Attachemtn and Stress Outcomes

7/30/2019 Attachemtn and Stress Outcomes

1/22

Preventive Resources and Emotion Regulation

Expectancies as Mediators Between Attachmentand College Students Stress Outcomes

Christopher J. McCarthy

University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas

Richard G. Lambert

University of North Carolina at Charlotte, Charlotte, North Carolina

Naomi P. Moller

University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas

In this study the authors examined both preventive psychological copingresources and negative mood regulation expectancies as potential mediatorsbetween parental attachment and two types of stress outcomes: stress symp-toms and stress-produced emotions. Data were collected from 390 college

students and separate structural equation models were tested for the out-comes of stress symptoms and emotions. Results suggested that for bothmodels, as hypothesized, preventive resources and negative mood regulationexpectancies functioned as mediators. Further, there was evidence that theseresults were similar for the model in which stress symptoms were used as anoutcome, as well as the model in which stress-produced emotions were usedas the outcome. Implications for a more complete understanding of psycho-logical resources promoted by secure attachment are discussed.

Keywords: parental attachment, coping resources, emotion regulation, stress outcomes

Attachment theorists have suggested that the psychological capacities ofadolescents and adults are strongly determined by childhood relationshipswith caregivers (Bowlby, 1979; Main, 1999). This prediction is often borne

Christopher J. McCarthy and Naomi P. Moller, Department of Educational Psychology,University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas; Richard G. Lambert, Department of EducationalLeadership, University of North Carolina at Charlotte, Charlotte, North Carolina.

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Christopher J. McCarthy,

Department of Educational Psychology, 1 University Station D5800, Austin, TX 78712-0383.E-mail: [email protected]

International Journal of Stress Management Copyright 2006 by the American Psychological Association

2006, Vol. 13, No. 1, 122 1072-5245/06/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/1072-5245.13.1.1

1


2/22

out in the experience of college counselors, who find that many students whohave difficulty coping in college report family-of-origin issues (Braver,Burnberry, Green, & Rawson, 1992). However, although the impact of

negative early relational experiences is potentially severe, implicit in mostcollege counseling interventions is the notion that difficult childhoods can beameliorated through individual and group work aimed to change attachmentdynamics and improve coping capacities (Lopez, Maurico, Gormley, Simko,& Berger, 2001).

Although the notions are widely held (Ainsworth, 1989) that (a) re-sources for coping with life demands in adolescence and adulthood developfrom early interactions with ones caregivers (Bradford & Lyddon, 1993) and(b) ones level of attachment to parental figures is closely linked to emotional

functioning throughout the life span, these ideas have historically receivedlittle empirical support (Magai, Distel, & Liker, 1995). In recent years,however, researchers have investigated how attachment histories impact abroad range of capacities for coping with stress (e.g., Wei, Heppner, &Mallinckrodt, 2003) in adolescence and adulthood, whereas a second line ofresearch has focused more narrowly on the notion that attachment mainlypromotes affect regulation capacities (Feeney & Noller, 1996).

The purpose of this study was to clarify whether both types of resourcesgeneral capacities for coping with stress and specific negative mood regula-

tion capacitiesplay a different role as mediators between attachment andstress outcomes among college students. Given that some researchers regardattachment as a theory of affect regulation (Feeney & Noller, 1996), it makessense that some studies have focused on levels of stress-produced emotionssuch as anxiety and depression as primary indicators of adjustment (Lopez etal., 2001; Wei et al., 2003). Other studies, however, have been focused onsymptoms that stress is affecting ones health or overall ability to function,including the capacity to resolve personal problems (Lopez, Mitchell, &Gormley, 2002) and keep life demands at an acceptable level (McCarthy,

Moller, & Fouladi, 2001). Because previous researchers have focused mainlyon examining the mediational role of narrowly defined psychological re-sources on one type of outcome measure (i.e., stress symptoms having to dowith the ability to function in everyday life or stress-produced emotionshaving to do with the experience of negative affect), it is important to clarifywhether mediators function differently depending on which type of outcomeis used. To evaluate whether there is a differential relationship betweenattachment mediators and these various indices of distress, we analyzed twoseparate models in this study: one used stress-produced emotions as the

outcome variable, and one used stress symptoms.Structural equation modeling was therefore used to (a) examine the

hypothesis that the effect of preventive psychological coping resources asgeneralized indices of the potential to cope with life demands would be

2 McCarthy, Lambert, and Moller


3/22

antecedent to (i.e., have a direct influence on) beliefs that one can cope withnegative emotions (hereafter referred to as negative mood regulation expec-tancies) and (b) to test rival models in which stress symptoms and stress-

produced emotions, respectively, are used as outcomes. The rationales for theinclusion of each construct in this study will next be presented in the orderin which they were hypothesized to affect psychological functioning: therelationship between (a) parental attachment, (b) the hypothesized mediatingvariables of preventive coping resources and their relationship to moodregulation expectancies, and (c) the outcome variables of self-reported stresssymptoms and stress-produced emotions.

THE RELATIONSHIP OF PARENTAL ATTACHMENT TO COPING

RESOURCES AND MOOD REGULATION EXPECTANCIES

Mikulincer and Florian (1998) suggested that secure adult attachmentfunctions as an inner resource that can help one cope with stress and theemotions generated by lifes adversities. As was noted previously, two linesof research have emerged in an attempt to clarify these resources and howthey are related to psychological functioning. One such line has focused on

a broad conceptualization of secure attachment as providing the individualwith the coping resources necessary for handling life stress across the lifespan. That this occurs can be inferred from research indicating that secureattachment promotes effective coping strategies including better problemsolving in toddlerhood (Matas, Arend, & Sroufe, 1978), higher social com-petence when interacting with peers in preschool-aged children (Howes,Matheson, & Hamilton, 1994), and high levels of ego resiliency and curiosityin school-aged youths (Arend, Gove, & Sroufe, 1979). Later in life secureattachment has been associated with greater commitment, trust, and satisfac-

tion in romantic relationships in young adults (Simpson, 1990).The mediational role of psychological resources for coping between

attachment and psychological functioning in college students has been ex-amined in several recent studies. For example, Lopez et al. (2001) found thatthe relationship between insecure adult attachment and distress in collegestudents (i.e., levels of anxiety and depression) was mediated by the tendencyto employ ineffective problem-focused coping strategies, such as becomingpreoccupied with problems or acting impulsively. In addition, Lopez, Mitch-ell, and Gormley (2002) found that measures of self-organization (i.e., the

tendency to conceal personal information, that is both intimate and negative,as well as experiences of depersonalization and self-fragmentation) mediatedthe relationship between college students current attachment and measuresof perceived stress levels and symptoms. In addition, Wei et al. (2003) found

3Preventive Resources


4/22

that perceived problem-solving ability in college students mediated adultattachment and indicators of psychological distress such as depression,anxiety, and hopelessness.

