Interparental Conflict, Attachment, and Psychological Distress in College Students

(1)

Perceptions of Interparental Conflict, Romantic Attachment, and Psychological Distress in College Students

Angela M. Cusimano and Shelley A. Riggs

University of North Texas

There is a well-documented association between interparental conflict and offspring psychological functioning from childhood to early adulthood. Although the literature suggests that interparental conflict affects offspring well-being through cognitive and emotional pathways, little research has addressed how the adult attachment system might mediate the early experience of interparental conflict and psychological distress in adulthood. In the current study, college students (N ⫽330) completed an online survey about their perceptions of early interparental conflict, romantic attachment patterns, and current psychological symptoms. Results suggest that memories of interparental conflict in childhood are significantly related to psychological functioning in emerging adulthood and adult attachment strategies play an important mediating role.

Keywords:interparental conflict, adult attachment, psychological distress, emerging adults

Two decades of research have established that early experiences and later perceptions of interparental conflict have detrimental effects on psychological adjustment (Grych & Fin- cham, 1990; Turner & Kopiec, 2006). Evidence suggests that these experiences influence feelings of emotional security, attachment representations, and relationships throughout the life span. Researchers have found that children’s appraisals of threat and self-blame after wit- nessing interparental conflict lead to internalizing problems, such as depression and anxiety (Grych, Fincham, Jouriles, & McDonald, 2000).

In later life, emerging adults who recalled a high frequency of conflict between their parents reported jealousy and insecurity in their own romantic relationships (Hayashi & Strickland, 1998) and compromised psychological well- being (e.g., low self-esteem, high distress, low satisfaction, and decreased levels of happiness;

Amato & Sobolewski, 2001). Given these links, the current study investigated the hypothesis

that adult romantic attachment representations mediate associations between memories of interparental conflict and current psychological functioning.

Attachment Theory: Building a Relationship Foundation

Bowlby (1969) conceptualized the attachment system as developing in infancy and guiding representations or “internal working models” (IWMs) of self and relationships throughout the course of a lifetime. Derived from early interactions with caregivers, IWMs are thought to include affective, defensive, and descriptive cognitive components (Bretherton, 1985; Main, Kaplan, & Cassidy, 1985). Parental styles of structuring and guiding interaction direct the general organization and structure of children’s memories and emotional experiences (Bretherton, 1993). As children become aware of their internal states, they learn to regulate their emotions and control their behavioral responses to the caregiver. Well-coordinated reg- ulatory patterns contribute to the capacity for emotional and behavioral self-regulation and provide the foundation for developing an inte- grated sense of self as a coherent whole (Carl- son & Sroufe, 1995; Sroufe & Fleeson, 1986).

Recent research supports this theory, showing that attachment representations seem to be both

Angela M. Cusimano and Shelley A. Riggs, Department of Psychology, University of North Texas.

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Angela Cusimano, Department of Psychology, University of North Texas, 1155 Union Circle #311280, Denton, TX 76201. E-mail: [email protected]

45 This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

(2)

stable and continuous from infancy to adulthood (Waters, Merrick, Treboux, Crowell, &

Albersheim, 2000).

The concept of attachment security or insecurity provides the basis for understanding social, emotional, and psychological development and functioning in children and adults (Cassidy

& Shaver, 1999). Secure individuals are able to process and regulate their emotions without avoiding or becoming overwhelmed by them.

They have consistently favorable views of themselves and others, and are at a lower risk of developing pathological symptoms because they seek comfort when distressed and are able to access resources by relying on others when their coping resources are low (Riggs, Jacob- vitz, & Hazen, 2002). In contrast, insecure individuals have inconsistent or unfavorable views of themselves and/or others, and ap- proach life in the same fashion. Their capacity for affect regulation is compromised in that they either suppress/ignore their feelings or con- versely become preoccupied with and exagger- ate their emotional responses. As a result of their negative internal models and ineffective emotional regulation strategies, insecure adults are less likely to adaptively respond to ambig- uous or stressful situations and more likely to develop symptoms of psychopathology (Carl- son & Sroufe, 1995).

Developmental research indicates that parenting behavior is the best predictor of social development and interpersonal competence in children beyond any other factor (Conger, Cui, Bryant, & Elder, 2000). For example, high co- ercion, rejection, and low emotional support from both mothers and fathers have been shown to mediate the relationship between interparental conflict and child maladjustment (Kaczyn- ski, Lindahl, Malik, & Laurenceau, 2006). Fur- ther, Conger and colleagues (2000) also found that parental nurturing and involvement in childhood prospectively predicted the quality of interpersonal behaviors in romantic relationships (e.g., being warm, loving, and less hostile) among young adults, which, in turn, mediated the association between parenting received as a child and later relationship satisfaction in adulthood. These findings suggest that aspects of socialization within the parent– child relationship that are associated with the formation of the attachment system can be related to be-

havioral functioning in later adult romantic relationships.

