Yuthika U. Girme

Attachment anxiety and reactions to relationship threat: The benefits and costs of inducing guilt in romantic partners

The current research tested whether individuals high in attachment anxiety react to relationship threats in ways that can help them feel secure and satisfied in their relationship. Individuals higher in attachment anxiety experienced greater hurt feelings on days they faced partner criticism or conflict (Study 1) and during observed conflict discussions (Study 2). These pronounced hurt feelings triggered exaggerated expressions of hurt to induce guilt in the partner. Partners perceived the hurt feelings of more anxious individuals to be more intense than low anxious individuals hurt and, in turn, experienced greater levels of guilt (Study 1). More anxious individuals were also rated by objective coders as exhibiting more guilt-induction strategies during conflict, which led to increases in partner guilt (Study 2). Moreover, partner guilt helped anxious individuals maintain more positive relationship evaluations. Although greater partner guilt had detrimental effects for individuals low in anxiety, more anxious individuals experienced more stable perceptions of their partners commitment and more positive relationship evaluations when their partner felt more guilt. Unfortunately, these benefits were accompanied by significant declines in the partners relationship satisfaction. These results illustrate that anxious reactions to threat are not uniformly destructive; instead, the reassuring emotions their reactions induce in relationship partners help anxious individuals feel satisfied and secure in their partners commitment.

When Visibility Matters Short-Term Versus Long-Term Costs and Benefits of Visible and Invisible Support

Sixty-one couples engaged in two video-recorded discussions in which one partner (the support recipient) discussed a personal goal with the other partner (the support provider). The support provider’s visible and invisible support behaviors were coded by independent raters. Measures of perceived support, discussion success, and support recipients’ distress during the discussion were gathered. Recipients also reported their goal achievement at 3-month intervals over the following year. Greater visible emotional support was associated with greater perceived support and discussion success for highly distressed recipients, but it was costly for nondistressed recipients who reported lower discussion success. In contrast, greater invisible emotional support was not associated with perceived support or discussion success, but it predicted greater goal achievement across time. These results advance our current understanding of support processes by indicating that the costs and benefits of visible support hinge on recipients’ needs, whereas invisible support shapes recipients’ long-term goal achievement.

“All or Nothing”: Attachment Avoidance and the Curvilinear Effects of Partner Support

People high in attachment avoidance typically respond more negatively to partner support, but some research suggests they can be calmed by high levels of practical support. In the present research, we attempted to reconcile these inconsistencies by modeling curvilinear associations between romantic partners support and support recipients outcomes and testing whether these curvilinear associations were moderated by recipients degree of attachment avoidance. We examined the effect of partner support during support-relevant discussions (Studies 1-3) and in daily life (Study 4) on support recipients distress (Studies 1-4), self-efficacy (Studies 2 and 3), perceived partner control/criticism (Studies 2 and 4), and distancing from the partner (Study 4). The results and a meta-analysis across all four studies (N = 298 couples) demonstrated that the curvilinear effect of practical support on recipients outcomes was moderated by attachment avoidance. Highly avoidant recipients exhibited more negative responses as their partner provided them low-to-moderate levels of practical support, including increasing distress, perceived partner control/criticism and distancing, and decreasing self-efficacy. However, as partners practical support shifted from moderate to high levels, highly avoidant recipients experienced more positive outcomes, including decreasing distress, perceived partner control/criticism and distancing, and increasing self-efficacy. Less avoidant individuals were resilient and experienced better outcomes regardless of the level of partner support they received. These results demonstrate the utility of curvilinear models in reconciling the costs and benefits of support, and indicate that high levels of practical support can overcome the defenses of highly avoidant individuals by offering undeniable evidence of the partners availability.

When Attachment Anxiety Impedes Support Provision: The Role of Feeling Unvalued and Unappreciated.

