The effects of episodic simulation on expected responsiveness of partner and attachment security

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1041.2020.00982

Abstract

Abstract:

The control-system model of attachment is the most commonly used model to characterize the function of the adult attachment system. It posits that the way for individuals to attain security is to access information on the availability and responsiveness of the attachment figure. According to previous attachment theory, when the attachment figure is absent, the information related to their availability and responsiveness is acquired by accessing the secure base script. However, the function of episodic representation is overlooked during this process. Inspired by the research on episodic simulation and attachment theory, we hypothesized that episodic simulation is an effective episodic representation that could help individuals access information on their partners’ availability and responsiveness and attain security in the attachment control system.

This study investigated whether episodic simulation could promote the expected responsiveness of a partner and attachment security through an experiment. A total of 46 young adults currently involved in a romantic relationship for more than six months were recruited as participants. All the tasks were arranged into two sessions. In session 1, the participants completed a scale related to attachment orientations, then rated six scenarios related to distressful situations that frequently occurred in close relationships from four aspects, namely distressful feeling, willingness to ask one’s partner for help, expected responsiveness of one’s partner, and state attachment security. Three days later, the participants were randomly arranged into an experimental group and a control group to complete the tasks of session 2. For each distressful situation, the participants in the experimental group needed to simulate and write down how they asked their partners for help and how they would solve the distressing problem with the help of their partners. The participants in the control group needed to write down the possible outcomes when the situation happened in a regular couple. Subsequently, all the participants rated the situation again from the four aspects used in session 1.

The results revealed no rating differences between the two groups in the pretest. In the posttest, the experimental group had higher ratings in expected responsiveness of their partners and state attachment security compared to the control group. When considering the changes from the pretest to the posttest in each rating (calculated using the scores in the posttest minus those in the pretest), we found that the promotion in expected responsiveness of partners was significantly correlated with the promotion in state attachment security. Moreover, the experimental group had higher promotions in their rating of expected responsiveness of their partners and state attachment security, as well as higher reduction in state attachment avoidance, compared to the control group. However, no group differences were observed in the rating changes related to distressful feelings, willingness to ask one’s partner for help, or state attachment anxiety. All the results were the same after controlling for attachment avoidance and attachment anxiety, which are rooted in individuals’ stable attachment script.

The results indicated that episodic simulation could function independently of the attachment script in the attachment control system. Episodic simulation could help individuals access information related to the responsiveness of their partners and attain security. This study provided a supplement for the attachment control-system model.

Key words: adult attachment, control-system model of attachment, episodic simulation, responsiveness of partner, attachment security

CAO Xiancai, WANG Dahua, WANG Yan. (2020). The effects of episodic simulation on expected responsiveness of partner and attachment security. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 52(8), 982-992.

