Adult Attachment Dimensions and Specificity of Emotional Distress Symptoms: Prospective Investigations of Cognitive Risk and Interpersonal Stress Generation as Mediating Mechanisms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Three prospective studies examined the relation between adult attachment dimensions and symptoms of emotional distress (anxiety and depression). Across all three studies, avoidant and anxious attachment prospectively predicted depressive symptoms, and anxious attachment was associated concurrently with anxiety symptoms. Study 2 tested a cognitive risk factors mediational model, and Study 3 tested an interpersonal stress generation mediational model. Both cognitive and interpersonal mediating processes were supported. The cognitive risk factors pathway, including elevated dysfunctional attitudes and low self-esteem, specifically mediated the relation between insecure attachment and prospective elevations in depression but not anxiety. For the interpersonal stress generation model, experiencing additional interpersonal, but not achievement, stressors over time mediated the association between insecure attachment and prospective elevations in depressive and anxious symptoms. Results advance theory and empirical knowledge about why these interpersonal and cognitive mechanisms explain how insecurely attached people become depressed and anxious.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".