Two studies examined whether concerns of relational value interfere with the ability of individuals higher in attachment anxiety to provide responsive support to their partner. In both studies, heterosexual couples engaged in 2 video-recorded discussions about each other’s most important personal goal. Support recipients (the person whose goal was discussed) reported on how distressed they felt during the discussion. Support providers (the partner who was in the position to provide support) reported on how valued and appreciated they felt during the discussion. Independent observers coded the degree to which support providers exhibited critical and derogating behaviors versus warmth and understanding during the discussion. The results were consistent across both studies, with the exception that the predicted effects only emerged for male providers in Study 2. First, more anxious support providers felt less valued and appreciated when support recipients reported greater distress. Second, lower feelings of value/appreciation were associated with more anxious providers exhibiting greater negative support behavior. These results illustrate how the concerns of relational value central to attachment anxiety impede effective support provision, which should have detrimental effects for relationships. Indeed, consistent with prior research, greater negative behaviors by support providers predicted declines in recipients’ relationship quality over time.

Happily Single: The Link Between Relationship Status and Well-Being Depends on Avoidance and Approach Social Goals

Although prior research suggests that single people experience lower well-being than those involved in romantic relationships, the effect of relationship status is small. Moreover, relationships can be a source of hurt and conflict, which single people can avoid. The current research examined for whom being involved in a relationship versus being single enhances versus undermines well-being by testing whether social goals moderated the link between relationship status and (1) daily life satisfaction (Study 1, N = 187, undergraduate sample) and (2) life satisfaction/well-being across time (Study 2, N = 4,024, nationally representative sample). In both studies, single people high in avoidance goals who strive to prevent relationship conflict and disagreements were just as happy as people involved in a relationship. In addition, individuals high in approach goals who strive to enhance relationship closeness experienced greater life satisfaction/well-being but particularly when they were involved in a relationship (Study 2).

The ebbs and flows of attachment: Within-person variation in attachment undermine secure individuals’ relationship wellbeing across time.

Although attachment security is relatively stable over time, individuals do experience significant within-person variation in their attachment security across time. No research to date, however, has assessed the relational consequences of within-person variation (fluctuations) in attachment security toward a specific attachment figure. Study 1 (N = 409) first examined whether attachment security was associated with individuals’ expectations that their current intimate relationship would be stable and consistent over time (vs. inconsistent and unstable). Studies 2 and 3 extended this by examining the prevalence and consequences of actual within-person variation (fluctuations) in relationship-specific attachment security toward an intimate partner in 2 multiwave longitudinal studies that assessed individuals (Study 2, N = 324) and couples (Study 3, N = 171 dyads). The results indicate that secure individuals (those low in attachment anxiety or attachment avoidance) expect their current relationship to remain relatively stable and consistent over time (Study 1). However, Studies 2 and 3 demonstrated that most individuals do experience fluctuations in their relationship-specific attachment security. Moreover, greater fluctuations predict declines in relationship satisfaction (Studies 2 and 3) and increases in relationship distress (Study 3) over time, but primarily for secure individuals (those low in baseline attachment anxiety or attachment avoidance). This set of findings highlight the importance of examining within-person fluctuations in attachment security, which are associated with declines in trajectories of relationship wellbeing, particularly for secure individuals who anticipate greater stability in their relationships.

Partners’ attachment insecurity predicts greater physiological threat in anticipation of attachment-relevant interactions:

This study examined whether anticipating interacting with a partner higher in attachment insecurity predicted greater physiological threat in an emotion regulation context. Eighty-eight couples watched an emotionally negative film clip, prepared to discuss the video with their partner, and then engaged in a conversation. One dyad member (regulator) was randomly assigned to express versus suppress affective displays while his/ her partner (target) was given no additional instructions. Greater partner avoidance was associated with stronger physiological responses consistent with the experience of threat—sympathetic arousal coupled with increased vascular resistance—when regulators anticipated suppressing versus expressing affective displays. Greater partner anxiety was associated with greater physiological threat responses regardless of the emotion regulation context. Threat responses also manifested during the conversation: Regulators and targets with highly avoidant partners exhibited greater threat responses when suppressing versus expressing affective displays. Additionally, more insecure partners found the conversation more difficult. These data are the first to show that anticipating attachment-relevant interactions with more insecure partners elicit cardiovascular responses diagnostic of threat.