Figures/Tables 6

References 50

[1]	Alea, N., & Bluck, S. (2007). I’ll keep you in mind: The intimacy function of autobiographical memory. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 21(8), 1091-1111. doi: 10.1002/(ISSN)1099-0720 URL
[2]	Baccus, J. R., Baldwin, M. W., & Packer, D. J. (2004). Increasing implicit self-esteem through classical conditioning. Psychological Science, 15(7), 498-502. doi: 10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00708.x URL pmid: 15200636
[3]	Barsics, C., van der Linden, M., & D’Argembeau, A. (2016). Frequency, characteristics, and perceived functions of emotional future thinking in daily life. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 69(2), 217-233. doi: 10.1080/17470218.2015.1051560 URL
[4]	Berntsen, D., & Bohn, A. (2010). Remembering and forecasting: The relation between autobiographical memory and episodic future thinking. Memory & Cognition, 38(3), 265-278. doi: 10.3758/MC.38.3.265 URL pmid: 20234017
[5]	Beyderman, I., & Young, M. A. (2016). Rumination and overgeneral autobiographical memory as mediators of the relationship between attachment and depression. Personality and Individual Differences, 98, 37-41. doi: 10.1016/j.paid.2016.03.077 URL
[6]	Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and loss: Vol. 1. Attachment. New YorkS: Basic Books.
[7]	Bowlby, J.(1973). Attachment and loss: Vol. 2. Separation. New York: NY: Basic Books.
[8]	Bowlby, J.(1980). Attachment and loss: Vol. 3. Loss. New York: NY: Basic Books.
[9]	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 (pp. 46-76). New York: Guilford Press.
[10]	Bretherton, I., & Munholland, K. A. (2008). Internal working models in attachment relationships: Elaborating a central construct in attachment theory.In Cassidy & P. R. Shaver (Ed.), Handbook of attachment: Theory, research, and clinical applications (pp. 103-129). New York: Guilford.
[11]	Brown, G. P., Macleod, A. K., Tata, P., & Goddard, L. (2002). Worry and the simulation of future outcomes. Anxiety, Stress & Coping, 15(1), 1-17.
[12]	Butzer, B., & Campbell, L. (2008). Adult attachment, sexual satisfaction, and relationship satisfaction: A study of married couples. Personal Relationships, 15(1), 141-154. doi: 10.1111/pere.2008.15.issue-1 URL
[13]	Cao, X., Madore, K. P., Wang, D., & Schacter, D. L. (2018). Remembering the past and imagining the future: Attachment effects on production of episodic details in close relationships. Memory, 26(8), 1140-1150. doi: 10.1080/09658211.2018.1434800 URL pmid: 29400595
[14]	Carnelley, K. B., & Rowe, A. C. (2007). Repeated priming of attachment security influences later views of self and relationships. Personal Relationships, 14(2), 307-320. doi: 10.1111/pere.2007.14.issue-2 URL
[15]	Collins, N. L., & Allard, L. M. (2004). Cognitive representations of attachment: The content and function of working models. In M. B. Brewer & M. Hewstone (Ed.), Social cognition (pp. 75-101). New York: MA: Blackwell. doi: 10.1521/soco.2007.25.5.603 URL pmid: 19424447
[16]	Collins, N. L., & Read, S. J. (1994). Cognitive representations of attachment: The structure and function of working models. In K. Bartholomew & D. Perlman (Eds.), Attachment processes in adulthood (pp. 53-92). London: Jessica Kingsley.
[17]	Cusimano, A.M., & Riggs, S. A. (2013). Perceptions of interparental conflict, romantic attachment, and psychological distress in college students. Couple and Family Psychology: Research and Practice, 2(1), 45-59. doi: 10.1037/a0031657 URL
[18]	D’Argembeau, A., Renaud, O., & van Der Linden, M. (2011). Frequency, characteristics and functions of future-oriented thoughts in daily life. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 25(1), 96-103. doi: 10.1002/acp.1647 URL
[19]	Dykas, M. J., & Cassidy, J, (2011). Attachment and the processing of social information across the life span: Theory and evidence. Psychological Bulletin, 137(1), 19-46. doi: 10.1037/a0021367 URL
[20]	Gaesser, B., & Schacter, D. L. (2014). Episodic simulation and episodic memory can increase intentions to help others. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 111(12), 4415-4420. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1402461111 URL
[21]	Gallese, V.(2005). Embodied simulation: From neurons to phenomenal experience. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences, 4(1), 23-48. doi: 10.1007/s11097-005-4737-z URL
[22]	Gillath, O., Hart, J., Noftle, E. E., & Stockdale, G. D. (2009). Development and validation of a state adult attachment measure (SAAM). Journal of Research in Personality, 43(3), 362-373. doi: 10.1016/j.jrp.2008.12.009 URL
[23]	Jing, H. G., Madore, K. P., & Schacter, D. L. (2016). Worrying about the future : An episodic specificity induction impacts problem solving, reappraisal, and well-being. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 145(4), 402-418. doi: 10.1037/xge0000142 URL
[24]	Jing, H. G., Madore, K. P., & Schacter, D. L. (2017). Preparing for what might happen: An episodic specificity induction impacts the generation of alternative future events. Cognition, 169, 118-128. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2017.08.010 URL pmid: 28886407
[25]	Li, T. G., & Kato, K. (2006). Measuring adult attachment: Chinese Adaptation of the ECR Scale. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 38(3), 399-406.
[26]	Mikulincer, M., Gillath, O., Sapir-Lavid, Y., Yaakobi, E., Arias, K., Tal-Aloni, L., & Bor, G. (2003). Attachment theory and concern for others’ welfare: Evidence that activation of the sense of secure base promotes endorsement of self-transcendence values. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 25(4), 299-312. doi: 10.1207/S15324834BASP2504_4 URL
[27]	Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2003). The attachment behavioral system in adulthood: Activation, psychodynamics, and interpersonal processes. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 35(3), 53-152.
