|
Article Excerpt
The transition to college is a critical juncture in the interpersonal development of late adolescents, particularly because it often entails living away from home and family members for the first time. Research suggests that two constructs integral to this process, continuing parental attachment and social support, are both related to successful college adjustment (Coble, Gantt, & Mallinckrodt, 1996; Holmbeck & Wandrei, 1993; Kenny & Donaldson, 1991; Lapsley, Rice, & FitzGerald, 1990; Rice, FitzGerald, Whaley, & Gibbs, 1995). However, the implications of such findings for counseling interventions are unclear because although the theoretical conceptualizations of attachment and social support are distinctly different, these constructs are often operationalized in similar ways (Asendorpf & Wilpers, 2000; Blain, Thompson, & Whiffen, 1993; Mullis, Hill, & Readdick, 1999; Wallace & Vaux, 1993). Further research is necessary to establish whether the two constructs are differentially related to psychological well-being during times of interpersonal distress. The present study was therefore designed to examine the relative contribution of both attachment and perceptions of social support to indices of psychosocial functioning among college students who had experienced a romantic relationship breakup in the past year. These participants were chosen because relationship breakups are both a common stressor in this population (McCarthy, Lambert, & Brack, 1997) and theoretically relevant to both attachment and social support research.
ATTACHMENT AND SOCIAL SUPPORT
The findings of numerous studies suggest that attachment and social support are linked. Research has shown that those who retrospectively reported that their mothers demonstrated more attachment behaviors had higher ratings of current social support than those with mothers exhibiting fewer attachment behaviors (Flaherty & Richman, 1986). This finding has also been replicated with ratings of current attachment security and social support in adults. In studies assessing perceptions of available social support, self-reported securely attached adults have reported more available social support than their less securely attached counterparts (Davis, Morris, & Kraus, 1998; Florian, Mikulincer, & Bucholtz, 1995, Larose & Boivin, 1997). Moreover, those with a self-reported secure attachment style have been shown to be more likely to seek support in times of need (Collins & Feeney, 2000; Herzberg et al., 1999; Ognibene & Collins, 1998) and to be more satisfied with their social support network than those with insecure attachment styles (Priel & Shamai, 1995).
From the standpoint of attachment theory, the empirically demonstrated link between attachment and social support is clear. Attachment pioneers Bowlby (1979, 1988) and Ainsworth (1989) defined attachment as the emotional bond experienced with another who is sensed as a source of security and who provides a secure base anchoring exploration. Secure attachment has also been described in terms of "felt security" in relationships with significant others (Sroufe & Waters, 1977), with the implication being that securely attached individuals go through life with the unconscious belief that there will be someone to help when they are in need. In other words, security of attachment is theoretically as well as empirically associated with a perception of available social support. Insecure adults, by contrast, may be more likely to fear loss of social support, such as through abandonment by important attachment figures (West, Livesley, Reiffer, & Sheldon, 1986).
Bowlby (1979, 1988) and Ainsworth's (1989) clear conceptualization of attachment means that there seems to be little confusion about the construct within the attachment literature. One area with less agreement is how attachment should be assessed. Researchers using self-report measures have assessed current ways of relating to close others or generalized attachment style (Feeney, Noller, & Hanrahan, 1994), current attachment to parents and peers (Armsden & Greenberg, 1987, 1989), and adult romantic attachment (Brennan, Clark, & Shaver, 1998). Given this debate in the literature, it was decided to include a range of attachment measures so as to capture the construct as fully as possible.