Although the evidence that secure attachment promotes a range ofpsychological resources is persuasive, another line of research has beenfocused more narrowly on the proposition that secure attachment bondspromote mood regulation capacities (Fuendeling, 1998). For example, se-curely attached adults have been found to be less anger-prone (Mikulincer,1995), to be better able to regulate feelings of distress (Mikulincer & Florian,1995), and to have greater confidence in their ability to regulate negativemoods (McCarthy et al., 2001). Creasey (2002) also found support for themediational role of negative mood regulation (NMR) expectancies between

adult attachment styles measured using the Adult Attachment Interview andself-reported stress symptoms in a sample of female college students. Ittherefore seems reasonable to conclude that both general levels of copingresources and specific capacities for regulating negative moods can bothserve important, yet distinct, roles when functioning as mediators betweenlevels of attachment and well-being.

PREVENTIVE PSYCHOLOGICAL COPING RESOURCES ANDNEGATIVE MOOD REGULATION EXPECTANCIES AS MEDIATORS

OF ATTACHMENT AND DISTRESS

The dominant models of stress and coping, often referred to as transac-tional models, emphasize the importance of subjective evaluations of bothexternal demands and perceived coping resources in determining whetherdemands become stressors (for a review, see Matheny, Aycock, Pugh,Curlette, & Canella, 1986). According to this perspective, individuals expe-

rience the physiological, emotional, and behavioral consequences of stressonly when it is perceived that the demands of a situation exceed onesresources for coping. Consequently, possession of adequate levels of psy-chological coping resources is essential in avoiding many of the harmfuleffects of stress.

Matheny et al. (1986) and Aspinwall and Taylor (1997) noted that mostresearch and intervention models involve coping resources for combatingcurrent stressors and neglect the importance of resources that might be usedto prevent stress. This distinction seems particularly important for the current

study, given how attachment theorists frame the types of capacities andresources promoted by secure attachment. For example, Bowlby (1979)suggested that childhood attachment experiences continue to exert an influ-ence into adulthood because ones attachment history leads to the formation



5/22

of internal cognitive templates, called working models. These models, hesuggested, persist into adolescence and adulthood and help individuals pre-dict and manage interactions with the outside world, especially relationships

with significant others. Similarly, McCarthy, Lambert, Beard, and Dematatis(2002) suggested that preventive coping resources equip people with a set ofattitudes and beliefs that will be useful in preventing harmful levels of stress.McCarthy et al. (2002) suggested two main ways in which this could happen: (a)good preventive copers may use their capacities to arrange their lives so thatnegative events and requirements are kept to a minimum, and (b) possession ofpreventive coping resources may allow one to make benign interpretations of lifedemands whenever possible that mitigate stressful reactions.

NMR expectancies were modeled in this study as being impacted by

preventive coping resources because of the suggestion that NMR expectan-cies are associated with the intensity and duration of negative mood statesexperienced under stress (Catanzaro & Greenwood, 1994, p. 35). In otherwords, although the availability of sufficient coping resources may influencereactions to distressing events, NMR expectancies are thought to be the mech-anism by which stress-produced emotions are actually regulated (Mearns, 1991).In an attempt to measure this, Catanzaro and Mearns (1990) developed theNegative Mood Regulation Scale (NMRS) to measure the expectancy that somebehavior or cognition will alleviate a negative mood state (p. 546) and hypoth-

esized a relationship between such expectancies and stress outcomes.Recently, the NMRS was used to examine the link between coping

resources and mood regulation expectancies in a study by McCarthy,Lambert, and Seraphine (2004). The researchers found that coping re-sources and mood regulation expectancies both functioned as mediatorsbetween adaptive family functioning and self-reported negative emotionsfollowing parental conflict. Although McCarthy et al. (2004) used only aglobal measure of coping resources that did not specifically assess stressprevention resources, they did find that psychological coping resources

directly impacted self-reports of the ability to regulate negative moods. Itwas speculated that mood-regulation expectancies derive in part from thebelief that one has sufficient coping resources for dealing with stress-producedemotions. In the present study, therefore, we examined the hypothesis thatpreventive coping resources would have a direct relationship with negative moodregulation expectancies and that both would function as mediators of the rela-tionship between attachment and stress outcomes.

THE PRESENT STUDY

In this study we evaluated a model constructed from the followinghypotheses: (a) the antecedent variable, parental attachment, was expected to



6/22

have a positive direct effect on the development of college students preven-tive coping resources and mood regulation expectancies; (b) coping resourcesand mood regulation expectancies were expected to directly influence both

stress-symptoms and stress-produced emotions; and (c) levels of preventivecoping resources were expected to have a direct effect on negative moodregulation expectancies.

Figure 1 shows the path diagrams tested in the study, in which theellipses represent latent constructs and single-headed arrows represent direc-tional links between pairs of constructs. The conceptual models using stresssymptoms and stress-produced emotions as the outcomes consisted of fourlatent constructs and six directional links between constructs. Because thevariables in the structural model are defined as latent, each one is defined or

measured by two or more observed variables. Latent variables, conceptuallysimilar to factors in exploratory factor analysis, are not directly measured andwhen modeled using structural equation modeling (SEM) provide an estimateof an underlying construct while controlling for measurement error. Theyrepresent underlying latent traits and are indirectly measured by multipleobserved variables, each of which provides sample-specific estimates ofcomponents of the latent variable. The links between the latent variables andthe observed variables are often referred to as the measurement model and issimilar to a factor model. Next is a description of each latent construct interms of its defined observed variables.

