Marital Attachment Interview: Adult Attachment Assessment of Marriage
Identifieur interne : 000895 ( Istex/Corpus ); précédent : 000894; suivant : 000896Marital Attachment Interview: Adult Attachment Assessment of Marriage
Auteurs : Susan Dickstein ; Ronald Seifer ; Martin St Andre ; Masha SchillerSource :
- Journal of Social and Personal Relationships [ 0265-4075 ] ; 2001-10.
Abstract
We present pilot data of a newly developed attachment measure, the Marital Attachment Interview. This interview was developed to assess adults' representations of their current relationship with a partner as an adjunct to available assessments of relationship representations of parents with young children (infant-parent attachment) and adults with their own parents (adult attachment). From this pilot study of 24 couples, we present: (1) the distribution of marital attachment classifications, (2) the concordance between marital attachment and adult attachment classifications; and (3) the associations between marital attachment classification (representation) and family factors. We then speculate about the utility of this new narrative approach for understanding how attachment in intimate relationships may be useful in appreciating components of intergenerational transmission of attachment.
Url:
DOI: 10.1177/0265407501185005
Links to Exploration step
ISTEX:373221275B9D0DC7D700986FA12CDDFB688A92E9Le document en format XML
<record><TEI wicri:istexFullTextTei="biblStruct"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">Marital Attachment Interview: Adult Attachment Assessment of Marriage</title><author wicri:is="90%"><name sortKey="Dickstein, Susan" sort="Dickstein, Susan" uniqKey="Dickstein S" first="Susan" last="Dickstein">Susan Dickstein</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Bradley Hospital, Brown University School of Medicine,</mods:affiliation></affiliation><affiliation><mods:affiliation>E-mail: susan_dickstein@Brown.edu</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author wicri:is="90%"><name sortKey="Seifer, Ronald" sort="Seifer, Ronald" uniqKey="Seifer R" first="Ronald" last="Seifer">Ronald Seifer</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Bradley Hospital, Brown University School of Medicine</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author wicri:is="90%"><name sortKey="St Andre, Martin" sort="St Andre, Martin" uniqKey="St Andre M" first="Martin" last="St Andre">Martin St Andre</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Hospital St Justine, Montreal</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author wicri:is="90%"><name sortKey="Schiller, Masha" sort="Schiller, Masha" uniqKey="Schiller M" first="Masha" last="Schiller">Masha Schiller</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Bradley Hospital, Brown University School of Medicine</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">ISTEX</idno><idno type="RBID">ISTEX:373221275B9D0DC7D700986FA12CDDFB688A92E9</idno><date when="2001" year="2001">2001</date><idno type="doi">10.1177/0265407501185005</idno><idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/373221275B9D0DC7D700986FA12CDDFB688A92E9/fulltext/pdf</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">000895</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Istex" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="ISTEX">000895</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Marital Attachment Interview: Adult Attachment Assessment of Marriage</title><author wicri:is="90%"><name sortKey="Dickstein, Susan" sort="Dickstein, Susan" uniqKey="Dickstein S" first="Susan" last="Dickstein">Susan Dickstein</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Bradley Hospital, Brown University School of Medicine,</mods:affiliation></affiliation><affiliation><mods:affiliation>E-mail: susan_dickstein@Brown.edu</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author wicri:is="90%"><name sortKey="Seifer, Ronald" sort="Seifer, Ronald" uniqKey="Seifer R" first="Ronald" last="Seifer">Ronald Seifer</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Bradley Hospital, Brown University School of Medicine</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author wicri:is="90%"><name sortKey="St Andre, Martin" sort="St Andre, Martin" uniqKey="St Andre M" first="Martin" last="St Andre">Martin St Andre</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Hospital St Justine, Montreal</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author wicri:is="90%"><name sortKey="Schiller, Masha" sort="Schiller, Masha" uniqKey="Schiller M" first="Masha" last="Schiller">Masha Schiller</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Bradley Hospital, Brown University School of Medicine</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></analytic><monogr></monogr><series><title level="j">Journal of Social and Personal Relationships</title><idno type="ISSN">0265-4075</idno><idno type="eISSN">1460-3608</idno><imprint><publisher>Sage Publications</publisher><pubPlace>Sage CA: Thousand Oaks, CA</pubPlace><date type="published" when="2001-10">2001-10</date><biblScope unit="volume">18</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">5</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="651">651</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="672">672</biblScope></imprint><idno type="ISSN">0265-4075</idno></series><idno type="istex">373221275B9D0DC7D700986FA12CDDFB688A92E9</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1177/0265407501185005</idno><idno type="ArticleID">10.1177_0265407501185005</idno></biblStruct></sourceDesc><seriesStmt><idno type="ISSN">0265-4075</idno></seriesStmt></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass></textClass><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">We present pilot data of a newly developed attachment measure, the Marital Attachment Interview. This interview was developed to assess adults' representations of their current relationship with a partner as an adjunct to available assessments of relationship representations of parents with young children (infant-parent attachment) and adults with their own parents (adult attachment). From this pilot study of 24 couples, we present: (1) the distribution of marital attachment classifications, (2) the concordance between marital attachment and adult attachment classifications; and (3) the associations between marital attachment classification (representation) and family factors. We then speculate about the utility of this new narrative approach for understanding how attachment in intimate relationships may be useful in appreciating components of intergenerational transmission of attachment.</div></front></TEI><istex><corpusName>sage</corpusName><author><json:item><name>Susan Dickstein</name><affiliations><json:string>Bradley Hospital, Brown University School of Medicine,</json:string><json:string>E-mail: susan_dickstein@Brown.edu</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Ronald Seifer</name><affiliations><json:string>Bradley Hospital, Brown University School of Medicine</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Martin St Andre</name><affiliations><json:string>Hospital St Justine, Montreal</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Masha Schiller</name><affiliations><json:string>Bradley Hospital, Brown University School of Medicine</json:string></affiliations></json:item></author><subject><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>adult attachment</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>marriage</value></json:item><json:item><lang><json:string>eng</json:string></lang><value>narratives</value></json:item></subject><articleId><json:string>10.1177_0265407501185005</json:string></articleId><language><json:string>eng</json:string></language><originalGenre><json:string>research-article</json:string></originalGenre><abstract>We present pilot data of a newly developed attachment measure, the Marital Attachment Interview. This interview was developed to assess adults' representations of their current relationship with a partner as an adjunct to available assessments of relationship representations of parents with young children (infant-parent attachment) and adults with their own parents (adult attachment). From this pilot study of 24 couples, we present: (1) the distribution of marital attachment classifications, (2) the concordance between marital attachment and adult attachment classifications; and (3) the associations between marital attachment classification (representation) and family factors. We then speculate about the utility of this new narrative approach for understanding how attachment in intimate relationships may be useful in appreciating components of intergenerational transmission of attachment.</abstract><qualityIndicators><score>1.449</score><pdfVersion>1.3</pdfVersion><pdfPageSize>439.68 x 658.32 pts</pdfPageSize><refBibsNative>true</refBibsNative><abstractCharCount>901</abstractCharCount><pdfWordCount>9</pdfWordCount><pdfCharCount>54</pdfCharCount><pdfPageCount>22</pdfPageCount><abstractWordCount>120</abstractWordCount></qualityIndicators><title>Marital Attachment Interview: Adult Attachment Assessment of Marriage</title><genre><json:string>research-article</json:string></genre><host><volume>18</volume><publisherId><json:string>SPR</json:string></publisherId><pages><last>672</last><first>651</first></pages><issn><json:string>0265-4075</json:string></issn><issue>5</issue><genre><json:string>journal</json:string></genre><language><json:string>unknown</json:string></language><eissn><json:string>1460-3608</json:string></eissn><title>Journal of Social and Personal Relationships</title></host><categories><wos><json:string>social science</json:string><json:string>psychology, social</json:string><json:string>communication</json:string></wos><scienceMetrix><json:string>health sciences</json:string><json:string>psychology & cognitive sciences</json:string><json:string>social psychology</json:string></scienceMetrix></categories><publicationDate>2001</publicationDate><copyrightDate>2001</copyrightDate><doi><json:string>10.1177/0265407501185005</json:string></doi><id>373221275B9D0DC7D700986FA12CDDFB688A92E9</id><score>1</score><fulltext><json:item><extension>pdf</extension><original>true</original><mimetype>application/pdf</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/373221275B9D0DC7D700986FA12CDDFB688A92E9/fulltext/pdf</uri></json:item><json:item><extension>zip</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>application/zip</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/373221275B9D0DC7D700986FA12CDDFB688A92E9/fulltext/zip</uri></json:item><istex:fulltextTEI uri="https://api.istex.fr/document/373221275B9D0DC7D700986FA12CDDFB688A92E9/fulltext/tei"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Marital Attachment Interview: Adult Attachment Assessment of Marriage</title></titleStmt><publicationStmt><authority>ISTEX</authority><publisher>Sage Publications</publisher><pubPlace>Sage CA: Thousand Oaks, CA</pubPlace><availability><p>SAGE</p></availability><date>2001</date></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct type="inbook"><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="en">Marital Attachment Interview: Adult Attachment Assessment of Marriage</title><author xml:id="author-1"><persName><forename type="first">Susan</forename><surname>Dickstein</surname></persName><email>susan_dickstein@Brown.edu</email><affiliation>Bradley Hospital, Brown University School of Medicine,</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-2"><persName><forename type="first">Ronald</forename><surname>Seifer</surname></persName><affiliation>Bradley Hospital, Brown University School of Medicine</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-3"><persName><forename type="first">Martin</forename><surname>St Andre</surname></persName><affiliation>Hospital St Justine, Montreal</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-4"><persName><forename type="first">Masha</forename><surname>Schiller</surname></persName><affiliation>Bradley Hospital, Brown University School of Medicine</affiliation></author></analytic><monogr><title level="j">Journal of Social and Personal Relationships</title><idno type="pISSN">0265-4075</idno><idno type="eISSN">1460-3608</idno><imprint><publisher>Sage Publications</publisher><pubPlace>Sage CA: Thousand Oaks, CA</pubPlace><date type="published" when="2001-10"></date><biblScope unit="volume">18</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">5</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="651">651</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="672">672</biblScope></imprint></monogr><idno type="istex">373221275B9D0DC7D700986FA12CDDFB688A92E9</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1177/0265407501185005</idno><idno type="ArticleID">10.1177_0265407501185005</idno></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><creation><date>2001</date></creation><langUsage><language ident="en">en</language></langUsage><abstract xml:lang="en"><p>We present pilot data of a newly developed attachment measure, the Marital Attachment Interview. This interview was developed to assess adults' representations of their current relationship with a partner as an adjunct to available assessments of relationship representations of parents with young children (infant-parent attachment) and adults with their own parents (adult attachment). From this pilot study of 24 couples, we present: (1) the distribution of marital attachment classifications, (2) the concordance between marital attachment and adult attachment classifications; and (3) the associations between marital attachment classification (representation) and family factors. We then speculate about the utility of this new narrative approach for understanding how attachment in intimate relationships may be useful in appreciating components of intergenerational transmission of attachment.