Whereas attachment researchers at least seem to agree as to the nature of various forms of attachment bonds, social support is defined in widely varying ways within the literature. In some studies, social support is quantified simply in terms of number of people in a self-reported social network or, even more crudely, in terms of whether the respondent is married or not (Tardy, 1985). However, assessing social support in this manner may not approximate the importance or complexity of support provided by friends and family, particularly with respect to weathering stressful life events. Another approach used to operationalize social support is to quantify it as the sum total of the various forms of support received from specific relationships (Procidano & Heller, 1983), for example by assessing the availability of support from a discrete number of persons in one's social network (e.g., Flaherty, Gaviria, & Pathak, 1983; Flaherty & Richman, 1986). Yet another approach is to categorize social support into several dimensions, such as the emotional support provided by close friends or family, support derived from "belongingness" to a group with a shared sense of identity, appraisal support offered by others in talking through problems, and tangible support or practical help (Horsten et al., 1999; Orth-Gomer, 1998). However, dimensional descriptions of social support usually do not distinguish whether social support is a property of the environment or of the individual. This is particularly problematic if the assessment of social support is based on self-report measures, because such methods are obviously tied to subjective perceptions. However, self-report bias is not necessarily a threat to the validity of such measures if one conceptualizes social support as a function of perception rather than an objective reality.
Defining social support in terms of an individual's perception of their social network is similar to the "felt security" component of secure attachment theorized by attachment researchers. Viewed in this way, the felt security that leads to the capacity to seek support and depend on others becomes characteristic of both secure attachment and sufficient levels of social support. With the shared foundation of felt security, an individual with high social support thus becomes conceptually identical to a securely attached individual (Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991; Collins & Read, 1990).
The overlap between the two constructs of attachment and social support has led some researchers to conceptualize social support as originating in attachment working models of self and others (B. R. Sarason et al., 1991). In this view, both the perception and the use of social support are rooted in the social worldview that develops from childhood experiences with caregivers. Several social support measures reflect this approach. For example, the Perceived Support Scale (PSOC, Procidano & Heller, 1983) and the Social Support Questionnaire (SSQ; I. G. Sarason, Levine, Basham, & Sarason, 1983) measure the degree of perceived support from one's family and friends. Similarly, the Social Provisions Scale (SPS; Cutrona, 1984) defines social support through a general assessment of perceived support as determined by the degree to which needs are met through the support network. Defining social support in this way (i.e., as the perception of support) seems to be popular among researchers, as indicated by the preponderance of studies using the PSOC (e.g., Blain et al., 1993), the SSQ (e.g., Priel & Shamai, 1995), and the SPS (e.g., Davis et al., 1998). However, given the conceptual overlaps between perceived social support and attachment security, the popularity of this approach does not answer the question of whether the two constructs contribute differentially to psychological well-being following a relationship breakup.
Because interpersonal distress often arises from a generalized dissatisfaction with social relations as a whole, rather than with specific relationships, the construct of social connectedness may in this context more usefully describe ongoing perceptions of the social environment (Kohut, 1984, Lee & Robbins, 1995; Wolf, 1988). Defined as the non-relationship-specific perception of support from the social environment, the concept of social connectedness may allow researchers to disentangle generalized expectancies that support can be found in the environment from perceptions of support founded on specific dose emotional relationships with others. As measured by the Social Connectedness Scale (SCS), social connectedness has been linked to emotional well-being (Lee & Robbins, 1998) and loneliness (Lee & Robbins, 2000). However, as of yet, there has been no research examining the SCS along with measures of both attachment and social support. Thus, one aim of this study was to explore how a broader definition of social support, presented by the construct of social connectedness, compares with a more traditional measure of perceived social support from family and friends in predicting adjustment following a relationship breakup when attachment is concurrently assessed.
