Lavy, S., Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2010). Autonomy–proximity imbalance: An attachment theory perspective on intrusiveness in romantic relationships.

Question 1

Ganz generell, was ist in diesem Paper eine notwendige Voraussetzung für die Zufriedenheit von Beziehungspartnern

Answer 1

Ein Gleichgewicht zwischen Autonomie und Verbundenheit ist oft eine Herausforderung in engen Beziehungen, aber eine notwendige Voraussetzung für die Zufriedenheit der Beziehungspartner.

Question 2

Als was kann sich das Ungleichgewicht zwischen Autonomie und Verbundenheit ausdrücken?

Answer 2

In diesem Artikel geht es um ein Ungleichgewicht zwischen Autonomie und Verbundenheit, was sich in intrusivem Verhalten ausdrücken kann.

Question 3

Ganz generell, was kann Intrusivität für ein Paar bedeuten

Answer 3

Intrusivität kann bedeuten,
- dass eine Person mehr Nähe sucht und die andere sich zurückzieht oder
- dass beide Partner Nähe suchen, aber auf eine Art und Weise, die nicht zum nicht zum gewünschten Ergebnis führt.

Question 4

Auf welche Arten kann sich intrusives Verhalten äußern?

Answer 4

In Versuchen
- die Einstellungen und Verhaltensweisen des Partners zu kontrollieren und zu beeinflussen,
- die Grenzen des Partners zu verletzen oder
- in Form von unangemessenen Forderungen und
- sehr anhänglichem Verhalten.

Question 5

Warum ist das Thema von intrusivem Verhalten aus bindungstheoretischer Perspektive interessant

Answer 5

Da ängstlich gebundene Menschen besonders anhänglich, kontrollierend und von einem intensiven Wunsch nach Nähe geleitet sind. Im Gegensatz dazu sind vermeidende Menschen besonders wachsam und mitunter auch abwehrend gegenüber den Versuchen des Partners, Nähe herzustellen.

Question 6

Ganz ungefähr, was untersucht die vorliegende Studie?

Answer 6

• Untersucht, wie unsichere Bindungsstile mit aufdringlichem Verhalten in romantischen Beziehungen zusammenhängen und mit welchen subjektiven Kognitionen und Emotionen dieses Verhalten einhergeht.
• Darüber hinaus geht es um die Wahrnehmung von aufdringlichem Verhalten des Partners sowie die Reaktionen darauf.

Question 7

Part of the Abstract:
We examined associations between two kinds of attachment insecurity (anxiety and avoidance) and intrusiveness in couple relationships. One hundred fifty-six adults completed measures of attachment insecurities and variables related to intrusiveness.
Name the four variables related to intrusiveness

Answer 7

• engaging in intrusive behavior,
• perceiving a partner as intrusive,
• subjective experiences of being intrusive,
• and reacting to intrusive behavior

Question 8

Part of the Abstract:
With which variables of intrusiveness was attachment anxiety related

Answer 8

Attachment anxiety was associated with
- more intrusive behavior,
- more ambivalent reactions to partner intrusiveness, and
- greater emotionality when being intrusive.

Question 9

Part of the Abstract:
With which variables of intrusiveness was avoidance related

Answer 9

Avoidance was associated with
- perceiving a partner as intrusive,
- reacting critically and establishing distance in response to partner intrusiveness, and
- feeling concerned and caring when being intrusive.

Question 10

Introduction
What can a person do if he or she has regulated emotions effectively by relying on security-providing ‘‘attachment figures” (relationship partners who provide a ‘‘safe haven” and a ‘‘secure base for exploration”)

Answer 10

Then the person can alternate, at will, between comfortable closeness and self-confident autonomy.

Question 11

Introduction
the anxious, clingy pattern was associated with a child being raised in interactions with a (…) attachment figure

Answer 11

self-preoccupied and intrusive attachment figure

Question 12

Introduction
the avoidant, compulsively self-reliant pattern was associated with a child being raised in interactions with a (…) attachment figure

Answer 12

distant and unsupportive attachment figure

Question 13

Introduction
Personality and social psychologists who study attachment-re- lated mental processes and behavior in adolescents and adults have designed self-report measures of the two major dimen- sions identified by Ainsworth et al. (1978), attachment anxiety and avoidance, which reflect two learned ways to regulate the attachment behavioral system:

Answer 13

- hyperactivation (vigilance regarding a partner’s interest or disinterest and clingy, intrusive behavior) and
- deactivation (avoidance of intimacy and strong efforts to re- main self-reliant).

Question 14

Introduction
According to Pistole (1994), why is there often a problem between avoidant and anxiously attached individuals?

Answer 14

The anxiously attached person’s desire for extreme closeness and the avoidant person’s extreme self- reliance often disrupt or damage couple relationships because they interfere with the negotiation of mutually satisfying closeness and autonomy.

(-> Pistole suggested that avoidant individuals’ distancing behavior interferes with their own (assumed) needs for closeness and with their responsiveness to their partners’ needs for close- ness. In contrast, anxious individuals’ extreme need for closeness and fear of abandonment can lead to intrusive behavior and to mis- interpretations of partners’ moves toward autonomy as signs of rejection. Pistole’s analysis was empirically supported)

Question 15

Introduction
In which descriptions of two types of pathological relationships has intrusiveness been mentioned

Answer 15

In
- pursuer–distancer relationships (in which one person seeks more closeness and the other backs away) and
- pursuer–pursuer relationships (in which the two partners both desire closeness but seek it in ways that do not result in the desired outcome).

(-> These two patterns are common in cases of marital breakdown and divorce as well as cases of domestic violence, because one partner intensively seeks closeness and reassurance and the other responds with either intensified ef- forts to maintain autonomy and independence or awkward efforts to achieve extreme closeness and dependence)

Question 16

Introduction
In which four different ways is intrusiveness in (pathological and non-pathological) relationships manifested?

Answer 16

Attempts to
- monitor and influence a partner’s attitudes and behaviors,
- invade the partner’s self-boundaries,
- make unsuitable relational demands and
- be clingy, controlling, and critical

Question 17

What were the Hypotheses of
(1) intrusive behavior in romantic relationships,
(2) perceptions of a partner’s intrusive behavior,

Answer 17

(1) We hypothesized that anxious individuals would be more intrusive, and

(2) Avoidant individuals would be more sensitive to threats to their autonomy and would therefore tend to view their partners as intrusive.

Question 18

What were the Hypotheses of (3) reactions to a partner’s intrusive behavior

Answer 18

Hypothesized that reactions to a partner’s intrusive behavior would differ among individuals with different forms of attachment insecurity.

• For anxious individuals, there were two possibilities:
  (1) They might react positively to a partner’s intrusiveness, being grateful for signs of interest and involvement.
  But if the intrusive behavior was perceived as critical or unpleasant, (2) they might behave as they often do in response to relationship conflict, displaying and expressing strong negative emotions.
• From avoidant individuals we expected distancing responses to partner intrusiveness, responses that restored personal boundaries and a sense of autonomy.

Question 19

What were the Hypotheses of (4) the subjective experience of being intrusive

Answer 19

Hypothesized that people with different attachment orientations would have different subjective experiences of being intrusive.
- We expected more anxiously attached people to experience more negative thoughts and feelings when being intrusive, because their intrusive behavior would be motivated by fear of rejection and a perceived shortage of partner affection.
- We were unsure what to predict about avoidant individuals’ experiences, because intrusiveness should be an unusual form of behavior for them.

Question 20

How was
(1) participants attachment
and
(2) the other Behaviors
measured

Answer 20

• Participants’ attachment anxiety and avoidance were assessed with the Experiences in Close Relationships Inven- tory (ECR; Brennan et al., 1998).
• Their intrusiveness, perceptions of their partners’ intrusiveness, reactions to partner intrusiveness and subjective experiences of being intrusive were assessed with new questionnaires designed especially for that purpose.

Question 21

(What were the hypothesized gender difference in this study)

Answer 21

(We also considered possible gender differences, because gender roles assign greater proximity-seeking motivation to women and greater autonomy-seeking motivation to men.
We hypothesized that men would perceive their female partners as more intrusive, and that men’s negative reactions to intrusiveness would be stronger.)

Question 22

Which analyses were conducted to assess unique and interactive effects of gender, attachment anxiety, and avoidant attachment on each of the intrusiveness-related scale scores.

Answer 22

Hierarchical regression analyses

Question 23

Results
Self-reports of intrusive behavior
(also name other main effects and interactions)

Answer 23

As expected, the regression analysis for participants’ reports of intrusive behaviors indicated that more anxiously attached partic- ipants reported significantly higher levels of intrusiveness (see Table 2). No other main effects or interactions were significant.

Question 24

Results
Perceptions of partner’s intrusiveness
(also name other main and interaction effects)

Answer 24

• The regression analysis for participants’ perceptions of their partners’ intrusiveness yielded a significant main effect of avoidant attachment (see Table 2). As expected, more avoidant participants perceived their partners to be more intrusive.
  (This effect was also significant when controlling for self-reported intrusiveness)
• Unexpectedly, how, attachment anxiety was also positively associated with perceived partner intrusiveness.
  It must be noted, that this effect was eliminated when controlling for self-reported intrusiveness (which had a relationship with intrusiveness that wos not moderated by gender or attachment)
• Gender had no significant main or interactive effects.

…

A result, not shown in Table 2, was that self-reported intrusiveness and perceived partner intrusiveness were substantially correlated.
Further analyses revealed that the correlation was not moderated by gender or attachment scores. When the analysis for perceived partner intrusiveness was recomputed, controlling statistically for the participants’ own self-reported intrusiveness, the beta coefficient for attachment anxiety was reduced from (p < .01) to not significant. This control did not eliminate the significant effect for avoidance.

Question 25

Results Reactions to partner intrusiveness (also name other main or interaction effects)

Answer 25

- Revealed significant associations between attachment anxiety and higher scores on anger and hurt feelings, confusion and helplessness, negative thoughts about the intrusive partner, and acceptance and giving in (see Table 2). - In contrast, avoidant attachment was significantly associated with higher scores on negative thoughts about the intrusive partner and disregarding/ignoring the intrusion, and with lower scores on regretting the incident and verbally confronting the partner. No main or interactive effects of gender were found. These results fully supported our predictions.

Question 26

Results The subjective experience of being intrusive (also name other main and interaction effects)

Answer 26

- Revealed significant main effects of attachment anxiety on five of the six dimensions (see Table 2). The higher a participant’s attachment anxiety, the stronger were his or her cognitive and emotional responses while being intrusive toward a partner. - Avoidant attachment was significantly associated only with experiencing less anger. - No main or interactive effects of gender were found.

Question 27

Why might anxiously attached individuals show more intrusive behavior

Answer 27

Probably because of chronic worries about their relationships and their value in their partners’ eyes. It is possible that when anxious people feel threatened with rejection or abandonment, they intrude into a relationship partner’s personal ‘‘space,” often making matters worse rather than better.

Question 28

Why might avoidant participants perceive their partners as more intrusive

Answer 28

Suggests that avoidant individuals’ need for independence results in heightened sensitivity to their partners’ intrusiveness.

Question 29

Why might there have been this unexpected association between attachment anxiety and perceived partner intrusiveness?

Answer 29

- This association became marginal and nonsignificant when we controlled for participants’ own self-reported intrusiveness. - These findings may have something to do with dyadic cycles of intrusiveness in pursuer–pursuer relationships, when one anxious partner’s intrusive behavior increases the other’s intrusiveness, generating a vicious cycle.

Question 30

Why might it be, that against expectations, that men did not perceive their partners as more intrusive than women

Answer 30

- The association between gender and perceived partner intrusiveness was not significant. - It is possible that the failure to find the expected gender differences resulted from the use of an explicit, self-report measure for assessing perceptions of partner responsiveness. (It may help to use implicit measures in the future, that eliminate self-report biases, such as social desirability or effects of gender-related norms and expectations.))

Question 31

We hypothesized that anxious individuals would report strong po- sitive and negative emotional reactions. Why might it be that attachment anxiety was associated with stronger anger, hurt, confusion, helplessness, and negative thoughts about one’s partner as well as greater acceptance and willingness to give in.

Answer 31

- The anxiously attached are strongly affected by their desires for security and closeness, which cause them to focus on the potential rewards of intimacy. - They are also affected, however, by fears of rejection and abandonment and by memories of frustrating attachment relationships, which lead them to overemphasize their partners’ potentially negative traits and intentions. - Both of these views are conducive to strong relational ambivalence and mental confusion about one’s reactions to a partner’s intrusiveness – anger and hurt feelings or acceptance and giving in.

Question 32

In line with our hypothesis, we found that more avoidant indi- viduals reacted to intrusiveness with which twho distancing strategies

Answer 32

- psychological (having negative thoughts about their partner and not feeling regret) and - behavioral (ignoring and not verbally confronting the partner)

Question 33

In line with our hypothesis, we found that more avoidant indi- viduals reacted to intrusiveness with distancing strategies. Why might this be

Answer 33

These responses seem to help avoidant peo- ple restore their sense of autonomy by emphasizing psychological boundaries between themselves and their partners.

Question 34

Why was it predicted that anxiously attached people would experience more negative thoughts and feelings when being intrusive

Answer 34

because their intrusive behavior would be motivated by fear of rejection and lack of partner affection.

Question 35

What were the exact observed reactions of individuals with attachment axiety to a partners intrusiveness in comparison to avoidants

Answer 35

(1) stronger anger, hurt, confusion, helplessness, and negative thoughts about one’s partner (2) as well as greater acceptance and willingness to give in

Question 36

When being intrusive, attachment anxiety was associated with (...) Why might this be? What additional result can one note here?

Answer 36

When being intrusive, attachment anxiety was associated with - all of the negative experiential reactions we assessed: anger, regret, insecurity, and helplessness. - However, attachment anxiety was also associated with a sense of being appreciated by a partner. (probably reflecting attachment-anxious people’s gratitude when intrusive responses result in a partner’s attention and concern.)

Question 37

Why might it have been that Avoidant attachment was negatively associated with anger when being intrusive

Answer 37

- This is probably reflecting the suppression of negative emotions that can activate attachment needs despite one’s wish to remain self-reliant. - In addition, anger implies emotional involvement in a relationship, and such involvement may undermine an avoidant person’s pursuit of autonomy and emotional distance. - Another possibility is that for avoidant individuals, infrequent intrusive behaviors are not caused or associated with anger but are motivated by a genuine concern for the safety or well-being of the partner in cases where there is a good external reason to behave intrusively.

Question 38

What do the findings indicate in general

Answer 38

- Both anxious and avoidant attachment are associated with imbalances of closeness and distance. - (Anxious individuals tend to overemphasize the importance of closeness, causing them sometimes to become intrusive, demanding, and coercive. When they are intrusive, they are very emotional, and when their partner is intrusive they fail to under- stand, and they experience strong negative emotions despite their own tendency to be intrusive. Avoidant individuals emphasize the importance of emotional distance and self-reliance, leading them to perceive their partners’ proximity-seeking behavior as intrusive. - However, avoidant individuals’ tendency to ignore their partner may cause the partner to become intrusive, which in turn may cause avoidant individuals to distance themselves further from their partners, which then may cause the partners to become even more intrusive. ) - - This self-perpetuating cycle may be the key to pursuer–distancer relationships, which can destroy a couple’s relationship.

Question 39

(What could future studies investigate)

Answer 39

(Future studies should evaluate and refine these new measures and explore their connections with other theoretically relevant constructs, such as relationship satisfaction, commitment, intimacy, and partner responsiveness. In addition, studies should examine the external validity of the new measures using data from both members of a couple and from external observers, such as friends or family members. This is crucial for determining, for example, if the association between avoidant attachment and perceived partner intrusiveness reflects avoidant individuals’ sensitivity to proximity-seeking behaviors or their partners’ actual intrusiveness. Future studies should also examine associations between the various facets of intrusiveness and relationship quality.)