</p></abstract><textClass><keywords scheme="keyword"><list><head>keywords</head><item><term>adult attachment</term></item><item><term>marriage</term></item><item><term>narratives</term></item></list></keywords></textClass></profileDesc><revisionDesc><change when="2001-10">Published</change></revisionDesc></teiHeader></istex:fulltextTEI><json:item><extension>txt</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>text/plain</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/373221275B9D0DC7D700986FA12CDDFB688A92E9/fulltext/txt</uri></json:item></fulltext><metadata><istex:metadataXml wicri:clean="corpus sage not found" wicri:toSee="no header"><istex:xmlDeclaration>version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"</istex:xmlDeclaration><istex:docType PUBLIC="-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v2.3 20070202//EN" URI="journalpublishing.dtd" name="istex:docType"></istex:docType><istex:document><article article-type="research-article" dtd-version="2.3" xml:lang="EN"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="hwp">spspr</journal-id><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">SPR</journal-id><journal-title>Journal of Social and Personal Relationships</journal-title><issn pub-type="ppub">0265-4075</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Sage Publications</publisher-name><publisher-loc>Sage CA: Thousand Oaks, CA</publisher-loc></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1177/0265407501185005</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">10.1177_0265407501185005</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Articles</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>Marital Attachment Interview: Adult Attachment Assessment of Marriage</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Dickstein</surname><given-names>Susan</given-names></name><aff>Bradley Hospital, Brown University School of Medicine, <email xlink:type="simple">susan_dickstein@Brown.edu</email></aff></contrib></contrib-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Seifer</surname><given-names>Ronald</given-names></name><aff>Bradley Hospital, Brown University School of Medicine</aff></contrib></contrib-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>St Andre</surname><given-names>Martin</given-names></name><aff>Hospital St Justine, Montreal</aff></contrib></contrib-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Schiller</surname><given-names>Masha</given-names></name><aff>Bradley Hospital, Brown University School of Medicine</aff></contrib></contrib-group><pub-date pub-type="ppub"><month>10</month><year>2001</year></pub-date><volume>18</volume><issue>5</issue><fpage>651</fpage><lpage>672</lpage><abstract><p>We present pilot data of a newly developed attachment measure, the Marital Attachment Interview. This interview was developed to assess adults' representations of their current relationship with a partner as an adjunct to available assessments of relationship representations of parents with young children (infant-parent attachment) and adults with their own parents (adult attachment). From this pilot study of 24 couples, we present: (1) the distribution of marital attachment classifications, (2) the concordance between marital attachment and adult attachment classifications; and (3) the associations between marital attachment classification (representation) and family factors. We then speculate about the utility of this new narrative approach for understanding how attachment in intimate relationships may be useful in appreciating components of intergenerational transmission of attachment.</p></abstract><kwd-group><kwd>adult attachment</kwd><kwd>marriage</kwd><kwd>narratives</kwd></kwd-group><custom-meta-wrap><custom-meta xlink:type="simple"><meta-name>sagemeta-type</meta-name><meta-value>Journal Article</meta-value></custom-meta><custom-meta xlink:type="simple"><meta-name>search-text</meta-name><meta-value> Marital Attachment Interview: Adult attachment assessment of marriage Susan Dickstein & Ronald Seifer Bradley Hospital, Brown University School of Medicine Martin St Andre Hospital St Justine, Montreal Masha Schiller Bradley Hospital, Brown University School of Medicine ABSTRACT We present pilot data of a newly developed attachment measure, the Marital Attachment Interview. This interview was developed to assess adults' representations of their current relationship with a partner as an adjunct to available assessments of relationship representations of parents with young children (infant-parent attachment) and adults with their own parents (adult attachment). From this pilot study of 24 couples, we present: (1) the distribution of marital attach- ment classifications, (2) the concordance between marital attachment and adult attachment classifications; and (3) the associations between marital attachment classification (rep- resentation) and family factors. We then speculate about the utility of this new narrative approach for understanding how attachment in intimate relationships may be useful in appreci- ating components of intergenerational transmission of attach- ment. KEY WORDS: adult attachment * marriage * narratives Attachment research has become a hallmark approach from which to conceptualize interpersonal interaction that has meaning across genera- tional boundaries and relationship contexts (Waters, Vaughn, Posada, & This research was supported by grants from Brown University, Department of Psychiatry and Human Behavior, and from the National Institute of Mental Health (MH50642). Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Susan Dickstein, Brown University, Director, Early Childhood Research Center, Bradley Hospital, 1011 Veterans Memorial Parkway, East Providence, RI 02915. [E-mail: susan_dickstein@Brown.edu]. Joumal of Social and Personal Relationships Copyright ( 2001 SAGE Publications (London, Thousand Oaks, CA and New Delhi), Vol. 18(5): 651-672. [0265-4075 (200110) 18:5; 019357] Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 18(5) Kondo-Ikemura, 1995; Van IJzendoorn, 1992). Increasingly, adult attach- ment relationships have been the focus of attention in the attempt to eluci- date processes that might help explain attachment status in children. The majority of this work has examined adult attachment relationships in the realm of adults' conceptualization of their own early childhood relation- ships with their parents. In this report, we focus on the marital relationship as an adult attachment construct (Hazan & Shaver, 1987, 1990; Shaver, Hazan, & Bradshaw, 1988) with associated representational properties. We believe these marital attachment relationships are an important component for full understanding of the complex pattern of inter- and intragenerational representations of self-other relatedness. Bowlby (1969) theorized that children form internal working models of their relationships with others based on early interactions with significant caregivers. When children have experiences with reliable and responsive caregivers, they construct a working model of that relationship as secure and accessible, and a sense of self as adequate and worthy (Bretherton, 1985; Cummings & Cicchetti, 1991). In contrast, the continual experience of caregiver unavailability or inconsistency leads to expectations that the caregiver cannot be relied upon as a secure base from which to explore the world, and that the self is unworthy of love. Furthermore, working models develop for each significant relationship partner; each of these multiple working models is a dynamic construction, with the possibility that one con- structed working model can affect other working models. In sum, attachment theory supports the following points: (1) the child's sense of self is formed within a relationship context; (2) each child poten- tially has multiple significant relationship contexts within which the sense of self can be differentiated and enriched; and (3) working models are a heuristic for understanding the organized representations of self and relationships corresponding to observable attachment patterns that can be classified through use of standard procedures. Intergenerational patterns of attachment Parents and children Recent methodological developments have facilitated more direct assess- ment of adults' current working models of their past relationships, termed adult attachment (George, Kaplan, & Main, 1996; Main & Goldwyn, 1994). Secure attachment is characterized by a balance between the attachment and exploratory motivational systems. In infants, this is demonstrated when the child seeks proximity to, and obtains comfort from, the caregiver during times of distress, following which the child promptly returns to exploration of the object and social worlds. In adults, secure attachment (labeled auton- omous) is manifest as the ability to describe early relationships with care- givers in a coherent and consistent manner; these adults convey a strong sense of personal identity; and emphasis is placed on the importance and value of early experiences and current relationships. 652 Dickstein et al.: Marital attachment Non-secure attachment, on the other hand, is characterized by disruptions between the attachment and developmentally appropriate motivational systems. In infants, there are two organized patterns of insecure attachment (avoidant and resistant), which differ on the level of activation of attachment behaviors, and one pattern with no clear organization (disorganized). Avoidant infant-parent attachment is manifest as the child, during a stress- ful situation (confirmed by high levels of physiological arousal), deactivat- ing attachment behavior by avoiding contact with the parent in an apparent attempt to minimize the anxiety associated with possible parental rejection. In adults, the analogous pattern is classified as dismissing of attachment in which adults limit, deactivate, or devalue the influence of attachment relationships. Resistant infant-parent attachment is manifest as the child over-activating attachment behavior by simultaneously demanding and rejecting parental attention, and exhibiting excessive dependence on the parent in an apparent attempt to minimize arousal. In adults, the analogous pattern is classified as preoccupied with attachment characterized by descriptions of early attachment relationships that are confused or con- flicted, often accented by passivity, fear, or anger. Finally, the disorganized infant-parent attachment classification involves the child exhibiting no consistent way to deal with stressful attachment- related situations. This includes the child demonstrating aspects of more than one of the organized patterns described earlier, and/or other indications of conflict, apprehension, or helplessness (Lyons-Ruth, 1992; Lyons-Ruth & Jacobvitz, 1999). In adults, attachment disorganization is characterized by a lack of resolution with respect to loss or trauma in which there is a pervasive emphasis on continued effects of loss or trauma in connection with current attachment experiences. Transcripts that reflect unresolved status exhibit specific lapses in monitoring of reasoning (such as psychologically confused statements or attempts to manipulate the mind with respect to the loss) and/or discourse (such as unusual attention to detail when describing the loss or invasion of loss-related themes into other topics). Theoretical and empirical work suggests that mothers' working models of their early relationships with their own parents (reflected in adult attach- ment classifications) greatly influence interaction patterns that they develop with their children. Maternal insecure adult attachment is related to the development of behavior problems in their children (Crowell & Feldman, 1989), sleep disorders in their toddlers (Benoit, Zeanah, Boucher, & Minde, 1989), failure to thrive in their infants (Benoit, Zeanah, & Barton, 1989), and dysregulations in mother-infant affect attunement (Haft & Slade, 1989). Further, parents' working models of relationships developed early in life are related to the attachment relationships they develop with their own children. Prospective studies have found concordance rates ranging from 66% to 75% between maternal adult attachment classifications (secure versus insecure) obtained by the Adult Attachment Interview (AAI) during