All Academic, Inc. Research Logo

Info/CitationFAQResearchAll Academic Inc.
Document

Exploring the Relationship Between Hurtful Messages and Partner Attachment
Unformatted Document Text:  Hurt and Attachment 8 Exposure to various relationships allows individuals to revise the working models of themselves and others (Hazan & Shaver, 1987). Thus, interactions between both partners likely influence the attachment relationship. As Le Poire, Shepard, and Duggan (1999) emphasize, it is the combination of individuals’ attachments that mold the form of the adult attachment relationship. Consequently, the communication between partners continually influences the attachment relationship. For example, a responsive partner may transform an anxious-ambivalent (or a now preoccupied) partner into a more secure partner. An unresponsive or inappropriately responsive partner may transform a secure into a more avoidant partner. Following this reasoning, HMs may be influential in the development of the romantic attachment style. In terms of the fears associated with attachment styles (Le Poire et al., 1997), HMs may increase the fear of intimacy and trust. As Miller (1997) notes, greater intimacy provides more weapons with which to hurt others. Thus, tempering intimacy may be a way insecure individuals prevent HMs. The frequent occurrence of HMs may also increase a sense of distrust in partners. If a person is repetitively hurt by their partner, they likely perceive that their partners cannot be trusted as a source of validation or comforting in times of need. These premises have been supported by the empirical literature on HMs. Once hurt, individuals increase relational distance (Vangelisti, 1994; Vangelisti & Young, 2000) and decrease trust and relational intimacy (Vangelisti & Sprague, 1998). Moreover, increased perceptions of intentionality of hurt were related to decreased intimacy (Vangelisti & Sprague). In other words, if individuals believe their partners had intentions to hurt them, they were more likely to distance themselves from their partners. Further, a common response to HMs is acquiescence, which indicates an impulse to avoid or move away from the relationship (Vangelisti & Crumley, 1998). As L’Abate (1997) and Vangelisti (2001) argue, those who

Authors: Dailey, Rene. and Le Poire, Beth.
first   previous   Page 8 of 29   next   last



background image
Hurt and Attachment 8
Exposure to various relationships allows individuals to revise the working models of themselves
and others (Hazan & Shaver, 1987). Thus, interactions between both partners likely influence the
attachment relationship. As Le Poire, Shepard, and Duggan (1999) emphasize, it is the
combination of individuals’ attachments that mold the form of the adult attachment relationship.
Consequently, the communication between partners continually influences the attachment
relationship. For example, a responsive partner may transform an anxious-ambivalent (or a now
preoccupied) partner into a more secure partner. An unresponsive or inappropriately responsive
partner may transform a secure into a more avoidant partner. Following this reasoning, HMs may
be influential in the development of the romantic attachment style. In terms of the fears
associated with attachment styles (Le Poire et al., 1997), HMs may increase the fear of intimacy
and trust. As Miller (1997) notes, greater intimacy provides more weapons with which to hurt
others. Thus, tempering intimacy may be a way insecure individuals prevent HMs. The frequent
occurrence of HMs may also increase a sense of distrust in partners. If a person is repetitively
hurt by their partner, they likely perceive that their partners cannot be trusted as a source of
validation or comforting in times of need.
These premises have been supported by the empirical literature on HMs. Once hurt,
individuals increase relational distance (Vangelisti, 1994; Vangelisti & Young, 2000) and
decrease trust and relational intimacy (Vangelisti & Sprague, 1998). Moreover, increased
perceptions of intentionality of hurt were related to decreased intimacy (Vangelisti & Sprague).
In other words, if individuals believe their partners had intentions to hurt them, they were more
likely to distance themselves from their partners. Further, a common response to HMs is
acquiescence, which indicates an impulse to avoid or move away from the relationship
(Vangelisti & Crumley, 1998). As L’Abate (1997) and Vangelisti (2001) argue, those who


Convention
Need a solution for abstract management? All Academic can help! Contact us today to find out how our system can help your annual meeting.
Submission - Custom fields, multiple submission types, tracks, audio visual, multiple upload formats, automatic conversion to pdf.
Review - Peer Review, Bulk reviewer assignment, bulk emails, ranking, z-score statistics, and multiple worksheets!
Reports - Many standard and custom reports generated while you wait. Print programs with participant indexes, event grids, and more!
Scheduling - Flexible and convenient grid scheduling within rooms and buildings. Conflict checking and advanced filtering.
Communication - Bulk email tools to help your administrators send reminders and responses. Use form letters, a message center, and much more!
Management - Search tools, duplicate people management, editing tools, submission transfers, many tools to manage a variety of conference management headaches!
Click here for more information.

first   previous   Page 8 of 29   next   last

©2012 All Academic, Inc.