RELATIONSHIP OF ATTACHMENT AND SOCIAL SUPPORT TO PSYCHOLOGICAL ADJUSTMENT
Both the attachment and social support literature provide evidence of separate, well-established links with emotional well-being and relationship functioning. Attachment, for example, has been labeled a theory of affect regulation (Kobak & Sceery, 1988). As Bowlby (1969) argued, childhood attachment experiences continue to exert an influence into adulthood because one's history of regulating distress with attachment figures leads to the formation of internal cognitive templates, called "working models." These models guide emotional functioning in adulthood by dictating appraisal of current interpersonal situations and organizing rules and strategies for handling emotions as well as coping responses (Main, 1999). More specifically, whereas secure attachment is characterized by an open engagement with difficult attachment-related emotions, avoidant (child)/dismissing (adult) attachment status is associated with a tendency to ignore or minimize the affect and anxious-ambivalent (child)/preoccupied (adult) attachment status with a tendency to ruminate on and amplify the distress (Kobak, Cole, Ferenz-Gillies, Fleming, & Gamble, 1993).
Empirical evidence of the relationship between attachment and emotional adjustment is suggested by a number of findings from the literature on parent-child attachment. For example, secure attachment status has been linked to enthusiastic and persistent problem solving in toddlerhood (Matas, Arend, & Sroufe, 1978) and to high levels of ego resiliency and curiosity in school settings (Arend, Gove, & Sroufe, 1979). In addition, secure attachment has been associated with less angry, more focused discussion by teens during problem-solving discussion with theft mothers (Kobak et al., 1993) and better emotional functioning and less perceived stress in young adults (McCarthy, Moller,& Fouladi, 2001). In other words, research has found links between attachment and emotional functioning from toddlers through young adults, and these findings have been supported using different methodologies, including direct observation and self-report inventories.
Social support, like secure attachment, is also associated with emotional functioning. For example, high levels of social support have been associated with better adjustment for those facing such stressful life events as cancer (Koopman, Hermanson, Diamond, Angell, & Spiegel, 1998) or recovery from childhood maltreatment (Runtz & Schallow, 1997). Conversely, low levels of social support have been linked with loneliness, anxiety, and depression (Davis et al., 1998; Priel & Shamai, 1995).
Considerable attention has also been paid to the contribution of attachment and social support in coping with interpersonal distress, but, as noted previously, each construct continues to be examined separately in the literature. One type of interpersonal stressor that has been addressed by researchers is that of relationship breakup, with numerous studies documenting the distress associated with the dissolution of a romantic relationship (e.g., Choo, Levine, & Hatfield, 1996; McCarthy et al., 1997; Sprecher, Felmlee, Metts, Fehr, & Vanni, 1998). Secure attachment has been shown to be a buffering factor in the distress following a relationship breakup (Birnbaum, Orr, Mikulincer, & Florian, 1997; Pistole, 1995), and, similarly, the availability of social support has been linked with lower levels of stress following the ending of a marital relationship (Sansom & Farnill, 1997).
GOALS OF THE CURRENT STUDY
The research indicates that social support and a secure attachment style may independently contribute to one's adjustment following the breakup of a relationship. However, there is a dearth of research assessing the differential contributions of both attachment security and social support during stressful periods (Coble et al., 1996). This study aims to remedy this lack by exploring whether social support and secure attachment are differentially associated with indicators of distress following the breakup of a romantic relationship. Four dimensions of attachment were used as predictors of adjustment in this study: general attachment style and attachment to parents, peers, and romantic partners. Two measures of social support were also used as predictors: one measure of perceived social support from family and friends and one measure of connectedness to the social environment. Four measures of adjustment were included as outcome variables: self-reported loneliness, hopelessness, perceived stress, and symptomatology. These outcome measures were selected for their encompassing aspects of adjustment frequently used with a college student population (e.g., Kobak & Sceery, 1988; Larose & Boivin, 1997) and types of distress experienced by those coping with relationship breakup (e.g., Choo et al., 1996; Sprecher et al., 1998).
Due to theoretical associations between attachment and social support (Coble et al., 1996; Larose & Boivin, 1997), it was predicted that indices of these constructs would be correlated. Because of the empirically established roles of attachment and social support in coping and adjustment (Ptacek, 1996), it was predicted that measures of attachment and social support would also be correlated with post-breakup adjustment. However, because of the similarity...
|
.%20%20&position=1)