pregnancy, and infant-mother attachment (secure versus insecure) observed in the Ainsworth et al. (1978) Strange Situation more than a year later (Benoit, Vidovic, & Roman, 1991; Fonagy, Steele, & Steele, 653 Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 18(5) 1991; Ward, Botyanski, Plunkett, & Carlson, 1991). A similar range of concordance rates was found when the AAI was administered concurrently or following the Strange Situation (Eichberg, 1987; Zeanah et al., 1993). Although most of the literature to date has focused on mothers, recent work has highlighted the importance of examining fathers' working models of relationships. In a meta-analysis conducted by Van IJzendoorn and Bakermans-Kranenburg (1996), results indicated that the distribution of attachment representations in fathers is remarkably similar to that of mothers. Initial work suggests that mothers' and fathers' representations may differentially correspond with child outcomes. For example, while fathers' attachment representations were significantly related to father- infant security, Van IJzendoorn (1995) found that the association was some- what less strong than it was for mothers. In addition, in a non-clinical sample, Cowan, Cohn, Cowan, and Pearson (1996) found that fathers' rep- resentations were more associated with teacher ratings of externalizing behaviors in pre-school age children, whereas mothers' representations were more associated with child internalizing behaviors. In sum, attachment patterns can be examined in different developmental periods; there is correspondence within families across generations; these attachments appear to influence the developing sense of self as well as the developing expectations regarding the extent to which others can be relied upon as emotional and social supports; and mothers' and fathers' represen- tations potentially yield differential associations with child behavior. While a high degree of within-family correspondence has been reported between adult and infant-parent attachment classifications, the direction of the effects has not been clearly substantiated. The extent to which this association can be accounted for by intervening variables (such as the nature of mothers' current adult relationships) has not been explored. Finally, factors that may account for the observed intergenerational matches and mismatches (poten- tially revealing protective or risk factors) have not been investigated. The marital relationship An often-neglected link in studying the intergenerational chain of attach- ment relationships is the quality of the parent's current and significant adult relationships, especially the marital relationship. This is a critical omission in that the quality of the marital relationship serves to regulate cogni- tive-affective processes and provides an important basis of social support (e.g., Quinton, Rutter, & Liddle, 1984). On the one hand, it is possible that individuals hold distinct types of working models for different relationship partners - this generalizes to having a possible lack of correspondence between adult attachment (with family of origin) and marital attachment (with adult partner). On the other, the cognitive-affective processes in play when constructing marital attachment working models may affect the ongoing construction of past relationships, behavior with parents, and behavior with children. Our broad research agenda focuses on the hypoth- esis that the marital relationship also has an important potential restorative function in adults with insecure attachment histories, which can promote 654 Dickstein et al.: Marital attachment the development of secure infant-parent attachment relationships in the next generation. Marital attachment. Marital attachment, a concept that extends attachment constructs to the marital domain, is broader in its cognitive-affective scope than appraisals of current marital satisfaction. Assessment of marital attach- ment is designed to infer the working model of the marriage. Similar to infant and adult attachment, marital attachment involves the extent to which partners operate from a secure base in order to accomplish develop- mentally appropriate tasks within adult domains such as effective parenting or employment, return to a safe haven during times of stress or distress, and use of the attachment relationship (the marriage, in this case) to regulate affect (e.g., Hazan & Shaver, 1990; Shaver et al., 1988). In the current study, we present a new method to evaluate the marital relationship from the per- spective of representation. How does marital attachment differ from marital satisfaction? We propose that marital attachment reflects the organization of behaviors and thoughts parents use to regulate their current relationships. We evaluate here the marital relationship from the perspective of representation (marital attachment). In an effort to assess discriminant validity, we compare marital attachment representations to other marital appraisals (such as marital satisfaction) to determine the extent to which these are dis- tinct constructs. In a related study of pre-marital couples, Owens et al. (1995) found significant, yet only moderate, associations between measures of marital representation and satisfaction. How does marital attachment differ from adult attachment? As with adult attachment, security of marital attachment is hypothesized to have implications for infant-parent attachment. However, unlike adult attach- ment, which is an assessment of a current model of caregiving relationships elicited via descriptions of past relationships, marital attachment is an assessment of a current model of intimate relationships elicited via descrip- tions of a current relationship that shares the same family context within which the infant-parent attachment develops. As such, marital attachment is likely to be immediately associated with the nature of family functioning, and, therefore, to play a mediational role in the continuation of attachment security or insecurity across generations. It is hypothesized that secure marital attachment may function to reduce the likelihood of insecure adult attachment leading to insecure infant-parent attachment. In a related vein, recent work has assessed associations between the quality of the marital relationship and each partner's adult attachment working model of childhood. Cohn, Cowan, Cowan, and Pearson (1992) found no relation between adult attachment (of early childhood relation- ships) classifications and self-reports of marital satisfaction, obtained from both husbands and wives. For husbands, however, adult attachment security was related to more positive (as opposed to conflictual) behavior in the mar- riage. Further, the authors speculated that a secure partner may, in fact, buffer negative effects of insecure working models established concerning 655 Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 18(5) early experience (i.e., adult attachment) vis-a-vis current marital behavior. Such findings support our working hypothesis that the nature of the attach- ment relationship between the partners may be linked both to marital behavior and to intergenerational continuity of relationship patterns. Marital Attachment Interview (MAI). The MAI is a direct extension of the Adult Attachment Interview (George et al., 1996), with modifications to address differences between construction of past relationships with the prior generation and the current same-generation marital attachment relationship. The MAI maintains similar properties to the AAI, including use of structured questions about attachment issues, questions asked in a set order, probes for specific information without altering the person's phrasing, no use of interpretive or integrative comments, and questions probing for overall evaluations of experience in conjunction with requests for specific examples. The MAI has a total of 16 questions covering orien- tation to the current marital relationship; description of the current relationship, including expectations, changes over time, and separation experiences; experiences with rejection, threat, and support from the partner; past significant and intimate adult relationships, including any prior divorces and/or abusive relationship experiences; information regarding the person's memories of his/her own parents' marital relationship; description of marital relationship influences on the current personality; and a wrap up. The narratives generated from verbatim transcripts of the Marital Attachment Interview are coded using the Adult Attachment Interview scoring system in slightly modified form to make marital attachment classifications (Main & Goldwyn, 1994). Attachment classifications from narrative assessment are based on two major dimensions including security-insecurity and activation-deactivation of attachment behavior (Kobak, Cole, Ferenz-Gillies, & Flemming, 1993). The security-insecurity dimension is assessed from narrative properties including narrative charac- teristics (how the person presents narrative material) and content regarding actual relationship experiences (what the person says about relationships). The manner in which the person presents narrative material is weighted more heavily in the scoring than the specific content. Secure attachment narratives are coherent, detailed, and responsive to the interview queries. They may be associated with modest levels of either activation or deactivation of attachment behavior. Information is presented in a relatively independent and objective manner, demonstrating perspec- tive, insight, and/or understanding, as well as the ability to manage negative affect. Although the specific content and valence of relationships may vary, there is thematic indication of valuing attachment relationships and regard of attachment-related experiences as influential in current personality and functioning. The two main types of insecure attachment (characterized by incoher- ence, poor access to attachment-relevant material, and shift of focus away from the interview agenda) are differentiated based on either under- activation of the attachment system (i.e., demonstration of dismissing, 656 Dickstein et al.: Marital attachment distancing, or devaluing of the attachment figure) or over-activation of the attachment system (i.e., demonstration of confusion, conflict, and/or height- ened distraction with the attachment figure). Narratives reflecting the under-activation form of insecurity (Dismissing) are characterized by lack of specificity regarding attachment experiences and their influence on current personality and functioning. Marital attach- ment narratives characterized by under-activation may be manifest by dis- missal of the importance of relationships, description of apparently difficult experiences in the relationship (e.g., marital separation) with denial or failure to address the impact on the self, indication of being cut off from the emotional aspects of relationships, lack of specificity regarding details of relationship experiences, and/or global positive yet unsubstantiated (or con- tradicted) evaluation of the relationship. Narratives reflecting the over-activation form of insecurity (Preoccupied) are characterized by an inability to abstract from or make sense of attach- ment relationship experience (i.e., to coherently access meaningful aspects of the relationship in an objective manner); in addition, these narratives involve current thematic anger, passivity, or vagueness of thought, and a sense of being overwhelmed by relationships. Marital attachment narratives characterized by over-activation may be manifested by description of being overwhelmed by the demands of relationships, of increased dependency upon relationships, and/or indication of a lack of self-other differentiation. A second classification (in addition to one of the three strategies described earlier) is also made regarding the presence of Unresolved fea- tures with Respect to Loss or Trauma. This is manifested by current con- fusion and a sense of being overwhelmed by a significant traumatic event that, in the case of marital attachment, may include the loss of a former or current partner due to death or dissolution of the relationship, or severe trauma (such as abuse by the current or former partner). Similar to the AAI, MAI transcripts that reflect Unresolved status exhibit specific lapses in monitoring of reasoning (such as psychologically confused statements or attempts to manipulate the mind with respect to the loss or trauma) and/or discourse (such as unusual attention to detail when describing the loss or invasion of loss-related themes into other topics). A Cannot Classify rating is provided for those transcripts that do not meet the criteria for one of the three major classifications described earlier. This may involve simultaneous use of distinct strategies (pertaining to the state of mind scales) so that no organized pattern is apparent, or may involve evi- dence of discrepant states of mind in different portions of the interview. Summary and research hypotheses This study is embedded in a larger theoretical agenda regarding