The latent variable of parental attachment was measured by using scalesfrom two different instruments: (a) scales measuring the affective quality ofthe relationship (Quality scale) and parents supportiveness (Support scale)from the Parental Attachment Questionnaire (PAQ; Kenny, 1987, 1990) and(b) two scales measuring attachment to the mother and father from theInventory of Parental and Peer Attachment (IPPA; Armsden & Greenberg,1987, 1989). It should be noted that several types of attachment measures

exist, which may be continuous or categorical, assess current or retrospectiverelationships, or focus on attachment style versus attachment behaviors(Garbarino, 1998). Different measures are also used to assess attachment indifferent domains, such as romantic, peer, or parental relationships. The focusof this investigation was on parental attachment because this attachmentrelationship represents perhaps the most direct link between child and adultattachment. Parental attachment tends to remain significant at least throughthe college years, and, in most cases, the target of these attachments remainsconstant throughout childhood and adolescence, in contrast to romantic and

peer attachments which typically do not (Armsden & Greenberg, 1987). Inaddition, although many studies focus on differences in functioning betweenthe various categories of insecure attachment proposed by Main and col-leagues (i.e., dismissing, when the person devalues attachment objects, and



7/22

preoccupied, when the attachment experience is highly idealized; see Main,1999), the goal of this study was to examine parental attachment history asa single dimension ranging from higher attachment security to lower attach-ment security (McCarthy et al., 2001).

Figure 1. Structural models tested with final standardized path coefficients. Values for themodels using Stress symptoms as the outcome are presented first next to each path, followed

by bolded and italicized values for the Stress-produced emotions models. Preventive CR

Preventive Coping Resources, NMR Negative Mood Regulation Expectancies. Higher scores

on Attachment, Preventive CR, and NMR indicate higher functioning on that variable, higher scoreson Stress Outcome indicated higher levels of either stress symptoms or stress-produced emotions.



8/22

As was noted previously, the ability to anticipate and avoid stressful

situations seemed especially relevant to examine as a function of attachment

history, and four scales from the Preventive Resources Inventory (PRI;

McCarthy & Lambert, 2003) were used in this study: Perceived Control,Maintaining Perspective, Social Resourcefulness, and Self-Acceptance. The

construct for generalized expectancies about negative mood regulation was

measured by using the three scales from the NMRS (Catanzaro & Mearns,

1990).

For the models using stress symptoms as the outcome measure, three

scales from the Hopkins Symptom Checklist (HSC; Greene, Walkey, Mc-

Cormick, & Taylor, 1988) were used: General Distress, Somatic Distress, and

Performance Difficulty. For the models using stress-produced emotions as

the outcome variable, the UCLA Loneliness Scale (LS; Russell, 1996;

Russell, Peplau, & Cutrona, 1980; Russell, Peplau, & Ferguson, 1978), the

Beck Hopelessness Scale (BHS; Beck, Weissman, Lester & Trexler, 1974),

and the negative affect scale from the Positive and Negative Affect Scale

(PANAS; Watson, Clark, & Tellegen, 1988) were used.

METHOD

Participants and Procedures

Participants were 390 students (mean age 21.04, SD 2.34) taking

upper division elective courses at a large, Southwestern university. They

were recruited over two consecutive semesters, received course credit for

their participation, and completed a demographics survey and the instruments

described below. Data collection began approximately 1 month after eachsemester began and occurred over the course of approximately 6 weeks so

that participants were completing the study at about the same point in each

semester. The sample was 68.4% female and 31.6% male; 54.9% were

seniors, 21.9% were juniors, 12.6% were sophomores, 8.2% were freshman,

and 2.3% were graduate students. Based on self-reports, ethnic backgrounds

of the sample were European American (65.4%), Asian American (20.2%),

Hispanic (4.7%), African American (4.1%), and biracial or multiracial

(5.6%). The participants reported their current parental figures as both

biological father and mother (84.1%), only one biological parent in theirlives (8.3%), one biological and one step parent (7.1%), and other

situations (0.6% or two participants, currently living with grandparents or

legal guardians).



9/22

Measures

PAQ

The PAQ is a 55-item questionnaire assessing attachment to both parents(Kenny, 1987, 1990). The scale is based on Ainsworths conceptualization ofattachment and was developed for use with college students. Although thePAQ has three scales measuring the affective quality of the relationship(Quality scale), parents supportiveness (Support scale), and their encourage-ment of autonomy (Independence scale), only the former two scales (Qualityand Support) were used in this study. In previous research by McCarthy et al.(2001) investigating a range of adult attachment measures and their relation-

ship to affect regulation and perceived stress among college students, it wasfound that the quality and support scales from Kennys (1990) PAQ formeda unitary parental attachment factor and that college students with higherscores on this factor reported lower levels of perceived stress, relied less onthe use of suppression to cope with negative feelings, and had greaterconfidence in their ability to attend to and regulate negative moods.

Kenny (1987) reported testretest reliability over a 2-week interval of .92for scores on the entire instrument and between .82 and .91 for scores fromthe three separate scales, and Cronbachs alphas ranged from .88 to .96. In

this study, Cronbachs alphas of .95 for the Quality of Relationship scale and.85 for Quality of Support scales were found. The predictive validity of thePAQ is suggested by correlations with measures of dating competence and,for females only, assertion (Kenny, 1987).

