The role of the ‘dyadic’ and the ‘reflected’ components of the reliable attachment style in marital relationships

Abstract

The idea of this study stems from the Russian tradition of investigating the role of people’s perception process of one another in interpersonal relations (A.A. Bodalev et al.). It is based on the generalized concept of adult attachment by Mikulinzer–Shaver and the dyadic approach to the analysis of romantic relationships in a couple as a collective subject. Objective. The study seeks to identify the role of the ‘dyadic’ and the ‘reflected’ components of the reliable attachment style in marital relationships. The sample included 102 married couples: 59 ‘symmetrically reliable’ couples (i.e., couples with identified ‘dyadic’ and mutually ‘reflected’ components of the attachment style) and 43 ‘asymmetrically reliable’ couples. Methods. The methods included: The Adult Romantic Attachment Test-Questionnaire (BI-2, v3.1) by D. G. Sorokov used to reveal the characteristics of the ‘dyadic’ and the ‘reflected’ components of attachment; The Multi-Item Measure of Adult Romantic Attachment (MIMARA); and a questionnaire. Results. 1) According to the results of ANOVA, ‘symmetrically reliable’ couples in comparison with ‘asymmetrically reliable’ couples (MIMARA) show significantly higher scores of the indicators ‘striving for rapprochement’ and significantly lower scores of the indicators ‘jealousy’, ‘fusion’ and ‘frustration’. All attachment indicators (BI-2, MIMARA) in ‘symmetrically reliable’ couples are not influenced by the socio-demographic factors and relationship satisfaction which were taken into account. In couples with ‘asymmetries’ in the ‘dyadic’ and ‘reflected’ attachment components, the attachment indicators are influenced by ‘relationship duration’, ‘official status of marriage’, ‘having children’ and ‘subjective satisfaction with the relationship’. 2) The Jonckheere–Terpstra test identified significant trends in the strict order corresponding to the step-by-step loss of the component of ‘dyadicity’ and/or ‘reflection’ of reliable attachment by spouses, i.e. an increase in the scores of the ‘frustration’ indicator and a decrease in the scores of the ‘desire for rapprochement’. 3) The method of two-factor analysis of variance outlines the prospects for further research on the role of the ‘dyadic’ and ‘reflected’ components in the attachment style of spouses. The study identified a significant (non-cumulative) impact of the factors of ‘dyadicity’ and ‘reflection’ on the ‘frustration’ indicator (degree of depression, presence of negative emotions in a relationship) and a cumulative impact of both factors on the ‘ambivalence’ indicator (level of inconsistency, instability of emotional attitude towards a partner). Conclusions. The study provides initial empirical confirmation for the hypothesis that the ‘dyadic’ and ‘reflected’ components of the reliable attachment style have a significant role in marital relations. Further research may focus on the psychological mechanisms of interaction between these factors, their impact on the quality of relationships of married couples having other attachment styles, and their impact on child-parent relations.