the role of adult relationship functioning in the development of attachment in the next generation. If the association between marital attachment and family func- tioning is borne out, this would be theoretically important because marital attachment could be expected to play a moderating role in the continuity of infant-parent attachment security or insecurity across generations. In 657 Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 18(5) families where both adult partners are secure in their marital attachment relationship (even if present with insecure adult attachment status in one or both partners), better family functioning may be evident due to pro- cesses such as effective skills in communication, problem solving, and res- olution of negative affect (without implication of directional causality). This in turn may be associated with increased parental availability and sensitivity to the infant's needs, and thus secure infant-parent attachment. This moderation of the typical pattern of insecure adult attachment status promoting insecure infant-parent attachment leads to the view of marital attachment as a protective factor in the intergenerational transmission of attachment patterns. Thus, demonstrating an association between marital attachment and family functioning would suggest continued interest in the important hypothesis that secure marital attachment may help break the cycle in which insecure adult attachment leads to insecure infant-parent attachment. This model rests on the assumptions that (1) adults can develop more than one attachment working model of relationships and (2) marriage con- stitutes an attachment-relationship domain. In the current work, we explore the following general questions: (1) Can the method used to assess adult attachment representations (i.e., of the early parent-child relationship) be extended to current intimate relationships such as marriage? (2) Are adult attachment representations formed regarding the early parent-child relationship associated with those formed regarding current intimate relationships? (3) Is representation of the marriage (assessed via attach- ment narrative methodology) different from appraisal of marriage (i.e., marital satisfaction)? These general questions in turn lead to the specific research hypotheses addressed in the current study: * It is hypothesized that there is only slight (if any) association between marital attachment and adult attachment classifications. Although there is some evidence to suggest that adult attachment is directly related to marital attachment (Owens et al., 1995), there is not yet enough empiri- cal data to conclude that the associations between the measures are more than overlap in method variance (as opposed to construct concordance). * It is hypothesized that there is minimal association between marital attachment classification and marital satisfaction, given the assumption that marital representation is different from marital appraisal and behav- ior. * It is hypothesized that there is substantial association between marital attachment classification and family functioning, given the assumption that the working model or representation of the marital relationship is intrinsically tied to the manner in which the couple transacts the business of being a family (with no implications of directionality of effect). 658 Dickstein et al.: Marital attachment Method Participants The sample for this pilot study included 24 families, recruited primarily from other ongoing studies of early childhood development. All partners were married and/or living together, and had at least one child 14 months of age (for 39% this was the firstborn). On average, families had 1.7 children (range = 1 to 3). The mean age of wives and husbands was 32.2 years (range = 20 to 45 years) and 33.2 years (range = 21 to 53 years), respectively. All participants were white, with 8.6% of the sample of Portuguese ethnicity. On average, the participants were well educated (the mean years of schooling for wives and husbands was 15.5 and 15.7, respectively; range = 10-20 years). They were married on average 4.1 years (range = 1 to 14 years); one husband had been previously widowed, and four participants (two husbands and two wives) had been previously divorced. Procedure Wives and husbands each completed AAI and MAI interviews on separate occasions and independent of one another. Each partner also completed ques- tionnaires regarding family functioning and marital satisfaction. Clinical psy- chologists or child psychiatrists conducted all attachment interviews. For both attachment interview protocols, clinicians were trained to be thoroughly famil- iar with the interview material, format, and general scoring principles in order to adhere to the interview structure while maintaining a conversation-like and empathic style. Interviews were conducted in a comfortable and private setting in the laboratory, with assurances given that no information would be disclosed to the partner. Each participant had a different interviewer for the AAI and MAI protocols; in addition, given the similarity of the basic content of the MAI protocol, each member of a husband-wife pair was interviewed by different clinicians. We conducted 47 Adult Attachment assessments (24 wives and 23 husbands) and 44 Marital Attachment assessments (24 wives and 20 husbands). There were 44 participants for whom information was available to compare adult attachment and marital attachment classification (24 wives and 20 husbands). Of the 23 possible couples for whom we obtained both husband and wife data, four couples were excluded because one of the partners received a Cannot Classify rating on the AAI. In one of these four couples, one partner also received a Cannot Classify rating on the MAI. Thus, there were 19 couples for whom information was available to compare spouses' classifications on adult attachment and marital attachment ratings. Interpretation of concordance rates presented here should take into consideration these cannot classify participants. All interviews were audiotaped for subsequent verbatim transcription, and then used to make classification judgments. Prior to scoring, all interviews were relabeled with a code that was independent of family identifiers so that raters were blind to spousal identity. All adult attachment and marital attachment interviews were scored by at least one of two raters, both of whom participated in a two-week training institute, and both of whom achieved reliability with a senior institute leader on adult attachment scoring (exact agreement > 80%). The two reliable AAI coders achieved reliability with each other on the MAI (81% exact agreement; kappa = .71). 659 Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 18(5) Adult Attachment Interview (AAI) and scoring. For this narrative-based inter- view, adults were requested to provide specific memories of early relationship experiences with their parents and other significant attachment figures, separa- tions, losses, rejections, and threats (George et al., 1996; Main & Goldwyn, 1994). The transcripts were rated on thirteen 9-point scales measuring the adult's probable early experiences with attachment figures and the current 'state of mind' with respect to attachment. In order to determine a final classification, raters coded five scales to assess Experience with each parent including the extent to which the participant described experiences that were Loving, Reject- ing, Role Reversing, Pressure to Achieve, and Neglecting. Raters also coded a second set of seven scales to assess Present State of Mind, including Idealization, Anger, Derogation, Insistence Upon Lack of Recall, Metacognitive Process, Passivity, and Fear of Loss. Finally, raters coded an overall score for Narrative Coherence. As with other attachment scoring systems (including infant, pre-school, and adult), there is no specific algorithm from which to compute final classifications from scale scores, although some guidance from scale scores is incorporated. For example, on the 9-point coherence scale, scores of 1 to 4 yield a classification of insecure or cannot classify, 6 to 9 require a secure classification, and a score of 5 may go in either direction. The final classifications are provided by incor- porating information obtained from the scales with impressions of the overall narrative; reliability is established following extensive training and studying of the attachment scoring system. Rating scales focus on salient information in two domains including actual relationship characteristics and narrative character- istics. Classification does not emphasize the content of the narrative, but rather the organization of thoughts and feelings and the qualitative aspects of the narrative. Thus, descriptions of good or bad experiences early in childhood are less important than the extent to which the person has integrated these experi- ences, as evidenced by accessible memories and coherent descriptions of past events. Transcripts were then classified as Secure (Autonomous) or Insecure (Dismissing or Preoccupied); and for presence of Unresolved with Respect to Mourning or Trauma. Marital Attachment Interview (MAI) and scoring. The MAI (1993) is a direct extension of the AAI. It is a structured narrative interview designed to assess the security of the marital attachment by rating the person's recollections and descriptions of the current marital (or partner) relationship from its beginning through the current time. Some information from past intimate relationships is also incorporated. The Marital Attachment scoring system uses the same basic principles as the Adult Attachment system for making attachment classifications (described earlier) from the transcribed interviews, with some modest modifications. For the MAI, Loving and Rejection scales are scored consistent with their counter- parts in the AAI system. The Loving scale assesses the extent to which the person describes experiences in the current significant adult relationship as loving or unloving, and maintains a firm sense that the partners are emotionally supportive and available. The Rejection scale assesses the extent to which the person describes experiences in the relationship as rejecting and/or avoiding of the person's attachment behaviors, as being emotionally distant or aloof, and/or as desiring to be out of the relationship altogether. Given the adult-adult nature 660 Dickstein et al.: Marital attachment of the marital relationship, these scales are considered bi-directionally; thus, a rating is made based on the person's experience of being rejected by the partner and/or the person's experience of rejecting the partner. Similar to AAI scoring, experience scales are ultimately scored based on the rater's judgments about the quality of the relationship in each domain. The scales rating Narrative Characteristics include Coherence, Idealization, Anger, Derogation, Lack of Specificity (the analogue of AAI Lack of Recall), Metacognitive Process, Passivity of Thought Processes, and Fear of Loss. These scales are consistent with their AAI counterparts, with Coherence being the primary scale upon which classification is based. Three of these scales were modified to better reflect the current nature of the marital relationship. The Anger scale assesses the extent to which the person indicates anger toward or about the partner during the interview, which reflects current involvement in feelings of anger. This scale is intended to assess thematic and pervasive anger, or anger that is presented in an overwhelming manner. Thus, a person who dis- closes currently felt anger with the partner related to a recent fight, but in an organized and reflective manner, would not receive a high score on this scale. The Lack of Specificity scale corresponds to the AAI Lack of Recall scale. The MAI scale is modified to address the current nature of the marital relationship, and thus emphasis is placed on specificity of disclosure (i.e., ability to provide rich and detailed description of experience) rather than memory for distal events. The Fear of Loss scale was modified to address overwhelming anxiety about the possibility of the partner's death or abandonment (rather than a child as in the AAI scoring). Similar to the AAI, MAI classifications are made of Secure (Autonomous) or Insecure (Dismissing or Preoccupied). In addition, a classification of Unresolved with Respect to Loss or Trauma may be assigned. The MAI Loss classification reflects lack of resolution with respect to the dissolution (due to separation, divorce, or death) of past intimate adult relationships. The MAI Trauma classifi- cation reflects lack of resolution with respect to abusive experiences with past or current partners. Also similar to the AAI system, Cannot Classify is assigned when no organized working model pattern can be detected or when clear evi- dence of two discrepant models is provided within the transcript. Dyadic Adjustment Scale (DAS). Husbands and wives independently com- pleted the DAS (Spanier, 1976). The DAS is a 32-item instrument that has been widely used to assess dyadic