[28]	Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R.(2016). A model of attachment-system functioning and dynamics in adulthood.Mikulincer & P. R. Shaver (Eds.), Attachment in adulthood: Structure, dynamics, and change(2nd ed., pp. 27-46). New York: The Guilford Press.
[29]	Mikulincer, M., Shaver, P. R., Gillath, O., & Nitzberg, R. A. (2005). Attachment, caregiving, and altruism: Boosting attachment security increases compassion and helping. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89(5), 817-839. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.89.5.817 URL pmid: 16351370
[30]	Mikulincer, M., Shaver, P. R., & Rom, E. (2011). The effects of implicit and explicit security priming on creative problem solving. Cognition and Emotion, 25(3), 519-531. doi: 10.1080/02699931.2010.540110 URL pmid: 21432691
[31]	Mikulincer, M., Shaver, P. R., Sapir-Lavid, Y., & Avihou-Kanza, N. (2009). What’s inside the minds of securely and insecurely attached people? The secure-base script and its associations with attachment-style dimensions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97(4), 615-633. doi: 10.1037/a0015649 URL pmid: 19785482
[32]	Rivkin, I. D., & Taylor, S. E. (1999). The effects of mental simulation on coping with controllable stressful events. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25(12), 1451-1462. doi: 10.1177/01461672992510002 URL
[33]	Rowe, A. C., Carnelley, K. B., Harwood, J., Micklewright, D., Russouw, L., Rennie, C. L., & Liossi, C. (2012). The effect of attachment orientation priming on pain sensitivity in pain-free individuals. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 29(4), 488-507. doi: 10.1177/0265407511431189 URL
[34]	Rowe, A., & Carnelley, K. B. (2003). Attachment style differences in the processing of attachment-relevant information: Primed-style effects on recall, interpersonal expectations, and affect. Personal Relationships, 10(1), 59-75. doi: 10.1111/pere.2003.10.issue-1 URL
[35]	Schacter, D. L. (2012). Adaptive constructive processes and the future of memory. American Psychologist, 67(8), 603-613. doi: 10.1037/a0029869 URL
[36]	Schacter, D. L., & Addis, D. R. (2007). The cognitive neuroscience of constructive memory: Remembering the past and imagining the future. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences, 362(1481), 773-786. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2007.2087 URL pmid: 17395575
[37]	Schacter, D. L., Addis, D. R., & Buckner, R. L. (2008). Episodic simulation of future events: Concepts, data, and applications. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1124(1), 39-60. doi: 10.1196/annals.1440.001 URL
[38]	Schacter, D. L., Benoit, R. G., & Szpunar, K. K. (2017). Episodic future thinking: Mechanisms and functions. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 17, 41-50. doi: 10.1016/j.cobeha.2017.06.002 URL pmid: 29130061
[39]	Seligman, M. E. P., Railton, P., Baumeister, R. F., & Sripada, C. (2013). Navigating into the future or driven by the past. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8(2), 119-141. doi: 10.1177/1745691612474317 URL pmid: 26172493
[40]	Szpunar, K. K., & Schacter, D. L. (2013). Get real: Effects of repeated simulation and emotion on the perceived plausibility of future experiences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 142(2), 323-327. doi: 10.1037/a0028877 URL
[41]	Szpunar, K. K., Spreng, R. N., & Schacter, D. L. (2014). A taxonomy of prospection: Introducing an organizational framework for future-oriented cognition. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(52), 18414-18421. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1417144111 URL
[42]	Taylor, S. E., Pham, L. B., Rivkin, I. D., & Armor, D. A. (1998). Harnessing the imagination: Mental simulation, self-regulation, and coping. American Psychologist, 53(4), 429-439. doi: 10.1037//0003-066x.53.4.429 URL pmid: 9572006
[43]	Taylor, S. E., & Schneider, S. K. (1989). Coping and the simulation of events. Social Cognition, 7(2), 174-194. doi: 10.1521/soco.1989.7.2.174 URL
[44]	Tomlinson, J. M., Carmichael, C. L., Reis, H. T., & Aron, A. (2010). Affective forecasting and individual differences: Accuracy for relational events and anxious attachment. Emotion, 10(3), 447-453. doi: 10.1037/a0018701 URL pmid: 20515233
[45]	Vicary, A. M., & Fraley, R. C. (2007). Choose your own adventure: Attachment dynamics in a simulated relationship. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 33(9), 1279-1291. doi: 10.1177/0146167207303013 URL pmid: 17933741
[46]	Wang, Y. (2017). Attachment effects on memory of painful information over time: From the perspective of narrative anylasis (Unpublished doctorial dissertation). Beijing Normal University, China.
[47]	Waters, H. S., & Waters, E, (2006). The attachment working models concept: Among other things, we build script-like representations of secure base experiences. Attachment and Human Development, 8(3), 185-197. doi: 10.1080/14616730600856016 URL pmid: 16938702
[48]	Wei, M., Liao, K. Y., Ku, T., & Shaffer, P. A. (2011). Attachment, self-compassion, empathy, and subjective well‐being among college students and community adults. Journal of Personality, 79(1), 191-221. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-6494.2010.00677.x URL
[49]	Whitaker, D. J., Beach, S. R. H., Etherton, J., Wakefield, R., & Anderson, P. L. (1999). Attachment and expectations about future relationships: Moderation by accessibility. Personal Relationships, 6(1), 41-56. doi: 10.1111/pere.1999.6.issue-1 URL
[50]	Wilson, T., & Gilbert, D. T. (2005). Affective forecasting: Knowing what to want. Current Direction in Psychological Science, 14(3), 131-134. doi: 10.1111/j.0963-7214.2005.00355.x URL

