables at a number of levels. First, we seek to make theorists and researchers aware of the importance of not using the terms moderator and mediator interchangeably by carefully elaborating, both conceptually and strategically, the many ways in which moderators and mediators differ. We then go beyond this largely pedagogical function and delineate the conceptual and strategic implications of making use of such distinctions with regard to a wide range of phenomena, including control and stress, attitudes, and personality traits. We also provide a specific compendium of analytic procedures appropriate for making the most effective use of the moderator and mediator distinction, both separately and in terms of a broader causal system that includes both moderators and mediators. (46 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)