satisfaction, cohesion, consensus, and expression of affection within the current partner relationship, and yields an overall Marital Satisfaction score for each spouse. For the sample as a whole, mean DAS scores for wives and husbands were 105.44 (17.03) and 106.41 (15.62), respectively. Cronbach's alpha in this sample was .93. Family Assessment Device (FAD). Husbands and wives independently com- pleted the FAD (Epstein, Baldwin, & Bishop, 1983). The FAD is a 60-item self-report questionnaire based on the McMaster Model to assess six domains of family functioning including Roles, Communication, Problem Solving, Behavior Control, Affective Responsiveness, and Affective Involvement, as well as a Total Family Functioning score (Epstein et al., 1983; Miller, Epstein, Bishop, & Keitner, 1985). Participants rate items on a four-point scale ranging from very healthy (1) to very unhealthy (4), with lower scores indicating healthier family functioning. The FAD distinguishes families rated by 661 Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 18(5) clinicians as healthy or unhealthy (Miller et al., 1985), and families with a recovered versus non-recovered depressed member who have rated them- selves as healthy or unhealthy (Keitner, Ryan, Miller, Epstein, & Bishop, 1990). The Total Family Functioning score for each partner was used in the current analyses. For the sample as a whole, mean FAD scores for wives and husbands were 1.63 (0.40) and 1.75 (0.41), respectively. Cronbach's alpha in the present sample was .89. Results Distribution and correspondence of AAI and MAI classifications Distribution of AAI classifications for the current sample was similar to reported norms (Van IJzendoorn & Bakermans-Kranenburg, 1996). Standard- ized residuals were computed (as described by the authors) against data for non-clinical adults from the meta-analytic review (Van lJzendoorn & Bakermans-Kranenburg, 1996). For the major classification (Dismissing, Secure, Preoccupied), residuals were 1.01 or less, with an overall chi-square = 1.56 (ns), indicating good correspondence with the more than 500 cases in the meta-analysis. There was evidence of a higher rate of AAI Unresolved/Cannot Classify in the current study, yielding a standardized residual of 3.02 and an overall x2 (1, N = 44) = 11.30 (p < .05). For both the major classification and the unresolved classification, standardized residuals were 1.01 or less, with overall chi-square tests that did not approach significance. The distribution of MAI classifications was similar to reported AAI norms. Table 1 presents AAI and MAI data for the sample as a whole, as well as separately for wives and hus- bands. There was modest correspondence between MAI and AAI classifications including Secure, Dismissing, Preoccupied, and Cannot Classify categories (kappa = .36, p < .001 for the sample as a whole; kappa = .51 for wives and .35 for husbands). Exact agreement percentages were calculated based on predic- tion of MAI classification from AAI classification. Overall exact agreement was 67% for the sample as a whole (with exact agreement of 70% and 65% for wives and husbands, respectively). For the sample as a whole, there was agreement of TABLE 1 Distribution of AAI and MAI scores Secure Dismissing Preoccupied Can't classify Unresolved n(%) n(%) n(%) n(%) n(%) AAI (N= 47) Total 25 (53) 9 (19) 9 (19) 4 (9) 13 (28) Wives 11 (46) 5 (21) 7 (29) 1 (4) 7 (29) Husbands 14 (61) 4 (17) 2 (9) 3 (13) 6 (26) MAI (N= 44) Total 25 (57) 9 (21) 9 (21) 1 (2) 8 (18) Wives 13 (54) 4(17) 6 (25) 1(4) 3 (13) Husbands 12 (60) 5 (25) 3 (15) 0 (0) 5 (25) AAI Base Rates* (58) (24) (18) (n/a) (19) *From Van IJzendoorn & Bakermans-Kranenburg (1996). 662 Dickstein et al.: Marital attachment 80% for Secure, 50% for Dismissing, 38% for Preoccupied, and 0% for Cannot Classify. Of those participants rated as Insecure (i.e., Dismissing, Preoccupied, or Cannot Classify) on the AAI, 74% were also rated as Insecure on the MAI. There was minimal correspondence of Unresolved status between AAI and MAI classification (kappa = .11, ns for the sample as a whole; exact agreement = 25%); with similar results (kappa = .27 and -.07, both ns) for wives and hus- bands, respectively. We established that Cannot Classify is, in fact, a category that emerges from MAI transcripts in much the same manner as for AAI interviews. However, given that only 9% (4/44) of AAI cases in this relatively small sample were coded as Cannot Classify, they were omitted from subsequent analyses. Data from participants classified as Unresolved with Respect to Loss or Trauma were analyzed with respect to their best-fitting organized attachment classification. Thus, for the most part, we focus on the major attachment categories of Secure, Preoccupied, and Dismissing. Wife/husband attachment correspondence. There was no significant association between wives' and husbands' classifications on AAI interviews (kappa = .04, ns, exact agreement = 47%). For AAI classifications, 70% (7/10) of wives rated as Secure had partners also rated as Secure. There was 22% wife-husband correspondence for insecurity; more specifically, 0% (0/5) of wives rated as Dismissing had partners also rated as Dismissing (but all (5/5) wives rated as Dismissing had partners rated as Secure); and 50% (2/4) of wives rated as Preoccupied also had partners rated as Preoccupied. Further, there were no husband-wife pairs in which both partners were classified as Unresolved on the AAI. There was higher (but still nonsignificant) correspondence between wives' and husbands' classifications on MAI interviews (kappa = .25, ns, exact agree- ment = 58%). Although this is a medium effect size (Cohen, 1988), small sample size restricted power to detect significance. For MAI classifications, 73% (8/11) of wives rated as Secure had partners also rated as Secure. There was a 50% wife-husband correspondence for insecurity; further, 66% (2/3) of wives rated as Dismissing had partners also rated as Dismissing; and 20% (1/5) of wives rated as Preoccupied also had partners rated as Preoccupied. Finally, of the eight couples who had at least one member classified as Unresolved on the MAI, two (25%) included both partners with this rating. Association between attachment classification and family factors In order to examine the boundaries of the construct of marital attachment, we assessed family factors on two levels, dyadic marital satisfaction and family-unit functioning. For the sample as a whole, security of marital attachment (MAI secure versus insecure) was not significantly related to marital satisfaction (r = .28, p < .07), although MAI classification was related to family-unit functioning (r = -.40, p < .01). In contrast, security of adult attachment was not related to marital satisfaction (r = .19, ns) or family-unit functioning (r = .09, ns). A sta- tistical note is relevant to these overall analyses. Each participant (husband and wife) was treated as an independent unit in these analyses, which technically violates the assumption of independence. Because it is impractical given the small sample to account for the nesting of individuals within couples, these analyses as presented should be interpreted with some caution. When examining results for wives and husbands separately (with caution due 663 Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 18(5) to small sample size), we found interesting differences. For wives, the magni- tude of associations between family factors and attachment status was generally consistent across measures. That is, the MAI for wives was related to marital satisfaction (r = .37) and family functioning (r = -.40); the AAI for wives was related to marital satisfaction (r = .36) and family functioning (r = -.32); all ps < .10. For husbands, the magnitude of all associations was lower (ranging from r = .12 to r = .20), except for MAI status and family functioning (r = -.41, p < .07). Nonetheless, exact correlations between AAI and MAI status were similar for wives (r = .46, p < .05) and husbands (r = .47, p < .05; also refer to kappa sta- tistics reported earlier). When examining effects of Unresolved status separately for wives and hus- bands, we found differences in attachment representation source. That is, Unre- solved status on the MAI was not significantly related to marital satisfaction or family functioning for wives (rs = -.29 and -.18, respectively) or for husbands (rs = -.06 and.03, respectively). However, unresolved status on the AAI was significantly related to both marital satisfaction for wives and husbands (rs = -.60 and -.49, respectively, p < .01) and family functioning for wives (r = .46, p < .01), but not husbands (r = 36). Correspondence of wife-husband attachment related to family factors. We explored the extent to which attachment correspondence between husbands and wives was related to marital satisfaction and family functioning. For these analyses, the couple was the unit of analysis. Separate analyses were conducted for MAI and AAI classifications. We assigned couples to one of three groups: (1) both partners were secure on the MAI (or AAI); (2) one partner was secure on the MAI (or AAI); or (3) both partners were insecure on the MAI (or AAI). Given the hypothesis-generating nature of this pilot study, we conducted linear trend analyses with these three groups to determine associations with family factors. Tables 2 and 3 present data regarding associations between family factors and couple correspondence on the AAI and MAI. With respect to the AAI, there were significant linear trends for wives' marital satisfaction and family functioning, with highest rates of family well- being associated with two secure partners, followed by moderate rates of family well-being with one secure partner, and lowest rates of family well-being with no secure partners. The correspondence of husband and wife AAI status was not significantly related to husbands' ratings of marital satisfaction or family functioning. With respect to the MAI, there was a significant linear trend for husbands' family functioning, with highest rates of family well-being associated with two secure partners, followed by moderate rates of family well-being with one secure partner, and lowest rates of family well-being with no secure partners. Although there was a nonsignificant linear trend, there was approximately 1 standard deviation difference in husbands' ratings of marital satisfaction when both partners were secure compared with when there was at least one insecure partner. For wives, there was also a .75 to 1 standard deviation difference in ratings of marital satisfaction and family functioning when both partners were secure compared with when there was at least one insecure partner. 664 Dickstein et al.: Marital attachment 0 a la 0 '=U *.I ;P- 'I ro 0, .- *0 0 0, to 3- o I 9 low I 0 *W mo u v rA u"a A 0 go 0 NW a 665 * * N 0 o ,7 .n .- 0 sN N 00 cNi 0 N __ C4 ~o O\ 0) 0- )0 0 o 6 ^ tn o. s tn r--4 r--4 - -4 C 00 o 0 0 ~ __N 0 __ 43- 40 4. . . - r2 4-~4 4-- 4 ~- u 0 $-4 0 CO -0. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 18(5) N c- * Nl UN -~ ~-' Cu C)C -~r Cu q 11t cl : v tr- - z \0 'rn - N 'I UN '0 0: UN UN I- T .I00 cn - CD' N ~T 14 116 s- 1 . - - 0 U )N 00 N 00 N 00 o C C *t ua * a*- a 666 hi 0 I-P Cu 0 hi au ICu 0 0 ._ .o E Cu Cu .