Variable	Experimental group (N = 23)	Control group (N = 23)	t	p	d
Feeling of distress	6.09 ± 1.20	5.40 ± 1.60	1.65	0.11	0.50
Willingness to seek support	6.51 ± 1.21	5.93 ± 1.40	1.48	0.15	0.45
Expected responsiveness of partner	6.41 ± 1.03	6.25 ± 1.16	0.51	0.61	0.15
State attachment security	5.41 ± 1.33	5.28 ± 1.47	0.31	0.76	0.09
State attachment anxiety	5.74 ± 1.80	5.14 ± 1.72	1.16	0.25	0.35
State attachment avoidance	5.64 ± 1.84	5.20 ± 2.28	0.72	0.47	0.22

Variable	Experimental group (N = 23)	Control group (N = 23)	t	p	d
Feeling of distress	6.09 ± 1.20	5.40 ± 1.60	1.65	0.11	0.50
Willingness to seek support	6.51 ± 1.21	5.93 ± 1.40	1.48	0.15	0.45
Expected responsiveness of partner	6.41 ± 1.03	6.25 ± 1.16	0.51	0.61	0.15
State attachment security	5.41 ± 1.33	5.28 ± 1.47	0.31	0.76	0.09
State attachment anxiety	5.74 ± 1.80	5.14 ± 1.72	1.16	0.25	0.35
State attachment avoidance	5.64 ± 1.84	5.20 ± 2.28	0.72	0.47	0.22

Variable	Experimental group (N = 23)		Control group (N = 23)
Variable	Pretest	Posttest	Pretest	Posttest
Feeling of distress	6.09 ± 1.20	5.90 ± 1.23	5.40 ± 1.60	5.23 ± 1.53
Willingness to seek support	6.51 ± 1.21	6.93 ± 0.97	5.93 ± 1.40	6.12 ± 1.36
Expected responsiveness of partner	6.41 ± 1.03	7.20 ± 1.08	6.25 ± 1.16	6.32 ± 1.35
Status attachment security	5.41 ± 1.33	6.44 ± 1.00	5.28 ± 1.47	5.12 ± 1.20
State attachment anxiety	5.74 ± 1.80	5.63 ± 1.87	5.14 ± 1.72	5.33 ± 1.92
Status attachment avoidance	5.64 ± 1.84	4.65 ± 2.26	5.20 ± 2.28	5.41 ± 2.40

Variable	Experimental group (N = 23)		Control group (N = 23)
Variable	Pretest	Posttest	Pretest	Posttest
Feeling of distress	6.09 ± 1.20	5.90 ± 1.23	5.40 ± 1.60	5.23 ± 1.53
Willingness to seek support	6.51 ± 1.21	6.93 ± 0.97	5.93 ± 1.40	6.12 ± 1.36
Expected responsiveness of partner	6.41 ± 1.03	7.20 ± 1.08	6.25 ± 1.16	6.32 ± 1.35
Status attachment security	5.41 ± 1.33	6.44 ± 1.00	5.28 ± 1.47	5.12 ± 1.20
State attachment anxiety	5.74 ± 1.80	5.63 ± 1.87	5.14 ± 1.72	5.33 ± 1.92
Status attachment avoidance	5.64 ± 1.84	4.65 ± 2.26	5.20 ± 2.28	5.41 ± 2.40

Variable	1	2	3	4	5
1. Changes in feeling of distress
2. Changes in willingness to seek help	0.55 ***
3. Changes in expected responsiveness of partner	-0.14	0.05
4. Changes in state attachment security	-0.04	0.21	0.32 *
5. Changes in state attachment anxiety	0.48 ***	0.19	-0.28	-0.20
6. Changes in state attachment avoidance	0.10	-0.10	-0.26	-0.06	0.17