Perceptions of Interparental Conflict The emotional security hypothesis (Davies &

Cummings, 1994) states that children develop emotional security within the family by cul- tivating a secure attachment to parents, as well as being exposed to a secure interparental relationship (Laurent, Kim, & Capaldi, 2008). Interparental conflict can undermine a secure attachment to parents as well as security in the interparental relationship, either by disrupting the formation of an attachment bond or compromising the child’s sense of confi- dence in the parent as a secure base (El-Sheikh

& Elmore-Staton, 2004). That is, a child may question the security of their relationship to one or both parents in the context of interparental conflict, where a parent may be perceived as hostile, coercive, and likely unavailable for pro- tection and support. Research has generally concluded that attachment to mother is a stronger predictor of later psychosocial development than attachment to father, but a secure attachment to both parents is related to optimal development (Main et al., 1985). As young as 5 years of age, children provide information com- parable with maternal reports of conflict between parents as well as child internalizing and externalizing problems (McDonald & Grych, 2006).

A meta-analysis of 68 studies on the association between interparental conflict and youth internalizing and externalizing problems showed consistently moderate effect sizes (.32 when considering nonsignificant findings, .68 when only considering significant findings), indicating consistency in the literature regarding the negative effects of interparental conflict (Buehler, Anthony, Krishnakumar, & Stone, 1997). Moreover, a recent study indicated that the association between conflict appraisals and maladjustment seems to increase with age, with a stronger association for older children com- pared with younger children (Jouriles, Spiller, Stephens, McDonald, & Swank, 2000). These findings suggest that as children grow older, they are better able to understand and may blame themselves for the conflict occurring between parents, whereas younger children may

This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

(3)

not understand the sources of conflict enough to blame themselves for it.

In the context of marital conflict, children evaluate the relationships within a family and these evaluations are directly related to the formation of IWMs; these IWMs guide behavior and interpretations of behavior within future relationships. Indeed, expectations about romantic relationships are learned through observations of how parents and caregivers interact.

In turn, inaccurate perceptions of self and other can develop in the face of family conflict and become risk factors for anxiety, depression, health problems, hostility, and aggression be- ginning in childhood (Nicolotti, El-Sheikh, &

Whitson, 2003). For example, individuals can develop conflicting perceptions about parents who engage in overt conflict (e.g., supportive one minute and frightening the next), which then contribute to confusion regarding the self as being worthy of love and support. These perceptions are directly related to feelings of self-worth, sadness, and anxiety, which can influence how individuals pursue or interpret relationships outside of the home.

Beyond exhibiting higher levels of anxiety, depression, and disruptive behavior, children who witness hostility and aggressive behavior between their parents are later more likely to be abusive toward romantic partners in adolescence and adulthood (Wekerle & Wolfe, 1999). However, important evidence has emerged suggesting that when adolescents perceive parents as a secure base in providing for their emotional, physical, and psychological needs, they display lower levels of internalizing and externalizing symptoms, even in the face of interparental conflict (Woodhouse, Dykas, & Cassidy, 2009). Vulnerability to the detrimental effects of interparental conflict does not diminish as children get older (Cum- mings, Davies, & Simpson, 1994), and memories of earlier threat will likely affect children’s responses to future conflict (McDonald

& Grych, 2006). Therefore, it is important to investigate the relationship between memories of interparental conflict in childhood and adult psychological well-being as a means to understand and prevent long-term interpersonal instability arising from the early family environment.

Adult Attachment

There are two distinct lines of research that have been used to explain attachment processes in adulthood. One line of research emerged from the discipline of developmental psychology, perhaps best represented by the work of Mary Main and her colleagues, who measured adult “states of mind” with the Adult Attach- ment Interview (AAI; George, Kaplan, & Main, 1985). This line of research focuses on links between parents’ states of mind with respect to attachment, parenting behavior, and children’s attachment classifications. The second line of research emerged from the realms of social and personality psychology. Originally proposed by Hazan and Shaver (1987), this line of research generally uses self-report instruments to measure adult attachment and focuses on romantic relationship experiences. Romantic attachment patterns are considered outgrowths of early attachment experiences and are conceptually similar to infant attachment patterns, which share many of the same emotional and behavioral characteristics (Crowell, Fraley, & Shaver, 2008). The two lines of research are distinct in that one attempts to explain parenting behavior based on early childhood experience and the other attempts to explain romantic relationship behavior. The current study draws from the second line of research, which emphasizes the connection between attachment processes and adult romantic relationships.

In the social/personality attachment literature, insecure attachment in adulthood can be measured along two affective– behavioral dimensions: anxiety and avoidance (Brennan, Clark, & Shaver, 1998). These affective–

behavioral dimensions correspond with the cognitive-representational “working” models of self and other, respectively (Crowell et al., 2008). Attachment anxiety is characterized by a negative model of self that contributes to a strong fear of rejection or abandonment, whereas attachment avoidance involves a negative model of others, accompanied by a fear or discomfort with intimacy, closeness, and depen- dence (Wei, Vogel, Ku, & Zakalik, 2005). Al- though attachment representations are considered to be continuous throughout the life span, these representations may change gradually de- pending on the emotional availability of the current attachment figure (e.g., caregiver, ro-

(4)

mantic partner, spouse) and may vary in re- sponse to significant changes across person, time, and context.

Psychological functioning. Unstable relationships and insecure attachment representations in childhood have long-term implications for the psychological functioning of individuals later in life. The bulk of the literature suggests that dimensions of adult attachment insecurity are associated with interpersonal difficulties and psychological distress (Lopez, Mitchell, &

Gormley, 2002) and that threats to interpersonal closeness appear to play a significant role in vulnerability to psychopathology (Onishi, Gjerde, & Block, 2001).

Attachment anxiety (i.e., negative model of self) is marked by a fear of abandonment, de- pendency on others, and hyperactivation of emotions. Research indicates that adults with high levels of attachment anxiety report symptoms of anxiety, social anxiety, interpersonal stressors, and decreased life satisfaction (Eng, Heimberg, Hart, Schneier, & Liebowitz, 2001;

Wei et al., 2005). Other findings also suggest that high attachment anxiety is associated with borderline personality disorder, symptoms of obsessive and paranoid personality, and in- creases in physiological arousal (Fraley &

Shaver, 1997; Riggs et al., 2007; Taylor, Mann, White, & Goldberg, 2000). Attachment avoidance (i.e., negative model of other), on the other hand, is marked by interpersonal distance and minimization of distress (Fraley, Garner, &

Shaver, 2000), and has been associated with emotional disengagement and decreased physiological arousal when the attachment system is activated (Fraley & Shaver, 1997). Attachment avoidance has been linked to symptoms of im- pulsivity, substance abuse, dissociative identity disorder, and schizoid and narcissistic personality disorders (Brennan & Shaver, 1995; Eng, Heimberg, Hart, & Schneier, 2001; Patrick, Hobson, Castle, Howard, & Maughan, 1994;

Riggs et al., 2007). Some psychiatric syn- dromes, such as depression and somaticism, have been linked to both attachment anxiety and attachment avoidance (Eng et al., 2001; Fraley

& Shaver, 1997; Riggs et al., 2007; Taylor et al., 2000; Wei et al., 2005), and may be best conceptualized as involving high levels of both attachment dimensions.

Relational functioning. Individuals’ early attachment experiences lay a foundation for

future love relationships through the development of working models that are reflections of early experiences and serve as guides or con- straints in pursuit of future relationships (Col- lins & Sroufe, 1999). Recent evidence con- firms this association, showing that secure attachments with caregivers in childhood are significantly related to adult romantic attachment security and quality of romantic relationships in young adulthood (Roisman, Col- lins, Sroufe, & Egeland, 2005). Throughout the life cycle, four key abilities or behaviors required for intimacy are developed through interactions with caregivers, peers, and romantic partners: the ability to seek care, to give care, to feel comfortable with an auton- omous self, and to negotiate (Cassidy, 2001).

A secure attachment facilitates these abilities, whereas an insecure attachment is likely to interfere with successful care seeking and im- pairments in the capacity for intimacy. For example, in adulthood, there is evidence that attachment security is associated with the ability to seek care in times of distress or need (Cassidy, 2001; Riggs et al., 2002).

In general, research findings show that secure adults (low avoidance, low anxiety) report more positive relationship experiences than their insecure counterparts, including greater relationship satisfaction, intimacy, commitment, and trust (Feeney, 1999). It has been suggested that social support and caregiving processes may be important pathways through which secure individuals create more loving and secure relationships (Kane et al., 2007). Secure individuals are better able to match their support to their partner’s needs, which allows them to serve as a safe haven of comfort and a secure base from which their partners can explore personal goals (Collins, Guichard, Ford, & Feeney, 2006). In contrast, research has repeatedly demonstrated that, relative to secure adults, insecure individuals with high levels of attachment anxiety and attachment anxiety report greater difficulty in romantic relationships, including poorer relationship functioning and satisfaction (e.g., Banse, 2004; Fuller & Fincham, 1995), as well as emotional dysregulation and less withdrawal during couple interactions (Paley, Cox, Burchinal, & Payne, 1999).

(5)

The Current Study

Families can be conceptualized as organized systems with mutually regulating levels of organization where dyadic relationships interact to influence the adjustment of each member as well as the whole family system (van Geert &

Lichtwarck-Ashoff, 2005). Parent– child dyads and marital dyads are both characterized as attachment relationships that serve functions such as regulating distress and maintaining a sense of security in the family environment (Bowlby, 1969; Hazan & Shaver, 1987). Although parent– child and marital dyads are considered to be exclusive relationships, regulation of distress within the marital dyad (e.g., conflict and com- munication) is directly related to the functioning of the parent– child dyad (e.g., parenting behaviors and attachment). The existing evidence supports the idea that emotional regulation strategies learned and observed within the family system remain relatively continuous into adulthood and exist in extrafamilial relationships. Therefore, it is important to continue investigating the role that emotional regulation strategies learned directly in parent– child interactions, as well as indirectly through observations of interparental interactions, play in adulthood in order to prevent harmful strategies from being repeated.

In particular, children of parents who are unavailable and inconsistent are likely to experience difficulties in establishing stable romantic relationships. Furthermore, the existing literature suggests a connection between the observation of relationship behaviors during childhood and relationship “working models” in adulthood. Indeed, dysfunction and emotional dysregulation in the parents’ marital relationship has been associated with psychological distress and transmission of conflict behavior in adult offspring (Kim, Pears, Capaldi, & Owen, 2009). Given that emerging adulthood is a time of developing one’s romantic interests (Arnett, 2004), it is important to understand emerging adults’ conceptualization of romantic relationships and how early relationship experiences may be related to current psychological functioning. Our study aims to confirm associations between memories of interparental conflict in childhood, adult romantic attachment, and current psychological distress in a sample of emerging adults attending college.

We hypothesized that recollections of interparental conflict in childhood would be directly related to romantic attachment style and current psychological symptoms. Based on previous research, we specifically predicted that recalled properties of conflict and perceptions of threat from conflict would be associated with higher symptoms of anxiety, depression, somatic complaints, hostility, paranoia, obsessive– compulsiveness, and interpersonal sensitivity. Further- more, because they are associated with different emotional regulation strategies, we expected that attachment avoidance and anxiety would be uniquely related to different psychological symptoms. Consistent with the research re- viewed earlier, we specifically predicted that attachment anxiety would be positively associated with symptoms of depression, anxiety, interpersonal sensitivity, paranoia, obsessive–

compulsiveness, phobic anxiety, and somatic complaints. Also based on previous research, we predicted that attachment avoidance would be associated with symptoms of depression, hostility, and somatic complaints; a significant association with paranoia was also hypothesized, due the high degree of distrust experienced by avoidant individuals. In addition, given that attachment representations are pre- sumed to guide emotional regulation and affect mental health throughout the life span, we also expected that multiple regression analyses would demonstrate that adult romantic attachment is a significant mediator between memories of interparental conflict and current symptoms of distress.

Method Participants

This study was part of a larger project examining links between memories of early family experiences, mental health, and romantic relationships in emerging adulthood. Participants included a diverse sample of 330 undergraduate students (237 females) at a large state university. Due to our interest in romantic attachment processes, participants were eligible only if they were involved in an exclusive heterosexual romantic relationship of at least 6 months. Ap- proximately 67.7% of the sample was Cauca- sian, 13% African American, 9% Hispanic, 5%

was Asian, 4% was biracial, 0.3% was Native

(6)

American, and 2% other. The majority (62%) of the sample reported growing up in intact families, 33% reported that their parents had divorced before they were 16 years old, and 5%

reported that their parents had divorced after they were 16. There were no participants who reported having parents that were unmarried or never married. Participants ranged in age from 17 to 43 years (M ⫽ 20.40,SD ⫽ 2.86), with 74% of the sample being 18 to 26 years of age (median age⫽20 years).

Measures

Children’s Perceptions of Interparental Conflict Scale (CPIC; Grych, Seid, & Fin- cham, 1992). The CPIC is a 48-item self- report measure that assesses perceptions of conflict between parents. For this study, the instructions were modified to assess memories of interparental conflict that occurred during childhood. Responses are based on a 3-point scale where 1⫽true, 2⫽sometimes true, and 3 ⫽ false, with higher scores indicating low levels of perceived interparental conflict. Re- search has shown that college students are able to adequately report instances of interparental conflict and that these reports are meaningfully related to current romantic attachment as well as adjustment and coping (i.e., Rodrigues & Kitz- mann, 2007). We used the recommended super- ordinate scales of the CPIC, which have demonstrated adequate internal consistency and test–retest reliability, as well as concurrent and criterion validity, for measuring the effects of interparental conflict on college student adjustment (Bickham & Fiese, 1997). The 19-item Conflict Properties scale assesses perceived frequency, intensity, and resolution of the conflict (e.g., “When my parents disagreed about something, they usually came up with a solution”).

The 11-item Threat scale asks about perceived threat of the conflict and coping efficacy in dealing with the conflict (e.g., “When my parents argued, I was afraid that something bad might happen”). Due to poor reliability estimates originally found in the Threat scale, one item (Item #6, “When my parents argue I can do something to make myself feel better”) was removed from the overall scale in order to achieve reliability above the acceptable standard of .60. The Self-Blame scale was not used in data analysis procedures due to poor reliabil-

ity estimates that could not be remedied. Reli- ability estimates for the CPIC are provided in Table 1.

Experiences in Close Relationships Scale (ECR; Brennan et al., 1998). The ECR is a 36-item self-report questionnaire measuring adult romantic attachment style. Each item is rated on a 7-point Likert scale ranging fromnot at all like metovery much like me. Two higher order scales, labeled Avoidance and Anxiety, are close to independent (i.e.,r⫽.18). A recent review of previous research (Crowell et al., 2008) reports that the two scales demonstrate internal consistency and test–retest reliability, and have high construct, predictive, and dis- criminant validity. The items on this questionnaire ask participants to report their emotional and behavioral responses with regards to their romantic partner and general relationship behavior. Previous research has shown that young adults are able to accurately report their own romantic attachment style and important aspects of romantic relationships (Bartholomew &

Horowitz, 1991), and we anticipated similar accuracy in the current study. The 18-item Anx- iety subscale measured feelings of inadequacy and worries about being rejected or abandoned in romantic relationships (e.g., “I worry a lot about my relationships”). The 18-item Avoid- ance subscale measured avoiding and discomfort with romantic sharing, closeness, and intimacy (e.g., “Just when my partner starts to get close to me, I find myself pulling away”).

Symptom Assessment-45 (SA-45; Maruish, 1998). This 45-item measure assesses the severity of nine separate psychological symptom categories within the last 7 days. Each symptom subscale is measured by five items on a 5-point scale from 1 (not at all) to 5 (extremely) assessing the severity of distress with higher scores indicating higher severity. The reliability and validity of the SA-45 (Maruish, 1998) has been well-established and the instrument is widely used in clinical and research settings. Previous internal consistency reliability coefficients have ranged from .70 to .80, and test–retest reliability coefficients have adequately ranged from .49 to .84 (Reynolds, 1996). Due to poor reliability, the Psychoticism scale was not used in data analysis procedures. Reliability estimates for the SA-45 are also provided in Table 1.

(7)

Table1 Correlations,Means,StandardDeviations,andCronbach’sAlphaReliabilityEstimatesforAllVariables (1)(2)(3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8)(9)(10)(11)(12) CPIC (1)Conflictproperties—.63ⴱⴱ⫺.19ⴱⴱ⫺.05⫺.10⫺.10⫺.06⫺.05⫺.16ⴱⴱ⫺.08⫺.07⫺.12ⴱ (2)Threat—⫺.16ⴱⴱ⫺.17ⴱⴱ⫺.18ⴱⴱ⫺.14ⴱ⫺.19ⴱⴱ⫺.15ⴱⴱ⫺.19ⴱⴱ⫺.14ⴱ⫺.20ⴱⴱⴱ⫺.19ⴱⴱ ECR (3)Avoidance—.18ⴱⴱ.13ⴱ.12ⴱ.13ⴱ.04.08.18ⴱⴱ.10.18ⴱⴱ (4)Anxiety—.41ⴱⴱ.50ⴱⴱ.30ⴱⴱ.24ⴱⴱ.18ⴱⴱ.26ⴱⴱ.49ⴱⴱ.42ⴱⴱ SA-45 (5)Anxiety—.61ⴱⴱ.62ⴱⴱ.58ⴱⴱ.51ⴱⴱ.48ⴱⴱ.60ⴱⴱ.54ⴱⴱ (6)Depression—.52ⴱⴱ.43ⴱⴱ.41ⴱⴱ.43ⴱⴱ.71ⴱⴱ.54ⴱⴱ (7)Obsessive– Compulsive—.52ⴱⴱ.50ⴱⴱ.42ⴱⴱ.68ⴱⴱ.54ⴱⴱ (8)Somatization—.40ⴱⴱ.44ⴱⴱ.40ⴱⴱ.40ⴱⴱ (9)Phobicanxiety—.29ⴱⴱ.54ⴱⴱ.38ⴱⴱ (10)Hostility—.43ⴱⴱ.44ⴱⴱ (11)Interpersonal sensitivity—.68ⴱⴱ (12)Paranoia— Mean(SD)20.22(9.09)13.89(4.22)2.54(1.09)3.78(1.02)59.02(8.25)60.12(6.98)61.46(8.71)55.92(7.73)62.14(5.17)59.48(6.45)60.32(7.25)58.58(7.13) Cronbach’s␣0.920.760.950.910.710.850.820.760.760.790.850.72 Note.␣⫽alpha;CPIC⫽Children’sPerceptionsofInterparentalConflictScale;ECR⫽ExperiencesinCloseRelationshipsScale;SA-45⫽SymptomAssessment-45. ⴱp⬍.05.ⴱⴱp⬍.01.ⴱⴱⴱp⬍.001.

(8)

Procedure

Participants completed a 30-min online survey in exchange for course credit. For the pur- poses of this study, only self-reports of interparental conflict experienced in childhood, current romantic attachment strategies, and symptoms of psychological distress were used. Before ad- ministering the instruments, the opening Web page described procedures, risk and benefits, and informed participants they could discon- tinue participation at any time. Informed con- sent was obtained by asking participants to read the opening webpage click on the “I agree”

button at the end, which would then take them to the actual survey. All measures were completed online by students; no partner reports were obtained. Tolerance and variance inflation factor (VIF) values indicate that multicollinear- ity was not an issue. Listwise deletion was used for cases missing large amounts of data across multiple measures (n ⫽ 38). No demographic differences were noted for retained participants relative to those who were omitted from analyses due to missing data. Mean substitution was used for measures in this study due to relatively low amounts of missing values, ranging from 4% for ECR Avoidance to 8% for ECR Anxi- ety.

Results

The means and standard deviations for all measures in the current sample are depicted in Table 1, along with a correlation matrix for all of the continuous variables. No significant relationships were found between dependent variables and demographics of the sample. Approx- imately 28% of all participants (n ⫽ 92) reported clinically significant elevations (i.e.,T scores of 65 and higher) on one or more SA-45 scale. Preliminary correlations revealed that the CPIC Threat scale was significantly associated with ECR avoidance and anxiety as well as all SA-45 scales. In contrast, the CPIC Conflict Properties scale was only significantly associated with ECR Avoidance. ECR Avoidance was significantly associated with most SA-45 symptoms except Somatization, Phobic Anxiety, and Interpersonal Sensitivity. Based on these preliminary findings, 13 regression models were run using CPIC Threat as the predictor, either ECR attachment anxiety or avoidance as the

mediator, and one of eight SA-45 subscales as the outcome. One regression was run using CPIC Conflict Properties as the predictor, ECR attachment avoidance as the mediator, and SA-45 Paranoia as the outcome.

Baron and Kenny’s (1986) model for testing mediation assumes a three-variable system that involves two causal paths leading to the outcome variable—the direct path from the predictor to the outcome variable (path c) and the path from the mediator to the outcome variable (path b); there is also a path directly from the predictor to the mediator (path a). According to Baron and Kenny (1986), a variable functions as a mediator when (a) variations in the predictor variable account for variations in the mediator (path a), (b) variations in the mediator significantly account for variations in the outcome variable (path b), and (c) when paths a and b are controlled for, a previously significant relationship between the predictor and outcome variables is no longer significant (path c).

Following this procedure, the first series of regression results indicated that perceptions of interparental conflict were significantly related to most psychological symptoms assessed in this sample. In particular, the Conflict Proper- ties scale (intensity, frequency, resolution) was significantly related to symptoms of phobic anxiety (␤ ⫽ ⫺.16,p⫽.00) and paranoia (␤ ⫽

⫺.12,p⫽.03). The Perceived Threat scale was significantly related to SA-45 anxiety (␤ ⫽

⫺.18, p ⫽ .00), depression (␤ ⫽ ⫺.14, p ⫽ .01), obsessive⫺compulsiveness (␤ ⫽ ⫺.19, p⫽.00), hostility (␤ ⫽ ⫺.14,p⫽ .02), paranoia (␤ ⫽ ⫺.19,p⫽ .00), somatization (␤ ⫽

⫺.15,p⫽.01), phobic anxiety (␤ ⫽ ⫺.19,p⫽ .00), and interpersonal sensitivity (␤ ⫽ ⫺.20, p⫽ .00).

In the second series of regressions, results revealed that perceptions of threat with regards to interparental conflict were significantly related to both adult attachment anxiety (␤ ⫽

⫺.17,p⫽.00) and avoidance (␤ ⫽ ⫺.16,p⫽ .00); conflict properties were significantly related to attachment avoidance (␤ ⫽ ⫺.19,p⫽ .00) but not to attachment anxiety (␤ ⫽ ⫺.05, p ⫽ .41). The next set of regression results revealed that ECR attachment anxiety was significantly related to all SA-45 symptoms including anxiety (␤ ⫽.39,p⫽.00), depression (␤ ⫽ .49,p⫽.00), obsessive⫺compulsiveness (␤ ⫽ .28,p⫽.00), somatization (␤ ⫽.22,p⫽.00),

(9)

phobic anxiety (␤ ⫽ .16, p ⫽ .01), hostility (␤ ⫽ .25, p ⫽ .00), interpersonal sensitivity (␤ ⫽.47,p⫽.00), and paranoia (␤ ⫽.40,p⫽ .00). ECR attachment avoidance was significantly related to SA-45 anxiety (␤ ⫽.13,p⫽ .02), depression (␤ ⫽.12,p⫽.03), obsessive-

⫺compulsiveness (␤ ⫽.13,p⫽.02), hostility (␤ ⫽.18,p⫽.00), and paranoia (␤ ⫽.18,p⫽ .00), but was not related to somatization (␤ ⫽ .04,p⫽.49), phobic anxiety (␤ ⫽.08,p⫽.14), and interpersonal sensitivity (␤ ⫽.10,p⫽.07).

For those models that met the first three cri- teria, a series of multiple regressions were con- ducted to test the mediation hypotheses. In the first block of each regression, one CPIC scale (either conflict properties or threat) was entered as the independent variable, followed in the second block by either ECR anxiety or avoidance as the mediator. One SA-45 scale served as the outcome variable. Mediation results are presented in Table 2. Findings suggesting mediation were confirmed using MedGraph-I (Jose, 2003), which utilizes the Sobel (1982) test for indirect effects. Mediation tests are presented in Table 2 and MedGraph results are reported in text.

Consistent with hypotheses, adult attachment avoidance fully mediated the relationship between CPIC conflict properties and symptoms of paranoia (Sobel Z ⫽ ⫺2.13, p⫽ .03). At- tachment avoidance partially mediated the relationship between CPIC perceived threat and symptoms of hostility (Sobel Z⫽ ⫺2.01, p⫽ .04) and paranoia (SobelZ⫽ ⫺2.01,p⫽.04).

Attachment avoidance did not mediate the relationship between any of the CPIC scales and symptoms of anxiety, depression, and obsessive⫺compulsiveness, as we hypothesized.

Attachment anxiety proved to be a mediator of the relationship between perceptions of interparental conflict and more current psychological symptoms. However, attachment anxiety only fully mediated the relationship between CPIC perceived threat and symptoms of hostility (Sobel Z⫽ ⫺2.49,p⫽ .01). Partial mediation by attachment anxiety was found for the associations between CPIC perceived threat and symptoms of anxiety (Sobel Z ⫽ ⫺2.79, p⫽ .01), depression (Sobel Z ⫽ ⫺2.79, p⫽ .01), obsessive⫺compulsiveness (SobelZ ⫽ ⫺2.59, p⫽.01), somatization (SobelZ⫽ ⫺2.37,p⫽ .02), phobic anxiety (Sobel Z ⫽ ⫺2.10, p ⫽ .04), interpersonal sensitivity (Sobel Z ⫽ ⫺2.

86,p⫽ .00), and paranoia (SobelZ ⫽ ⫺2.81, p⫽ .00).

Discussion

Consistent with previous research (Bickham

& Fiese, 1997; Turner & Kopiec, 2006), findings indicated that memories of parental conflict in childhood are significantly related to multiple symptoms of psychological distress among emerging adults. Results indicate that perceptions of threat seem to be the most influential characteristic of interparental conflict in associations between attachment anxiety, avoidance, and psychological symptoms. In the current study, romantic attachment anxiety was the more frequent mediator in the associations between perceptions of threat recollected from childhood and current psychological symptoms.

Each of these findings will be addressed in the context of study limitations.

Main Findings

Current results support earlier research (e.g., Amato & Sobolewski, 2001; McDonald &

Grych, 2006) regarding the association between perceptions of threat from interparental conflict and psychological distress, including both internalizing and externalizing symptoms. Addition- ally, our study found that childhood experiences with parental conflict are associated with attachment strategies in adulthood (i.e., attachment anxiety and avoidance), which lends support to previous research regarding the emotional security hypothesis in childhood (Davies & Cum- mings, 1994). Current findings are also in line with recent reports of associations between perceptions of interparental conflict and negative romantic experiences (e.g., expecting unhappi- ness, feeling pessimistic about relationships, and a fear of rejection; Steinberg, Davila, &

Fincham, 2006). More specifically, our results are consistent with the idea that appraisals of interparental conflict involve evaluations of relationships in the family, which may contribute to working models of how romantic relationships work and the associated emotion regulation strategies involved in maintaining those relationships.

Regarding our results for mediation, there is little evidence in the literature identifying attachment strategies in adulthood as a significant me-

(10)

diator of associations between retrospective perceptions of interparental conflict from childhood and adult psychological distress. Research in this area has considered coping strategies as possible mediators, but no previous study has reported mediation by adult attachment strategies. However, our results of attachment anxiety at least partially mediating the association between interparental conflict and most psychological symptoms as-

sessed by the SA-45 are consistent with previous research indicating that attachment anxiety is most often associated with relationship difficulties for emerging adults with a reported history of interparental conflict (Rodrigues & Kitzmann, 2007).

Our results also support studies suggesting that anxiety regarding romantic relationships is often associated with psychological symptoms and distress (Lopez et al., 2002).

Table 2

Tests of Mediation

Model Step/Predictor df ␤Initial/Final R² F

DV SA-45 Anxiety

1 1 CPIC Threat 1(328) ⫺.18^ⴱⴱ/⫺.11^ⴱ .03

2 ECR Anxiety 2(327) .40^ⴱⴱⴱ .19 35.45^ⴱⴱ

2 1 CPIC Threat 1(328) ⫺.18^ⴱⴱ/⫺.17^ⴱⴱ .03

2 ECR Avoidance 2(327) .09 .04 6.72^ⴱⴱ

DV SA-45 Depression

3 1 CPIC Threat 1(328) ⫺.14^ⴱ/⫺.06 .02

2 ECR Anxiety 2(327) .48^ⴱⴱⴱ .25 51.07^ⴱⴱⴱ

4 1 CPIC Threat 1(328) ⫺.14^ⴱ/⫺.13^ⴱ .02

2 ECR Avoidance 2(327) .09 .03 4.50^ⴱ

DV SA-45 Obsessive–Compulsive

5 1 CPIC Threat 1(328) ⫺.19^ⴱⴱ/⫺.14^ⴱ .03

6 1 CPIC Threat 1(328) ⫺.19^ⴱⴱ/⫺.17^ⴱⴱ .03

2 ECR Avoidance 2(327) .10 .04 7.16^ⴱⴱ

DV SA-45 Phobic anxiety

7 1 CPIC Threat 1(328) ⫺.19^ⴱⴱ/⫺.16^ⴱⴱ .04

2 ECR Anxiety 2(327) .16^ⴱⴱ .06 10.15^ⴱⴱⴱ

DVSA-45 Hostility

8 1 CPIC Threat 1(328) ⫺.14^ⴱ/⫺.09 .02

9 1 CPIC Threat 1(328) ⫺.14^ⴱ/⫺.11 .02

2 ECR Avoidance 2(327) .16^ⴱⴱ .04 7.19^ⴱⴱ

DV SA-45 Interpersonal sensitivity

10 1 CPIC Threat 1(328) ⫺.20^ⴱⴱⴱ/⫺.12^ⴱ .04

DV SA-45 Paranoia

11 1 CPIC Conflict properties 1(328) ⫺.12^ⴱ/⫺.09 .02

2 ECR Avoidance 2(327) .16^ⴱⴱ .04 6.76^ⴱⴱ

12 1 CPIC Threat 1(328) ