2010 19 2 146 156 2010 1) 2) 2 120 60 2 (e.g., Mikulincer & Shaver, 2007) 1) (B) 20730415 69 2008 2) 3) Hazan & Shaver (1987) (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2007) 3 3 3 1 3) 2 2 (e.g., 2001) (Bowlby, 1969/1982)
147 Figure 1 2 4 Bartholomew & Horowitz (1991) Brennan et al. (1998) 4) Bartholomew & Horowitz (1991) 3 2 4 (Figure 1) Relationship Questionnaire RQ (1) (2) Bowlby (1973) 2 4 5) (Figure 1) RQ 4 4) 5) 3 2 4 Mikulincer & Shaver (2007) (2003) 4 1 RQ 2 1 1 (Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991) 1 Figure 1 2 4 4 (Griffin & Bartholomew, 1994) (Ainsworth, Blehar, Waters, & Wall, 1978) 2 6) 6) 2 (e.g., Cozzarelli, Karafa, Collins, & Tagler, 2003)
148 19 2 (Brennan, Clark, & Shaver, 1998) Brennan et al. (1998) 14 2 (Anxiety) (Avoidance) 2 Experiences in Close Relationships inventory ECR ECR 2 (Figure 1) ECR (1) 2 4 (2) ECR 7) (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2007) (2004a) ECR 7) Fraley, Waller, & Brennan (2000) Brennan et al. (1998) ECR Experiences in Close Relationship Questionnaire-Revised ECR-R ECR-R (2006) ECR ECR-R 13 (72%) 7 (39%) (Fraley et al., 2000) ECR-R ECR (Fraley et al., 2000) ECR (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2007) (e.g., Mikulincer & Shaver, 2007) (2006) (e.g., 2004a) (Banai, Weller, & Mikulincer, 1998) (Ainsworth et al., 1978) 2 (Shaver & Mikulincer, 2004 2008) 1
149 (e.g. 2004) 1 (Sroufe & Waters, 1977) Bartholomew & Horowitz (1991) RQ 4 2 4 (Figure 1) 1 2 Griffin & Bartholomew (1994) RQ 2 r.32.49 2 (Banai et al., 1998) Banai et al. (1998) (1) 2 (2) (e.g., Mikulincer & Nachshon, 1991) Banai et al. (1998) 3 4 1.75 5 A B (1) A (2) A B i.e., 3 1 Banai et al. (1998) 2 2 4 3 3 Banai et al. (1998) 5 (Ainsworth et al., 1978) Banai et al. (1998) A
150 19 2 1 Banai et al. (1998) A 3 (Shaver & Mikulincer, 2004 2008) Simpson, Ickes, & Grich (1999) 2 (1) 2 4 (ECR, RQ) 2 4 2 (2) 2 8) 8) 2 ECR (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2007) 2 4 2003 ECR 2 4 Bartholomew & Horowitz (1991) RQ (Ainsworth et al., 1978) 2 3.5 (Fraley & Davis, 1997) Banai et al. (1998) 5 120 18.6 range 18 23 60 60 Banai et al. (1998)
151 5 7 1 7 2 Bartholomew & Horowitz (1991) e.g., (e.g., Banai et al., 1998) -GO (generalized other version) 2 (ECR: Brennan et al., 1998) 2004b ECR-GO 30 7 (2004b) ECR-GO a.88.90.81.86 (RQ: Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991) 1999 RQ-GO 4 7 4 1 RQ-GO (1999) (2004b) (Sternberg, 1997) 2003 2 2003 Sternberg, 1997 10 7 9) (2003) (2003) (a.96) 2 (2004) r.60 (p.01) 9) 9 1 9 2003 Sternberg, 1997 7
152 19 2 2008 7 2008 10 (Table 1) ECR-GO (2004b) (2003) RQ-GO Griffin & Bartholomew (1994) ECR-GO r.16 (n.s.) r.18 (n.s.) RQ-GO r.22 (p.05) r.22 (p.05) 2 2 ECR-GO RQ-GO Table 1 ECR-GO 3.53 1.01 3.03 0.96 3.56 0.95 3.40 1.03 RQ-GO 0.94 4.07 1.76 3.36 2.05 3.42 2.12 3.31 3.60 1.73 4.25 1.71 2.46 1.46 2.89 1.51 3.97 1.81 3.05 1.46 3.03 1.78 2.38 1.35 4.26 1.58 RQ-GO 4 RQ-GO Table 2 1 2 3 ECR-GO.23.25.25.26.29.24.22.19 RQ-GO.24.26.21.24.20.19.22.22.22.22.20.22.20.21.23.23.21.22.17.19.22.22.24.26 p.05, p.01 1 2 ECR-GO RQ-GO 3 1 2
153 Table 2 Table 2 1 RQ-GO 4 (Ainsworth et al., 1978) 3.5 (Fraley & Davis, 1997) 37 36 1 Banai et al. (1998) 2 Banai et al. (1998) 5 A r.28 36 A Banai et al. (1998) Banai et al. (1998) 5 (Ainsworth et al., 1978) Banai et al. (1998) Kenny, Horner, Kashy, & Chu (1992) e.g., Banai et al. (1998) A 4 2
154 19 2 4 2 RQ-GO 4 38.0% 2 53.7% 4.09 (n.s.) 2.10 (n.s.) 2.11 (n.s.) ECR-GO Figure 1 2 4 4 2 ECR-GO Figure 1 4 2 4 4 4 2 ECR-GO 4 39.5% 2 68.9% 4.19 (p.01) 2.24 (p.01) 2.24 (p.01) ECR-GO 2 RQ-GO 4 (Table 2) 1 ECR-GO 2 RQ-GO Table 2 2 Table 2 1 4 Table 2 3 (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2007)