IPPA

This 75-item inventory assesses both feelings and thoughts about thecurrent parental and peer attachment of college students and adolescents(Armsden & Greenberg, 1987, 1989). There are 25 items on each of threescales measuring attachment to the mother, father, and peers (IPPA-Mother,IPPA-Father, and IPPA-Peer). Although an earlier version of the IPPAassessed attachment to parents as a single construct (Armsden & Greenberg,1987), the authors later revised the scale to assess attachment to mother andfather separately (Armsden & Greenberg, 1989). This revised version of theinstrument has been used in several studies of late adolescent attachment

(Brack, Gay, & Matheny, 1993; McCarthy et al., 2001).Armsden and Greenberg (1987) reported internal consistency (Cron-

bachs alpha) scores that ranged from .86 to .91 and testretest reliabilityscores over a 3-week period of .93 for their overall parental attachment scale;



10/22

internal consistency estimates for scores from the separate mother and fatherscales have been reported at .89 and .88, respectively (Papini, Roggman, &Anderson, 1991). In this study, Cronbachs alpha for scores on the IPPA-

Mother scale was .95 and .96 for scores on the IPPA-Father scale (the Peerscale was not used in this study because the focus was on parental attach-ment). Armsden and Greenberg (1987) provided evidence for the convergentand concurrent validity of the IPPA with significant correlations betweenIPPA scores and measures of family support, conflict and cohesiveness,self-esteem, life satisfaction, depression, and anxiety. In addition, numeroussubsequent studies have provided further evidence of the validity of the IPPA(for a review, see Lopez & Gover, 1993).

PRI

The PRI (McCarthy & Lambert, 2003) is an 80-item self-report measurewith four primary scales measuring physical, social, and psychological assetsthat are useful in preventing the occurrence of life demands that exceed onescapacities for coping successfully. Respondents are asked to indicate theirlevel of agreement with statements about personal habits relating to theprevention of stress. The Perceived Control scale measures the belief that one

can cope successfully with life demands and manage situations that couldpotentially become stressful (sample item, I can handle most things), theMaintaining Perspective scale assesses attitudes and beliefs consistent withpreventing stressful situations and keeping stress-produced emotions at man-ageable levels (sample item, I am able to avoid causing myself stress bykeeping things in perspective), the Social Resourcefulness scale measuresthe ability to draw upon a social network of caring others who can act as abuffer against life demands (sample item, I have mutually supportiverelationships), and the Self-Acceptance scale measures the degree to which

one can accept and overcome imperfections in dealing with demanding lifesituations (sample item, I may not always get what I want).

Internal consistency estimates for the PRI scales using college samplesby McCarthy et al. (2002) found Cronbach alphas of .91 for PerceivedControl, .87 for Maintaining Perspective, .87 for Social Resourcefulness, and.71 for Self-Acceptance. In this study, Cronbachs alphas were .91, .88, .87,and .73, respectively. McCarthy et al. (2002) evaluated the validity of the PRIwith a sample of 501 college students. An exploratory factor analysis sup-ported organizing the PRI into the four scales described above. Further

evidence for the construct validity of the PRI was provided by theoreticallyconsistent relationships with related constructs and by hierarchical regressionanalyses in which scales from the PRI predicted perceived stress levels aftercontrolling for the incidence of negative life events.



11/22

NMRS

The NMRS is a 30-item inventory with three scales that measure per-

ceived ability to reduce negative mood (Kirsch, Mearns, & Catanzaro, 1990).The Cognitive scale assesses confidence in using cognitive strategies toreduce negative mood; the Behavior scale measures expectancies about usingovert behaviors to change negative emotions; and the General scale assessesgeneralized beliefs that one can alter ones mood. Internal consistencyestimates reported from five separate samples found Cronbach alphas rangingfrom .86 to .92 (Catanzaro & Mearns, 1990). In this study, Cronbachs alphaswere .76, .76, and .88 for the Cognitive, Behavior, and General scales,respectively. Catanzaro and Greenwood (1994) used a sample of college

students to demonstrate that NMRS scores were positively related to activecoping behaviors and negatively related to avoidant coping and stresssymptoms.

UCLA LS

This 20-item scale (Russell, 1996; Russell, et al., 1980, 1978) measuresperceived loneliness using a 4-point scale for each item. The instrument hasbeen used with a range of populations, including college students, nurses,teachers, and older individuals (Russell, 1996). The coefficient alphas acrossvarious populations ranged from .89 to .94, and testretest reliabilities of .73over 12 months were found (Russell, 1996). Hartshorne (1993) reported asplit-half reliability of .88 and a coefficient alpha of .90 with a collegesample. Coefficient alpha in the current study was .95. Confirmatory factoranalysis by the instrument authors supported the feasibility of a unidimen-sional factor structure. Construct validity was supported by strong positive

correlations with other instruments assessing loneliness, negative correlationswith measures of social support, and strong correlations in the expecteddirections with measures of depression, self-esteem, burnout, well-being, andhealth (Russell, 1996; Russell et al., 1980, 1978).

BHS

This 20-item true or false scale (Beck et al., 1974) is designed to measure

subjects degree of pessimism about the present situation and future. In thecurrent study, the coefficient alpha was .88. Evidence of concurrent validitywas suggested by a comparison of BHS scores with clinical ratings ofhopelessness and negative attitudes about the future (Beck et al., 1974). In



12/22


13/22

Table1IntercorrelationM

atrixforStudyMeasures

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

1.PAQ-Q

2.PAQ-S

0.732

3.IPPA-M

0.787

0.682

4.IPPA-F

0.619

0.536

0.445

5.PRI-PC

0.313

0.244

0.287

0.273

6.PRI-MP

0.3

63

0.304

0.311

0.274

0.7

69

7.PRI-SR

0.415

0.426

0.412

0.327

0.621

0.687

8.PRI-AC

0.381

0.3

57

0.3

62

0.342

0.786

0.799

0.683

9.NMRS-C

0.306

0.2

69

0.2

57

0.269

0.510

0.546

0.448

0.477

10.NMRS-B

0.3

63

0.3

53

0.347

0.291

0.470

0.515

0.5

66

0.442

0.642

11.NMRS-G

0.3

58

0.238

0.324

0.303

0.575

0.574

0.4

54

0.520

0.785

0.6

59

12.PANAS

0.333

0.115

0.212

0.245

0.4

57

0.384

0.3

54

0.375

0.421

0.4

50

0.500

13.BHS

0.4

55

0.3

58

0.3

61

0.266

0.546

0.522

0.474

0.533

0.504

0.549

0.528

0.4

55

14.LS

0.4

55

0.402

0.399

0.396

0.484

0.496

0.637

0.515

0.4

55

0.618

0.549

0.423

0.532

15.HSC-G

0.507

0.142

0.2

54

0.296

0.520

0.4

62

0.423

0.444

0.524

0.494

0.665

0.585

0.507

0.645

16.HSC-SD

0.2

55

0.070

0.214

0.214

0.304

0.213

0.2

53

0.292

0.291

0.300

0.352

0.5

65

0.338

0.3790

.531

17.HSC-PD

0.342

0.148

0.243

0.295

0.327

0.284

0.2

58

0.291

0.333

0.3

64

0.432

0.502

0.422

0.4

650

.606

0.539

Note.

