Anxious Attachment and Relationship Processes: An Interactionist Perspective
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Relationship processes in adult romantic relationships have been vastly studied under the aegis of attachment theory. Attachment theory is interactionist in nature, proposing that individual differences in levels of both attachment avoidance and anxiety predict an individual's thoughts, feelings, and behaviors in contexts that activate attachment concerns. A growing body of research is beginning to systematically test the conditions in which individual differences in attachment orientations both predict and fail to predict relationship processes. In this article, we focus on anxious attachment and review a program of research showing that the potentially destructive relationship processes typically observed in highly anxious individuals do not always appear in neutral or benign contexts, or when security needs are met. We argue that research needs to more thoroughly investigate the conditions that should, or should not, activate attachment concerns and thus result in links between individual differences in attachment orientations and relationship processes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it