155 Ainsworth, M. D. S., Blehar, M. C., Waters, E., & Wall, S. (1978). Patterns of attachment: A psychological study of strange situation. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Banai, E., Weller, A., & Mikulincer, M. (1998). Interjudge agreement in evaluation of adult attachment style: The impact of acquaintanceship. British Journal of Social Psychology, 37, 95 109. Bartholomew, K., & Horowitz, L. M. (1991). Attachment styles among young adults: A test of a four-category model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 226 244. Bowlby, J. (1969/1982). Attachment and loss. Vol. 1. Attachment. New York: Basic Books. Bowlby, J. (1973). Attachment and loss. Vol. 2. Separation. New York: Basic Books. Brennan, K. A., Clark, C. L., & Shaver, P. R. (1998). Self-report measurement of adult attachment: An integrative overview. In J. A. Simpson & W. S. Rholes (Eds.), Attachment theory and close relationships. New York: Guilford Press. pp. 46 76. Cozzarelli, C., Karafa, J. A., Collins, N. L., & Tagler, M. J. (2003). Stability and change in adult attachment styles: Associations with personal vulnerabilities, life events, and global construals of self and others. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 22, 315 346. (2001) pp. 487 521. Fraley, R. C., & Davis, K. E. (1997). Attachment formation and transfer in young adult s close friendships and romantic relationships. Personal Relationships, 4, 131 144. Fraley, R. C., Waller, N. G., & Brennan, K. A. (2000). An item-response theory analysis of self-report measures of adult attachment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 350 365. Griffin, D. W., & Bartholomew, K. (1994). Models of the self and others: Fundamental dimensions underlying measures of adult attachment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 430 445. Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. (1987). Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 511 524. (2004) 4, 121 127. (2006) 22, 139 154. (2003) 3 10, 11 24. (1999) Bartholomew 4 (RQ) 7, 41 50. Kenny, D. A., Horner, C., Kashy, D. A., & Chu, L. (1992). Consensus at zero acquaintance: Replication, behavioral cues, and stability. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 88 97. Mikulincer, M., & Nachshon, O. (1991). Attachment styles and patterns of self-disclosure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 321 331. Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2007). Attachment in adulthood: Structure, dynamics, and change. New York: Guilford Press. (2003) 4 3 4, 55 65 (2004a) (ECR) 75, 154 159 (2004b) 5, 19 27. Shaver, P. R., & Mikulincer, M. (2004). What do self-report attachment measures assess? In W. S. Rholes & J. A. Simpson (Eds.), Adult attachment: Theory, research, and clinical implications. New York: Guilford Press. pp. 17 46. P. R., & M. (2008)
156 19 2 W. S. J. A. pp. 16 50. Simpson, J. A., Ickes, W., & Grich, J. (1999). When accuracy hurts: Reactions of anxious-ambivalent dating partners to a relationship-threatening situation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 754 769. Sroufe, L. A., & Waters, E. (1977). Attachment as an organizational construct. Child Development, 48, 1184 1199. Sternberg, R. J. (1997). Construct validation of a triangular love scale. European Journal of Social Psychology, 27, 313 335. (2004) 12, 47 58. 2009.7.31 2010.5.7 Do Dyads Recognize the Other s Attachment Style in a New Acquaintanceship?: Examining the Agreement of Self and Other Ratings on Attachment Style Scales Tatsuma NAKAO Faculty of Education, University of the Ryukyus THE JAPANESE JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY 2010, Vol. 19 No. 2, 146 156 This study examined the agreement (correlations and correspondences) of self and other ratings on attachment style scales, and whether these correlations were influenced by the attachment style of the partner for the other-rating in dyads of new acquaintanceship. Participants were 60 pairs of university freshmen. The main results showed that two dimensions of attachment style had low but significant correlations between the self-rating and the other-rating. These correlations were not influenced by the attachment style of the partner. These findings might indicate that attachment style is a recognizable personality trait in the initial phase of close relationships. Key words: attachment style scale, self-other rating, new acquaintanceship