Emotional Suppression During Personal Goal Pursuit Impedes Goal Strivings and Achievement.

Prior research indicates that emotional suppression exacerbates distress and reduces cognitive performance and self-control. We extend this prior work in the current studies by examining whether emotional suppression in specific goal-relevant contexts impedes people’s goal strivings and progress. In Study 1, participants (N = 146) provided reports every 2 weeks across a 2-month period reporting the degree to which they engaged in emotional suppression during goal pursuit and reported important goal-related outcomes, including depressed mood, perceived support/closeness, goal effort, goal-related competence, and goal success. In Study 2, participants reported on the degree to which they engaged in emotional suppression while discussing a personal goal with their romantic partner (N = 100 heterosexual couples) and reported on the same outcomes as in Study 1 prior to, immediately following, and then 1 month after couples’ discussions. In both studies, greater use of emotional suppression predicted increased depressed mood, reduced perceived support/closeness, and reduced goal effort, competence, and success across time. Corroborating individuals’ self-reports, participants who engaged in emotional suppression were also perceived by their partners to experience greater depressed mood and lower feelings of support and closeness, and be less competent with regard to their goal (Study 2). The effects of emotional suppression were robust when controlling for a range of alternative explanations. These goal hindering effects are likely one important reason emotional suppression is linked with poorer psychological and health outcomes and extend our understanding of the detrimental impact that emotional suppression can have in people’s everyday lives.

Repairing Distance and Facilitating Support Reassurance Seeking by Highly Avoidant Individuals Is Associated With Greater Closeness and Partner Support

The interpersonal consequences of reassurance seeking may depend on who is seeking reassurance. This research examined whether greater reassurance seeking during couples’ support-relevant discussions was associated with greater partner support when enacted by more avoidant individuals who typically minimize dependence in their relationships. Three dyadic studies (N = 246 couples) demonstrated that the interpersonal effects of reassurance seeking were moderated by attachment avoidance. Greater reassurance seeking repaired the lack of closeness that partners of highly avoidant individuals typically feel (Study 3), and these partners, in turn, provided more support across studies. In contrast, greater reassurance seeking by less avoidant individuals was associated with partners feeling less close (Study 3), but was not associated with partners’ support across studies. These results provide the first evidence that reassurance seeking during support-relevant interactions can repair distance and facilitate support, but these positive interpersonal effects occur when reassurance seekers are high in attachment avoidance.

Does support need to be seen? Daily invisible support promotes next day relationship well-being.

Direct and overt visible support promotes recipients’ relationship satisfaction but can also exacerbate negative mood. In contrast, subtle and indirect invisible support can bypass costs to mood, but it is unclear whether it undermines or boosts relationship satisfaction. Because invisible support is not perceived by recipients, its relational impact may be delayed across time. Thus, the current research used three dyadic daily diary studies (total N = 322 married couples) to explore, for the first time, both the immediate (same day) and lagged (next day) effects of visible and invisible support on recipients’ mood and relationship satisfaction. Consistent with prior research, visible support was associated with recipients reporting greater relationship satisfaction and greater anxiety the same day. In contrast, but also consistent with prior research, invisible support had no significant same-day effects, and thus avoided mood costs. Nevertheless, invisible support was associated with recipients reporting greater relationship satisfaction the next day. Study 3 provided evidence that such effects emerged because invisible support was also associated with greater satisfaction with partners’ helpful behaviors (e.g., household chores) and relationship interactions (e.g., time spent together) on the next day. These studies demonstrate the importance of assessing different temporal effects associated with support acts (which may otherwise go undetected) and provide the first evidence that invisible support enhances relationship satisfaction but does so across days.