rvalues

.1arenotstatisticallys

ignificant;rvalue

.11issta

tisticallysignificantatp

.05

;.rvalue

.14orgreaterisstatistically

significanta

tp

.01.PAQ-Q.PAQ-SParentalAttachmentQuestionnaireQualityandSupportscales,respectively;IPPA-M,IPPA-F

Inventory

ofParental

andPeerAttachment(IPPA)M

aternalandPaternalscales,re

spectively;PRI-PC,PRI-MP,PRI-SR,PRI-AC

Preventive

Resources

Inventory(PRI)PerceivedControl.MaintainingPerspective,SocialResourcefulness,andAcceptancescales,respectively;NMRS-C,

NMRS-B,

NMRS-G

NegativeMoodRegulation(N

MRS)Cognitive,Behavior,and

GeneralScales,respectively;PANAS

NegativeAffectSca

lefromthe

Positiveand

NegativeAffectScale;BHS

BeckHopelessnessScale,LS

UCLALonelinessScale;an

dHSC-G,HSC-SD,HSC-PD

Hopkins

SymptomC

hecklistGeneral.SomaticDistress,andPerformanceDifficultiesscales,respectively.



14/22

the PAQ and the IPPA were correlated moderately to highly (r .536.787).A similar pattern was observed among the NMRS scales (r .642.785) andthe PRI scales (r .448.799), whereas the correlations between observed

variables hypothesized to load on different latent constructs were in the lowto moderate range.

The correlation matrices of observed variables for males and femaleswere compared to determine whether gender was associated with any of therelationships under investigation. All of the corresponding male and femalebivariate correlation coefficients were in the same direction and of the samegeneral magnitude. Therefore, separate models for males and females werenot estimated nor was gender entered into the SEM.

SEM

The sample covariance matrix was estimated by PRELIS, whereas themodel parameters were estimated using LISREL 8 (Joreskog, & Sorbom,1993). Hypothesized structural models are supported whether the overall fitof the model to the observed data is adequate and if the relevant structuralcoefficients between latent variables are statistically significant and in the

predicted direction (Bollen, 1989). The maximum likelihood solution pro-vides an approximate chi-square statistic that can be used to evaluate modelfit (Bollen, 1989). The use of several fit indices in addition to the chi-squarestatistic is recommended because the test can be overly sensitive to depar-tures in model fit for large sample sizes and violations of statistical assump-tions (Bollen, 1989; Hayduk, 1987). Several goodness-of-fit indices weretherefore used to evaluate models in this study: goodness-of-fit index (GFI;Joreskog, & Sorbom, 1993); adjusted goodness-of-fit index (AGFI; Joreskog& Sorbom, 1993); normed fit index (NFI; Bentler & Bonett, 1980); and the

non-normed fit index (NNFI; Tucker & Lewis, 1973). A useful generalguideline for judging adequacy of fit is a value of .90 or higher (Bollen,1989). The standardized root-mean-square residual (SRMR; Steiger, 1990)and root-mean-square error of approximation (RMSEA) were also used to

judge model fit, with a useful general guideline for evaluating adequatemodel fit of observed values .05 for good fit and .10 for moderate fit. Inaddition, chi-square/degrees of freedom values were used as an index for

judging model fit. According to Hayduk (1987), chi-square/degrees offreedom values 5 can be used to as a guideline for evaluating acceptable

model fit.Once the measurement models had been tested and found to be adequate,

two structural models were tested in an effort to demonstrate evidence insupport of the hypothesized mediation model (see Figure 1). Table 2 contains



15/22

the standardized coefficients that are used to estimate the strength of the pathsfrom each latent variable to its component observed variables. As expected,the magnitude and direction of these coefficients remained very similaracross the various models that were tested. The only exception was the

Table 2 Standardized Path Coeficients From Latent Variables to ObservedVariables for Each Model

Latent variableObservedvariables

Step 1coefficients

Step 2coefficients

Step 3coefficients

Stress symptoms modelsAttachment PAQ-Q 0.96 0.92 0.92

PAQ-S 0.78 0.80 0.80IPPA-M 0.78 0.81 0.81IPPA-F 0.64 0.68 0.68

Preventive Coping PRI-PC 0.85 0.84PRI-MP 0.88 0.88PRI-SR 0.75 0.75PRI-AC 0.87 0.87

Negative Mood Regulation

Expectancies NMRS-C 0.85 0.85NMRS-B 0.75 0.75NMRS-G 0.93 0.93

Stress Symptoms HSC-G 0.76 0.91 0.90HSC-SD 0.67 0.59 0.60HSC-PD 0.79 0.67 0.68

Stress-produced emotionsmodels

Attachment PAQ-Q 0.93 0.92 0.92PAQ-S 0.80 0.80 0.80IPPA-M 0.81 0.81 0.81IPPA-F 0.67 0.68 0.68

Preventive Coping PRI-PC 0.86 0.86PRI-MP 0.86 0.87PRI-SR 0.75 0.75PRI-AC 0.87 0.87

Negative Mood RegulationExpectancies NMRS-C 0.85 0.85

NMRS-B 0.78 0.78NMRS-G 0.91 0.91

Stress-Produced Emotions PANAS 0.63 0.63 0.63BHS 0.77 0.74 0.74LS 0.68 0.71 0.72

Note. PAQ-Q, PAQ-S Parental Attachment Questionnaire Quality and Support scales,respectively; IPPA-M, IPPA-F Inventory of Parental and Peer Attachment (IPPA) Maternaland Paternal scales, respectively; PRI-PC, PRI-MP, PRI-SR, PRI-AC Preventive ResourcesInventory (PRI) Perceived Control, Maintaining Perspective, Social Resourcefulness, andAcceptance scales, respectively; NMRS-C, NMRS-B, NMRS-G Negative Mood Regulation(NMRS) Cognitive, Behavior, and General Scales, respectively; PANAS Negative AffectScale from the Positive and Negative Affect Scale; BHS Beck Hopelessness Scale, LS UCLA Loneliness Scale; and HSC-G, HSC-SD, HSC-PD Hopkins Symptom ChecklistGeneral, Somatic Distress, and Performance Difficulties scales, respectively.