- *u a 0 Cu CE Cu *a Cu U, 0 0 U, a) 0 Q4 Q> 64 a) ;.4 0 (- a U) a) a . - . -i < * Dickstein et al.: Marital attachment Discussion First and foremost, we provided preliminary evidence that the Marital Attachment Interview (MAI) is a useful narrative-based method for col- lecting information about current intimate adult relationships. The flow of the interview administration was as expected when compared with the Adult Attachment Interview, with interviews lasting approximately one hour. The nature of the narratives generated by the MAI was comparable to the AAI in that similar discourse properties were apparent, with dis- cernible narrative-based and content-related variation that we have come to expect from the AAI. The classification scheme developed by Main and Goldwyn (1994) to score AAI transcripts was readily transferred to the MAI narratives. It is important to note that not only were major classifica- tions coded, but there was evidence to suggest that the Unresolved with Respect to Loss or Trauma and the 'Cannot Classify' categories were also observed. Given the small sample size in the current study, future work should help to elucidate more fully the utility of these latter two classifica- tions. Correspondence between AAI and MAI classifications The distribution of MAI primary classifications was similar to the standard norms for AAI classifications (Van IJzendoom & Bakermans-Kranenburg, 1996). Although there were no a priori expectations regarding the distri- bution of MAI classifications, this finding provides encouragement that the MAI taps into a working model system that is similar to the AAI, such that the information obtained via the MAI is considered to be attachment- relevant. More substantively, 61% of the participants in this pilot study were classified the same with respect to adult and marital attachment working models (marginal distributions indicate 30% concordance based on chance). This suggests that working models regarding early childhood experiences are powerful, yet not fully explanatory, mechanisms with respect to attachment within marital relationships, and provides evidence that multiple working models may be formed within different important relationship domains (Bretherton, 1999). It would be important for future work to explore the mechanisms involved in producing discordant working models with respect to the two relationship domains, and how pattems of discordance may affect other functioning and relationships. Briefly, it may be that marital attachment working models are differenti- ated from adult attachment working models such that evidence is provided for secure marital attachment despite adult attachment insecurity. This would involve maintaining discrepant working models regarding two relationship domains. In these cases where discordant working models are maintained, one would infer that construction of current relationships may have little effect on the construction of past family relationships. Consider- ing the case where marital and adult attachment classifications are concor- dant, (in some cases) it may be that a current secure marital working model has affected the working model regarding past events such that it gets 667 668 Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 18(5) reworked. Although the events of the past remain the same, a secure marital working model may provide (or reflect) the context within which the past events are reconstructed in a more secure organization. Correspondence between wives' and husbands' attachment classifications The extent to which marital partners are concordant in security of working models of close relationships may be important for understanding trans- mission of security to the next generation, as well as general child develop- mental outcomes. We did not find significant correspondence between adult attachment security for husbands and wives, although there was somewhat higher correspondence between partners on marital attachment security (Van lJzendoorn & Bakermans-Kranenburg, 1996). Previous work has reported more conflictual interactions in couples with partners who are both rated as insecure with respect to adult attachment status(Cohn, Silver, Cowan, Cowan, & Pearson, 1992), as well as less positive interactions with their children (Cohn, Cowan, Cowan, & Pearson, 1992). A next step would be to examine the behavioral interactions of couples with similar versus dissimilar patterns of marital attachment to determine whether this is related to factors such as levels of conflict or cohesion within the marriage, individual emotional expressivity and/or regulation, and parenting sensitivity. Association between attachment status and family factors We found that marital attachment security was significantly related to family functioning. Further, our data provide at least preliminary sugges- tion that marital attachment security may be associated (possibly in a pro- tective manner) with couple and family relationship well-being, both for wives and husbands. Of course, our data do not address the directionality of these effects. Perhaps representations affect appraisal, but it is equally reasonable that appraisal (the extent to which each partner feels satisfied with the relationship and/or rates the family unit as well functioning) is one basis for the construction of marital representations. In general, we found that marital attachment, in contrast to adult attachment, is a more proximal indicator of these important family factors. This makes sense in that marital attachment is, in fact, a model of a current relationship that shares the same context with other current aspects of family life. Relationship processes in wives and husbands This study may provide preliminary clues for understanding relationship processes in wives and husbands. In general, and especially for the MAI, the distribution of attachment classifications was similar for wives and hus- bands. In addition, the Unresolved status was related to family functioning for both wives and husbands in similar ways; that is, unresolved AAI status seemed more related to family factors than MAI Unresolved status. There were also some differences. In particular, when examining marital and family outcomes, the data for wives seemed to paint a more coherent Dickstein et al.: Marital attachment picture than for husbands. That is, wives' attachment status examined via interview techniques (independent of relationship context) was consistently related to marital and family outcomes. This was not the case for husbands. There are several ways to interpret this finding. First, it may be that men and women process relationships in distinct ways such that narrative-based representations are differentially related to family outcomes. Alternatively, it may be that these narrative instruments that elicit verbal storytelling about relationships have different construct or criterion validity for women versus men. Further, this finding may simply be a quirk of a small sample. Although promising, much more work is needed to substantiate these results. Limitations The present study involves a small sample size, restricting the power of sta- tistical tests - in many cases, medium effect sizes were found but were not significant in the 24 couples examined. Thus, it is important that these results be replicated with larger samples. In addition, the sample is a fairly homogeneous group, all with one-year-old children, with few risk factors. The extent to which results can be generalized to a more diverse population is not addressed by these data. In addition, data cannot address the extent to which attachment representations are related to behavioral outcomes other than self-reported marital satisfaction and family functioning. For example, these data do not allow for links to be made with respect to child outcomes. Further, small sample size precluded the kinds of analyses that would allow us to disentangle issues of husband-wife concordance of MAI status as related to other aspects of family functioning. From a family perspective, it would be important to study more carefully both husbands and wives to reveal potential differences in relationship processes. This sort of research would require relatively large sample sizes and would need to address the issue of lack of independence of data because husbands and wives are nested within couples. Implications and future directions More work is needed to better describe the construct of marital attachment. For example, it would be important to determine whether marital attach- ment is a relatively stable phenomenon (like adult attachment security), and the types of circumstances that may be associated with changes in attach- ment classification. A related question is whether marital attachment security remains stable during the transition to parenthood, which is known to be a vulnerable time marked by decreases in marital satisfaction and stresses to the family system. Further, in the context of secure (or insecure) marital attachment, one might evaluate whether negative effects of the tran- sition to parenthood on marital satisfaction and family functioning are buffered (or exaggerated). More work is necessary to determine the extent to which marital attachment may be a protective mechanism by which adult attachment insecurity is shielded from the next generation. 669 Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 18(5) In addition, the MAI provides evidence that the assessment of relation- ship representations by use of narrative methodology can be generalized to different relationship domains. It provides another window by which to explore intergenerational processes related to how individuals form relationships with others. Further, it builds on the tradition of other narra- tive methodologies that examine whole family outcomes, not only parent-child relationship qualities (e.g., Fiese et al., 1999). In sum, the MAI expands the utility of narrative strategies to examine a broader range of family issues beyond the parent-child dyad, which comprises the vast majority of narrative-based attachment research. REFERENCES Ainsworth, M. D. S., Blehar, M. C., Waters, E., & Wall, S. (1978). Patterns of attachment: A psychological study of the strange situation. Hillsdale, NJ: Eribaum. Benoit, D., Vidovic, D., & Roman, J. (1991, April). Transmission of attachment across three generations. Paper presented at the Biennial Meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, Seattle. Benoit, D., Zeanah, C., & Barton, M. (1989). Maternal attachment disturbances in failure to thrive. Infant Mental Health Journal, 10, 185-202. Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and loss: Vol. 1. Attachment. New York: Basic Books. Bretherton, I. (1985). Attachment theory: Retrospect and prospect. In I. Bretherton & E. Waters (Eds.), Growing points in attachment theory and research. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 50 (1-2, Serial No. 209), 3-35. Bretherton, I. (1999). Updating the 'internal working model' construct: Some reflections. Attachment and Human Development, 1 (3), 343-357. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the social sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Cohn, D. A., Cowan, P. A., Cowan, C. P., & Pearson, J. L. (1992). Mothers' and fathers' working models of childhood attachment relationships, parenting styles, and child behavior. Development and Psychopathology, 4, 417-431. Cohn, D. A., Silver, D. H., Cowan, C. P., Cowan, P. A., & Pearson, J. (1992). Working models of childhood attachment and couple relationships. Journal of Family Issues, 13, 432-449. Cowan, P. A., Cohn, D. A., Cowan, C. P., & Pearson, J. L. (1996). Parents' attachment histories and children's externalizing and internalizing behaviors: Exploring family systems models of linkage. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 64, 53-63. Crowell, J. A. (1990). Current relationship interview. Unpublished manuscript, State University of New York at Stony Brook. Crowell, J. A. & Feldman, S. S. (1988). Mothers' internal models of relationships and children's behavioral and developmental status: A study of mother-child interaction. Child Develop- ment, 59, 1273-1285. Cummings, E. M., & Cicchetti, D. (1990). Toward a transactional model of relations between attachment and depression. In M. T. Greenberg, D. Cicchetti, & E. M. Cummings (Eds.), Attachment in the preschool years: Theory, research and intervention (pp. 339-372). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Eichberg, C. G. (1987, April). Quality of infant-parent attachment: Related to mother's rep- resentation of her own relationship history. Paper presented at the Biennial meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, Baltimore, MD. Epstein, N. B., Baldwin, L. M., & Bishop, D. S. (1983). The McMaster family assessment device. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 9, 171-180. Fiese, B. H., Sameroff, A. J., Grotevant, H. D., Wamboldt, F. S., Dickstein, S., & Fravel, D. (1999). 670 Dickstein et al.: Marital attachment The stories that families tell: Narrative coherence, narrative interaction, and relationship beliefs. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 64 (2, Serial No. 257). Fonagy, P., Steel, H., & Steele, M. (1991). Matemal representations of attachment during preg- nancy predict the organization of infant-mother attachment at one year of age. Child Development, 62, 891-905. George, C., Kaplan, N., & Main, M. (1996). Adult Attachment Interview. Unpublished manu- script, University of California at Berkeley. 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 conceptualised as an attachment process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 511-524. Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. R. (1990). Love and work: An attachment-theoretical perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 270-280. Keitner, G. I., Ryan, C. E., Miller, I. W., Epstein, N. B., & Bishop, D. S. (1990, May). Family functioning and recovery from depression. Paper presented at the First International Con- ference on the McMaster Model of Family Functioning, Providence, RI. Kobak, R. R., Cole, H. E., Ferenz-Gillies, R., & Flemming, W. S. (1993). Attachment and emotion regulation during mother-teen problem solving: A control theory analysis. Child Development, 64, 231-245. Lyons-Ruth, K. (1992). Maternal depressive symptoms, disorganized infant-mother attach- ment relationships and hostile-aggressive behavior in the preschool classroom: A prospec- tive longitudinal view from infancy to age five. In D. Cicchetti & S. Toth (Eds.), Developmental perspectives on depression, rochester symposium on developmental psycho- pathology (Vol. 4, pp. 131-171). Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press. Lyons-Ruth, K., & Jacobvitz, D. (1999). Attachment disorganization: Unresolved loss, rela- tional violence, and lapses in behavioral and attentional strategies. In J. Cassidy & P. R. Shaver (Eds.), Handbook of attachment: Theory, research and clinical applications (pp. 520-554). New York: Guilford Press. Main, M., & Goldwyn, R. (1994). An adult classification and rating system. Unpublished manu- script, University of California, Berkeley. Miller, I. W., Epstein, N. B., Bishop, D. S., & Keitner, G. I. (1985). The McMaster family assess- ment device: Reliability and validity. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 11, 345-356. Owens, G., Crowell, J., A., Pan, H., Treboux, D., O'Connor, E., and Waters, E. (1995). The prototype hypothesis and the origins of attachment working models: Adult relationships with parents and romantic partners. In E. Waters, B. E. Vaughn, G. Posada, & K. Kondo- Ikemura (Eds.), Caregiving, cultural, and cognitive perspectives on secure-base behavior and working models: New growing points of attachment theory and research. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 60 (2-3, Serial No. 244), 216-233. Quinton, D., Rutter, M., & Liddle C. (1984). Institutional rearing, parenting difficulties and marital support. Psychological Medicine, 14, 107-124. Shaver, P. R., Hazan, C., & Bradshaw, D. (1988). Love as attachment: The integration of three behavioral systems. In R. J. Stenberg & M. L. Barnes (Eds.), The psychology of love (pp. 68-99). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Spanier, G. (1976). Measuring dyadic adjustment: New scales for assessing the quality of mar- riage and similar dyads. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 38, 15-28. Van IJzendoorn, M. H. (1992). Intergenerational transmission of parenting: A review of studies in nonclinical populations. Developmental Review, 12, 76-99. Van IJzendoorn, M. H. (1995). Adult attachment representations, parental responsiveness, and infant attachment: A meta-analysis on the predictive validity of the Adult Attachment Inter- view. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 387-403. Van IJzendoorn, M. H., & Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J. (1996). Adult Attachment Interview classifications in mothers, fathers, adolescents, and clinical groups: A meta-analytic search for normative data. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 64, 8-21. Ward, M. J., Botyanski, N. C., Plunkett, S. W., & Carlson, E. A. (1991, April). The concurrent 671 672 Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 18(5) and predictive validity of the AAI for adolescent mothers. Paper presented to the Biennial meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, Seattle. Waters, E., Vaughn, B. E., Posada, G., & Kondo-Ikemura, K. (1995). Caregiving, cultural, and cognitive perspectives on secure-base behavior and working models: New growing points of attachment theory and research. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Develop- ment, 60 (2-3, Serial No. 244). Zeanah, C. H., Benoit, D., Barton, M., Regan, C., Hirshberg, L. M., & Lisett, L. (1993). Rep- resentations of attachment in mothers and their one-year-old infants. Journal of the Ameri- can Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 32, 278-286. </meta-value></custom-meta></custom-meta-wrap></article-meta></front><back><ref-list><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Ainsworth, M. D. S.</surname></name> , <name name-style="western"><surname>Blehar, M. C.</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>Waters, E.</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>Wall, S.</surname></name> (<year>1978</year>). <source>Patterns of attachment: A psychological study of the strange situation</source>. <publisher-loc>Hillsdale, NJ</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Erlbaum</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="confproc" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Benoit, D.</surname></name> , <name name-style="western"><surname>Vidovic, D.</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>Roman, J.</surname></name> (1991, April). <article-title>Transmission of attachment across three generations</article-title>. Paper presented at the <conf-name>Biennial Meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development</conf-name>, <conf-loc>Seattle</conf-loc>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Benoit, D.</surname></name> , <name name-style="western"><surname>Zeanah, C.</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>Barton, M.</surname></name> (<year>1989</year>). <article-title>Maternal attachment disturbances in failure to thrive</article-title>. <source>Infant Mental Health Journal</source>, <volume>10</volume>, <fpage>185</fpage>-<lpage>202</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Bowlby, J.</surname></name> (<year>1969</year>). <source>Attachment and loss: Vol. 1. Attachment</source>. <publisher-loc>New York</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Basic Books</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Bretherton, I.</surname></name> (<year>1985</year>). <article-title>Attachment theory: Retrospect and prospect</article-title>. In I. Bretherton & E. Waters (Eds.), <article-title>Growing points in attachment theory and research</article-title>. <source>Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development</source>, <volume>50</volume> (<issue>1-2</issue>, Serial No. 209), <fpage>3</fpage>-<lpage>35</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Bretherton, I.</surname></name> (<year>1999</year>). <article-title>Updating the `internal working model' construct: Some reflections</article-title>. <source>Attachment and Human Development</source>, <volume>1</volume> (<issue>3</issue>), <fpage>343</fpage>-<lpage>357</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Cohen, J.</surname></name> (<year>1988</year>). <source>Statistical power analysis for the social sciences</source> (<edition>2nd ed.</edition>). <publisher-loc>Hillsdale, NJ</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Erlbaum</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Cohn, D. A.</surname></name> , <name name-style="western"><surname>Cowan, P. A.</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>Cowan, C. P.</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>Pearson, J. L.</surname></name> (<year>1992</year>). <article-title>Mothers' and fathers' working models of childhood attachment relationships, parenting styles, and child behavior</article-title>. <source>Development and Psychopathology</source>, <volume>4</volume>, <fpage>417</fpage>-<lpage>431</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Cohn, D. A.</surname></name> , <name name-style="western"><surname>Silver, D. H.</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>Cowan, C. P.</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>Cowan, P. A.</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>Pearson, J.</surname></name> (<year>1992</year>). <article-title>Working models of childhood attachment and couple relationships</article-title>. <source>Journal of Family Issues</source>, <volume>13</volume>, <fpage>432</fpage>-<lpage>449</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Cowan, P. A.</surname></name> , <name name-style="western"><surname>Cohn, D. A.</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>Cowan, C. P.</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>Pearson, J. L.</surname></name> (<year>1996</year>). <article-title>Parents' attachment histories and children's externalizing and internalizing behaviors: Exploring family systems models of linkage</article-title>. <source>Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology</source>, <volume>64</volume>, <fpage>53</fpage>-<lpage>63</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Crowell, J. A.</surname></name> (<year>1990</year>). <source>Current relationship interview</source>. Unpublished manuscript, <publisher-name>State University of New York</publisher-name> at <publisher-loc>Stony Brook</publisher-loc>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Crowell, J. A.</surname></name> & <name name-style="western"><surname>Feldman, S. S.</surname></name> (<year>1988</year>). <article-title>Mothers' internal models of relationships and children's behavioral and developmental status: A study of mother-child interaction</article-title>. <source>Child Development</source>, <volume>59</volume>, <fpage>1273</fpage>-<lpage>1285</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Cummings, E. M.</surname></name> , & <name name-style="western"><surname>Cicchetti, D.</surname></name> (<year>1990</year>). <article-title>Toward a transactional model of relations between attachment and depression</article-title>. In <name name-style="western"><surname>M. T. Greenberg</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>D. Cicchetti</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>E. M. Cummings</surname></name> (Eds.), <source>Attachment in the preschool years: Theory, research and intervention</source> (pp. <fpage>339</fpage>-<lpage>372</lpage>). <publisher-loc>Chicago</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>University of Chicago Press</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="confproc" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Eichberg, C. G.</surname></name> (1987, April). <article-title>Quality of infant-parent attachment: Related to mother's representation of her own relationship history</article-title>. Paper presented at the <conf-name>Biennial meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development</conf-name>, <conf-loc>Baltimore, MD</conf-loc>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Epstein, N. B.</surname></name> , <name name-style="western"><surname>Baldwin, L. M.</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>Bishop, D. S.</surname></name> (<year>1983</year>). <article-title>The McMaster family assessment device</article-title>. <source>Journal of Marital and Family Therapy</source>, <volume>9</volume>, <fpage>171</fpage>-<lpage>180</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Fiese, B. H.</surname></name> , <name name-style="western"><surname>Sameroff, A. J.</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>Grotevant, H. D.</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>Wamboldt, F. S.</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>Dickstein, S.</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>Fravel, D.</surname></name> (<year>1999</year>). <article-title>The stories that families tell: Narrative coherence, narrative interaction, and relationship beliefs</article-title>. <source>Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development</source>, <volume>64</volume> (<issue>2</issue>, Serial No. 257).</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Fonagy, P.</surname></name> , <name name-style="western"><surname>Steel, H.</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>Steele, M.</surname></name> (<year>1991</year>). <article-title>Maternal representations of attachment during pregnancy predict the organization of infant-mother attachment at one year of age</article-title>. <source>Child Development</source>, <volume>62</volume>, <fpage>891</fpage>-<lpage>905</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>George, C.</surname></name> , <name name-style="western"><surname>Kaplan, N.</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>Main, M.</surname></name> (<year>1996</year>). <source>Adult Attachment Interview</source>. Unpublished manuscript, <publisher-name>University of California</publisher-name> at <publisher-loc>Berkeley</publisher-loc>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Haft, W. L.</surname></name> , & <name name-style="western"><surname>Slade, A.</surname></name> (<year>1989</year>). <article-title>Affect attunement and maternal attachment: A pilot study</article-title>. <source>Infant Mental Health Journal</source>, <volume>10</volume>, <fpage>157</fpage>-<lpage>172</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Hazan, C.</surname></name> , & <name name-style="western"><surname>Shaver, P. R.</surname></name> (<year>1987</year>). <article-title>Romantic love conceptualised as an attachment process</article-title>. <source>Journal of Personality and Social Psychology</source>, <volume>52</volume>, <fpage>511</fpage>-<lpage>524</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Hazan, C.</surname></name> , & <name name-style="western"><surname>Shaver, P. R.</surname></name> (<year>1990</year>). <article-title>Love and work: An attachment-theoretical perspective</article-title>. <source>Journal of Personality and Social Psychology</source>, <volume>59</volume>, <fpage>270</fpage>-<lpage>280</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="confproc" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Keitner, G. I.</surname></name> , <name name-style="western"><surname>Ryan, C. E.</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>Miller, I. W.</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>Epstein, N. B.</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>Bishop, D. S.</surname></name> (1990, May). <article-title>Family functioning and recovery from depression</article-title>. Paper presented at the <conf-name>First International Conference on the McMaster Model of Family Functioning</conf-name>, <conf-loc>Providence, RI</conf-loc>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Kobak, R. R.</surname></name> , <name name-style="western"><surname>Cole, H. E.</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>Ferenz-Gillies, R.</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>Flemming, W. S.</surname></name> (<year>1993</year>). <article-title>Attachment and emotion regulation during mother-teen problem solving: A control theory analysis</article-title>. <source>Child Development</source>, <volume>64</volume>, <fpage>231</fpage>-<lpage>245</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Lyons-Ruth, K.</surname></name> (<year>1992</year>). <article-title>Maternal depressive symptoms, disorganized infant-mother attachment relationships and hostile-aggressive behavior in the preschool classroom: A prospective longitudinal view from infancy to age five</article-title>. In <name name-style="western"><surname>D. Cicchetti</surname></name> & <name name-style="western"><surname>S. Toth</surname></name> (Eds.), <source>Developmental perspectives on depression, rochester symposium on developmental psychopathology</source> (Vol. 4, pp. <fpage>131</fpage>-<lpage>171</lpage>). <publisher-loc>Rochester, NY</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>University of Rochester Press</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Lyons-Ruth, K.</surname></name> , & <name name-style="western"><surname>Jacobvitz, D.</surname></name> (<year>1999</year>). <article-title>Attachment disorganization: Unresolved loss, relational violence, and lapses in behavioral and attentional strategies</article-title>. In <name name-style="western"><surname>J. Cassidy</surname></name> & <name name-style="western"><surname>P. R. Shaver</surname></name> (Eds.), <source>Handbook of attachment: Theory, research and clinical applications</source> (pp. <fpage>520</fpage>-<lpage>554</lpage>). <publisher-loc>New York</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Guilford Press</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Main, M.</surname></name> , & <name name-style="western"><surname>Goldwyn, R.</surname></name> (<year>1994</year>). <source>An adult classification and rating system</source>. Unpublished manuscript, <publisher-name>University of California</publisher-name>, <publisher-loc>Berkeley</publisher-loc>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Miller, I. W.</surname></name> , <name name-style="western"><surname>Epstein, N. B.</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>Bishop, D. S.</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>Keitner, G. I.</surname></name> (<year>1985</year>). <article-title>The McMaster family assessment device: Reliability and validity</article-title>. <source>Journal of Marital and Family Therapy</source>, <volume>11</volume>, <fpage>345</fpage>-<lpage>356</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Owens, G.</surname></name> , <name name-style="western"><surname>Crowell, J., A.</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>Pan, H.</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>Treboux, D.</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>O'Connor, E.</surname></name>, and <name name-style="western"><surname>Waters, E.</surname></name> (<year>1995</year>). <article-title>The prototype hypothesis and the origins of attachment working models: Adult relationships with parents and romantic partners</article-title>. In E. Waters, B. E. Vaughn, G. Posada, & K. Kondo-Ikemura (Eds.), <article-title>Caregiving, cultural, and cognitive perspectives on secure-base behavior and working models: New growing points of attachment theory and research</article-title>. <source>Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development</source>, <volume>60</volume> (<issue>2-3</issue>, Serial No. 244), <fpage>216</fpage>-<lpage>233</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Quinton, D.</surname></name> , <name name-style="western"><surname>Rutter, M.</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>Liddle C.</surname></name> (<year>1984</year>). <article-title>Institutional rearing, parenting difficulties and marital support</article-title>. <source>Psychological Medicine</source>, <volume>14</volume>, <fpage>107</fpage>-<lpage>124</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="book" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Shaver, P. R.</surname></name> , <name name-style="western"><surname>Hazan, C.</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>Bradshaw, D.</surname></name> (<year>1988</year>). <article-title>Love as attachment: The integration of three behavioral systems</article-title>. In <name name-style="western"><surname>R. J. Stenberg</surname></name> & <name name-style="western"><surname>M. L. Barnes</surname></name> (Eds.), <source>The psychology of love</source> (pp. <fpage>68</fpage>-<lpage>99</lpage>). <publisher-loc>New Haven, CT</publisher-loc>: <publisher-name>Yale University Press</publisher-name>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Spanier, G.</surname></name> (<year>1976</year>). <article-title>Measuring dyadic adjustment: New scales for assessing the quality of marriage and similar dyads</article-title>. <source>Journal of Marriage and the Family</source>, <volume>38</volume>, <fpage>15</fpage>-<lpage>28</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Van IJzendoorn, M. H.</surname></name> (<year>1992</year>). <article-title>Intergenerational transmission of parenting: A review of studies in nonclinical populations</article-title>. <source>Developmental Review</source>, <volume>12</volume>, <fpage>76</fpage>-<lpage>99</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Van IJzendoorn, M. H.</surname></name> (<year>1995</year>). <article-title>Adult attachment representations, parental responsiveness, and infant attachment: A meta-analysis on the predictive validity of the Adult Attachment Interview</article-title>. <source>Psychological Bulletin</source>, <volume>117</volume>, <fpage>387</fpage>-<lpage>403</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Van IJzendoorn, M. H.</surname></name> , & <name name-style="western"><surname>Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J.</surname></name> (<year>1996</year>). <article-title>Adult Attachment Interview classifications in mothers, fathers, adolescents, and clinical groups: A meta-analytic search for normative data</article-title>. <source>Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology</source>, <volume>64</volume>, <fpage>8</fpage>-<lpage>21</lpage>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="confproc" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Ward, M. J.</surname></name> , <name name-style="western"><surname>Botyanski, N. C.</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>Plunkett, S. W.</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>Carlson, E. A.</surname></name> (1991, April). <article-title>The concurrent and predictive validity of the AAI for adolescent mothers</article-title>. Paper presented to the <conf-name>Biennial meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development</conf-name>, <conf-loc>Seattle</conf-loc>.</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Waters, E.</surname></name> , <name name-style="western"><surname>Vaughn, B. E.</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>Posada, G.</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>Kondo-Ikemura, K.</surname></name> (<year>1995</year>). <article-title>Caregiving, cultural, and cognitive perspectives on secure-base behavior and working models: New growing points of attachment theory and research</article-title>. <source>Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development</source>, <volume>60</volume> (<issue>2-3</issue>, Serial No. 244).</citation></ref><ref><citation citation-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Zeanah, C. H.</surname></name> , <name name-style="western"><surname>Benoit, D.</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>Barton, M.</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>Regan, C.</surname></name>, <name name-style="western"><surname>Hirshberg, L. M.</surname></name>, & <name name-style="western"><surname>Lisett, L.</surname></name> (<year>1993</year>). <article-title>Representations of attachment in mothers and their one-year-old infants</article-title>. <source>Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry</source>, <volume>32</volume>, <fpage>278</fpage>-<lpage>286</lpage>.</citation></ref></ref-list></back></article></istex:document></istex:metadataXml><mods version="3.6"><titleInfo lang="en"><title>Marital Attachment Interview: Adult Attachment Assessment of Marriage</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="alternative" lang="en" contentType="CDATA"><title>Marital Attachment Interview: Adult Attachment Assessment of Marriage</title></titleInfo><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Susan</namePart><namePart type="family">Dickstein</namePart><affiliation>Bradley Hospital, Brown University School of Medicine,</affiliation><affiliation>E-mail: susan_dickstein@Brown.edu</affiliation></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Ronald</namePart><namePart type="family">Seifer</namePart><affiliation>Bradley Hospital, Brown University School of Medicine</affiliation></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Martin</namePart><namePart type="family">St Andre</namePart><affiliation>Hospital St Justine, Montreal</affiliation></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Masha</namePart><namePart type="family">Schiller</namePart><affiliation>Bradley Hospital, Brown University School of Medicine</affiliation></name><typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource><genre type="research-article" displayLabel="research-article"></genre><originInfo><publisher>Sage Publications</publisher><place><placeTerm type="text">Sage CA: Thousand Oaks, CA</placeTerm></place><dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">2001-10</dateIssued><copyrightDate encoding="w3cdtf">2001</copyrightDate></originInfo><language><languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">eng</languageTerm><languageTerm type="code" authority="rfc3066">en</languageTerm></language><physicalDescription><internetMediaType>text/html</internetMediaType></physicalDescription><abstract lang="en">We present pilot data of a newly developed attachment measure, the Marital Attachment Interview. This interview was developed to assess adults' representations of their current relationship with a partner as an adjunct to available assessments of relationship representations of parents with young children (infant-parent attachment) and adults with their own parents (adult attachment). From this pilot study of 24 couples, we present: (1) the distribution of marital attachment classifications, (2) the concordance between marital attachment and adult attachment classifications; and (3) the associations between marital attachment classification (representation) and family factors. We then speculate about the utility of this new narrative approach for understanding how attachment in intimate relationships may be useful in appreciating components of intergenerational transmission of attachment.</abstract><subject><genre>keywords</genre><topic>adult attachment</topic><topic>marriage</topic><topic>narratives</topic></subject><relatedItem type="host"><titleInfo><title>Journal of Social and Personal Relationships</title></titleInfo><genre type="journal">journal</genre><identifier type="ISSN">0265-4075</identifier><identifier type="eISSN">1460-3608</identifier><identifier type="PublisherID">SPR</identifier><identifier type="PublisherID-hwp">spspr</identifier><part><date>2001</date><detail type="volume"><caption>vol.</caption><number>18</number></detail><detail type="issue"><caption>no.</caption><number>5</number></detail><extent unit="pages"><start>651</start><end>672</end></extent></part></relatedItem><identifier type="istex">373221275B9D0DC7D700986FA12CDDFB688A92E9</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1177/0265407501185005</identifier><identifier type="ArticleID">10.1177_0265407501185005</identifier><recordInfo><recordContentSource>SAGE</recordContentSource></recordInfo></mods></metadata><serie></serie></istex></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Psychologie/explor/TherFamFrancoV1/Data/Istex/Corpus
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 000895 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Istex/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 000895 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Wicri/Psychologie
|area= TherFamFrancoV1
|flux= Istex
|étape= Corpus
|type= RBID
|clé= ISTEX:373221275B9D0DC7D700986FA12CDDFB688A92E9
|texte= Marital Attachment Interview: Adult Attachment Assessment of Marriage
}}
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.29. |  |