16/22

General Distress scale of the HSC, which contributed more heavily to thelatent variable in Steps 2 and 3. In addition, these coefficients illustrate thatthe Quality scale from the PAQ was most strongly weighted in the attachment

latent variable as was the General scale from the NMRS in the negative moodregulation construct.

The intent of this investigation was to determine whether preventivecoping resources and negative mood regulation expectancies mediated therelationship between the antecedent variable, parental attachment, and thetwo outcome variables, stress symptoms and stress-produced emotions. Toevaluate whether there was a mediation effect in each of the models tested,the guidelines set forth by Baron and Kenny (1986) and Holmbeck (1997)were used, which involve meeting three conditions. Next the conditions are

defined as they apply to the present study.The first condition requires that the antecedent variable (parental attach-

ment) is directly associated with each of the two outcome variables for bothmodels tested (models using stress symptoms and stress-produced emotionsas the outcome variables). For each model, the path between the antecedentvariable, parental attachment, and the outcome variable (stress symptoms orstress-produced emotions) was tested. These path coefficients were statisti-cally significant, in the hypothesized direction, and as shown in Figure 1 (seeModels tested at Step 1) were moderate in strength (.45 and .56 for

stress symptoms and stress-produced emotions, respectively). The indexes offit for the two models, stress symptoms and stress-produced emotions,respectively, indicated good fit (GFI .95/.97, AGFI .90/.92, NFI .94/.96, NNFI .92/.95, SRMR .06/.05, RMSEA .11/.09, and 2/df2.23/4.09). Next, the hypothesized mediators, Preventive Coping Resources(PCR) and NMR expectancies were added to both models (see Modelstested at Step 2 in Figure 1): values for the path from attachment to PCRwere .44 and .45 for stress symptoms and stress-produced emotions, respec-tively, and values for the path from attachment to NMR expectancies were

.13 and .14 for stress symptoms and stress-produced emotions, respectively.A path modeling a direct influence from PCR to NMR expectancies was alsoincluded, with a value of .66 for both models. Paths from attachment to PCRand NMR expectancies as well as from NMR expectancies and PCR to bothstress outcomes were statistically significant and in the hypothesized direc-tions. The indexes of fit for the two models, stress symptoms and stress-produced emotions, respectively, indicated moderate to good fit (GFI .90/.88, AGFI .85/.82, NFI .92/.90, NNFI .92/.90, SRMR .06/.06,RMSEA .09/.10, and 2/df 4.29/5.11). In the third set of models (see

Models tested at Step 3 in Figure 1), the direct path from attachment tostress symptoms and stress-produced emotions was added to the mediationalmodel and found to be substantially reduced from its original magnitude(.45 to.11 and.56 to.20, respectively). In addition, the indexes of fit



17/22

for these two models, stress symptoms and stress-produced emotions, respec-tively, indicated very similar levels of fit (GFI .90/.89, AGFI .85/.83,NFI .92/.91, NNFI .92/.90, SRMR .06/.05, RMSEA .09/.10, and

2

/df 4.16/4.92). For all three models, the fit was slightly better for thestress-related symptoms models than for the stress-related emotions models.

DISCUSSION

The models tested in this study, in which PCR and self-reported NMRexpectancies were hypothesized to mediate the relationship between parental

attachment and stress outcomes, demonstrated adequate to good fit with thedata. Both models were associated with a proportion of total covariance andvariance, and the magnitude of the paths between constructs, while moderatein most cases, was convincing. The results suggested that the conditions formediation outlined by Baron and Kenny (1986) and Holmbeck (1997) weremet and that, as hypothesized, the relationship between parental attachmentand both stress symptoms and stress-produced emotions were mediated bypreventive coping resources and negative mood regulation expectancies.

The finding that students with lower levels of parental attachment may

possess lower levels of psychological resources and exhibit more vulnera-bility to stress symptoms is not particularly surprising given previous re-search indicating that adult capacities for coping with stress develop fromearly interactions with ones caregivers (Mikulincer & Florian, 1998). How-ever, this study contributes to the literature in two important ways: (a) byclarifying the roles of two important types of resources (PCR and NMRexpectancies) in mediating stress outcomes and (b) by examining whetherthis relationship varies as a function of the type of stress outcome (i.e., stresssymptoms or stress-produced emotions).

With regard to the mediational roles of PCR and NMR expectancies, thedata suggested a direct relationship between these constructs. This outcomecould support the hypothesis that mood-regulation expectancies derive notonly from ones attachment history, but also are due at least in part to thebelief that one has sufficient preventive coping resources for dealing withstressful situations. In support of this notion, Catanzaro and Greenwood(1994) suggested that generalized expectancies for successfully regulatingemotions would develop from the belief that one has sufficient copingresources to do so and that such expectancies are directly related to the

emotional outcome of coping processes (p. 34). It seems reasonable toconsider, based on these results, the fact that study participants who grew upwith secure parental attachments may have developed mood regulationexpectancies indirectly through the development of preventive coping re-



18/22

sources such as those examined in this study (i.e., Perceived Control, Main-taining Perspective, Social Resourcefulness, and Self-Acceptance). However,to test this proposition more fully, future research would need to specifically

test whether PCR mediate the relationship between parental attachment andNMR expectancies.

It is interesting to note that there were few substantial differences in thefit statistics found for the models using stress symptoms and stress-producedemotions as outcomes, and the exact same paths were statistically significantfor both models (see Figure 1). However, although the strength of therelationships among the constructs was generally comparable, some notabledifferences did emerge in the pattern of relationships between the mediatorconstructs and the outcomes. First, although the strength of the relationship

between NMR expectancies and both types of stress outcomes was nearlyidentical at Step 2 (.59 and .58 for stress-produced symptoms andemotions respectively, see Figure 1), differences in the magnitude of theserelationships were observed between the construct of preventive copingresources and the two outcomes (.23 and .39 for stress-produced symp-toms and emotions respectively, see Figure 1). This was surprising, since thepreventive coping resources construct was specified in terms of a range ofcapacities, including perceptions of control over life events and the ability tomaintain perspective in the face of life demands. In contrast, the NMR

expectancies construct was more narrowly defined in terms of confidence inones cognitive and behavioral strategies for alleviating negative mood states.Given this more narrow definition, it might have been expected that astronger relationship would emerge between NMR expectancies and theoutcome of stress-produced emotions than between NMR expectancies andstress symptoms. Instead, this pattern occurred with the mediator of PCR,although it should be noted that the magnitude of the paths between NMRexpectancies and both outcomes was stronger than was the case for preven-tive coping resources. Taken together, these results could support the hy-

pothesis that PCR serve as a foundation for mood regulation expectancies.Future research, perhaps using a longitudinal design in which the develop-ment of both types of capacities is assessed, would be necessary to furthertest this possibility.

A less surprising finding is that parental attachment was found to have astronger relationship to the outcome of stress-produced emotions than stresssymptoms, both in Step 1 of the model without the inclusion of the mediatorsand after the mediators were entered at Step 3 (see Figure 1). Attachment,which is conceptualized as the emotional bond experienced with another who

is sensed as a source of security and who provides a secure base anchoringexploration (Bowlby, 1979), is hypothesized to exert this continuing influ-ence on emotional functioning because early childhood attachment experi-ences lead to the formation of rules and strategies for handling emotions that



19/22

can persist across the life span. Therefore, it is not surprising that onesattachment history would have a stronger relationship to stress-producedemotions than symptoms.

Given the study limitations of a relatively homogenous sample collectedover the course of two semesters and the reliance of the study on self-reportinstruments, it will be important to test this model with more diverse samplesand experimental methods that allow for firmer conclusions about causality.The findings were replicated with both stress symptoms and stress-producedemotions, and it may not be necessary to generate separate models for eachoutcome in future research. However, because the results achieved moderateto good fit, there is clearly a need for future research to better explain therelationships among the constructs examined. For example, given that vari-

ables such as loneliness, negative affect, and hopelessness were included inthe stress-produced emotion construct, it might be beneficial to examine infuture research whether specific types of preventive coping resources (i.e.,measures of social functioning, optimism, etc.) and NMR expectancies havea differential relationship to each type of measure. In addition, whereasparental attachment was used as the antecedent construct in this study, otheraspects of attachment relationships such as attachment to peers and romanticpartners, could be investigated.

REFERENCES

Ainsworth, M. D. S. (1989). Attachments beyond infancy. American Psychologist, 44, 709716.

Arend, R., Gove, F., & Sroufe, L. A. (1979). Continuity of individual adaptation from infancyto kindergarten: A predictive study of ego-resiliency and curiosity in pre-schoolers. Child

Development, 50, 950959.

Armsden, G., & Greenberg, M. (1987). The inventory of parent and peer attachment: Individual

differences and their relationship to psychological well-being in adolescence. Journal ofYouth and Adolescence, 16, 427454.

Armsden, G. C., & Greenberg, M. T. (1989). The Inventory of Parent and Peer Attachment:Preliminary test manual. (Available from G. C. Armsden, Department of CommunityHealth Care Systems, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195)

Aspinwall, L. G., & Taylor, S. E. (1997). A stitch in time: Self-regulation and proactive coping.Psychological Bulletin, 121, 417436.

Baron, R., & Kenny, D. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psycho-logical research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Person-ality and Social Psychology, 51, 11731182.

Beck, A. T., & Steer, R. A. (1988). Beck Hopelessness Scale manual. San Antonio, TX: The

Psychological Corporation.Beck, A. T., Weissman, A., Lester, D., & Trexler, L. (1974). The measurement of pessimism:

The Hopelessness Scale. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 42, 861865.

Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness-of-fit in the analysis ofcovariance structures. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 588600.



20/22

Bollen, K. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York: Wiley.

Bowlby, J. (1979). The Making and Breaking of Affectional Bonds. London: Tavistock.

Brack, G., Gay, M. F., & Matheny, K. B. (1993). Relationships between attachment and copingresources among late adolescents. Journal of College Student Development, 34, 212215.

Bradford, E., & Lyddon, W. J. (1993). Current parental attachment: Its relation to perceivedpsychological distress and relationship satisfaction in college students. Journal of CollegeStudent Development, 34, 256260.

Braver, M., Burnberry, J., Green, K., & Rawson, R. (1992). Child abuse and current psycho-logical functioning in a university counseling center population. Journal of CounselingPsychology, 39, 252257.

Catanzaro, S. J., & Greenwood, G. (1994). Expectancies for negative mood regulation, coping,and dysphoria among college students. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 41, 3444.

Catanzaro, S. J., & Mearns, J. (1990). Measuring generalized expectancies for negative moodregulation: Initial scale development and implications. Journal of Personality Assessment,54, 546565.

Creasey, G. (2002). Psychological distress in college-aged women: Links with unresolved/preoccupied attachment status and the mediating role of negative mood regulation ex-pectancies. Attachment and Human Development, 4, 261277.

Deane, F. P., Leathem, J., & Spicer, J. (1992). Clinical norms, reliability and validity for theHopkins Symptom Checklist-21. Australian Journal of Psychology, 44, 2125.

Feeney, J., & Noller, P. (1996). Adult attachment. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Fuendeling, J. M. (1998). Affect regulation as a stylistic process within adult attachment.Journal of Personal and Social Relationships, 15, 291322.

Garbarino, J. J. (1998). Comparisons of the constructs and psychometric properties of selectedmeasures of adult attachment. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Develop-ment, 31, 2845.

Greene, D. E., Walkey, F. H., McCormick, I. A., & Taylor, A. J. W. (1988). Development andevaluation of a 21-item version of the Hopkins Symptom Checklist with New Zealand andUnited States respondents. Australian Journal of Psychology, 40, 6170.

Hartshorne, T. S. (1993). Psychometric properties and confirmatory factor analysis of theUCLA Loneliness Scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 61, 182195.

Hayduk, L. (1987). Structural equation modeling with LISREL: Essentials and advances.Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Holmbeck, G. (1997). Toward terminological, conceptual, and statistical clarity in the study ofmediators and moderators: Examples from the child-clinical and pediatric psychologyliteratures. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 65, 599610.

Howes, C., Matheson, C., & Hamilton, C. (1994). Maternal, teacher, and child care historycorrelates of childrens relationships with peers. Child Development, 65, 264273.

Joreskog, K., & Sorbom, D. (1993). LISREL 8: Users reference guide. Chicago, IL: ScientificSoftware.

Kenny, M. E. (1987). The extent and function of parental attachment among first-year collegestudents. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 16, 1729.

Kenny, M. E. (1990). College seniors perceptions of parental attachments: The value andstability of family ties. Journal of College Student Development, 31, 3946.

Killgore, W. D. (2000). Evidence for a third factor on the Positive and Negative AffectSchedule in a college student sample. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 90, 147152.

Kirsch, I., Mearns, J., & Catanzaro, S. J. (1990). Mood-regulation expectancies as determinants

of dysphoria in college students. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 37, 306312.Lopez, F. G., & Gover, M. R. (1993). Self-report measures of parent-adolescent attachment and

separation-individuation: A selective review. Journal of Counseling and Development, 71,560569.

Lopez, F. G., Maurico, A. M., Gormley, B., Simko, T., & Berger, E. (2001). Adult attachment



21/22

orientations and college student distress: The mediating role of problem coping styles.Journal of Counseling and Development, 79, 459464.

Lopez, F. G., Mitchell, P., & Gormley, B. (2002). Adult attachment orientations and collegestudent distress: Test of a mediational model. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 49,

460467.Magai, C., Distel, N., & Liker, R. (1995). Emotion socialization, attachment and patterns of

adult emotional traits. Cognition & Emotion, 5, 461481.

Main, M. (1999). Epilogue: Attachment theory, eighteen points for future studies. In J. Cassidy& P. R. Shaver (Eds.), Handbook of attachment: Theory, research, and clinical applica-tions (pp. 845888). New York: Guilford Press.

Matas, L., Arend, R. A., & Sroufe, L. A. (1978). Continuity of adaptation in the second year:The relationship between quality of attachment and later competence. Child Development,49, 547556.

Matheny, K. B., Aycock, D. W., Pugh, J. L., Curlette, W. L., & Canella, K. A. (1986). Stresscoping: A qualitative and quantitative synthesis with implications for treatment. The

Counseling Psychologist, 14, 499549.McCarthy, C. J., & Lambert, R. G. (2003). Preventive resources inventory. Austin, TX:

University of Texas Department of Educational Psychology.

McCarthy, C. J., Lambert, R. G., Beard, L. M., & Dematatis, A. P. (2002). Factor structure ofthe Preventive Resources Inventory and its relationship to existing measures of stress andcoping. In G. S. Gates, M. Wolverton, & W. H. Gmelch (Eds.), Research on stress andcoping in education (pp. 337). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.

McCarthy, C. J., Lambert, R. G., & Seraphine, A. E. (2004). Adaptive family functioning andemotion regulation capacities as predictors of college students appraisals and emotionvalence following conflict with their parents. Cognition and Emotion, 18, 97124.

McCarthy, C. J., Moller, N., & Fouladi, R. (2001). Continued attachment to parents: Its

relationship to affect regulation and perceived stress among college students. Measure-ment and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 33, 198213.

Mearns, J. (1991). Coping with a breakup: Negative mood regulation expectancies anddepression following the end of a romantic relationship. Journal of Personality and SocialPsychology, 60, 327334.

Mikulincer, M. (1995). Adult attachment style and individual differences in functional versusdysfunctional experiences of anger. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74,513524.

Mikulincer, M., & Florian, V. (1995). Appraisal and coping with a real-life stressful situation:The contribution of attachment styles. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21,406414.

Mikulincer, M., & Florian, V. (1998). The relationship between adult attachment styles andemotional and cognitive reactions to stressful events. In J. A. Simpson and W. S. Rholes(Eds.), Attachment theory and close relationships (pp. 143165). New York: GuilfordPress.

Papini, D. R., Roggman, R. L., & Anderson, J. (1991). Early-adolescent perceptions ofattachment to mother and father: A test of the emotional-distancing and bufferinghypothesis. Journal of Early Adolescence, 11, 258275.

Russell, D., Peplau, L. A., & Cutrona, C. E. (1980). The Revised UCLA Loneliness scale:Concurrent and discriminant validity evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psy-chology, 39, 472480.

Russell, D., Peplau, L. A., & Ferguson, M. L. (1978). Developing a measure of loneliness.

Journal of Personality Assessment, 42, 290294.Russell, D. W. (1996). UCLA Loneliness Scale (Version 3): Reliability, validity and factor

structure. Journal of Personality Assessment, 66, 2040.

Simpson, J. A. (1990). Influence of attachment styles on romantic relationships. Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology, 59, 971980.



22/22

Steiger, J. H. (1990). Structural model evaluation and modification: An interval estimationapproach. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 25, 173180.

Tucker, L. R., & Lewis, C. (1973). A reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factoranalysis. Psychometrika, 38, 110.

Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measureof positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and SocialPsychology, 54, 10631070.

Wei, M., Heppner, P. P., & Mallinckrodt, B. (2003). Perceived coping as a mediator betweenattachment and psychological distress: A structural equation modeling approach. Journalof Counseling Psychology, 50, 438447.

Young, M. A., Fogg, L. F., Scheftner, W. Fawcett, J., Akiskal, H., & Maser, J. (1996). Stabletrait components of hopelessness: Baseline and sensitivity to depression. Journal of

Abnormal Psychology, 105, 155165. rch article probably apply.


Date post:	14-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	elena-madalina
View:	214 times
Download:	0 times

Attachemtn and Stress Outcomes

Documents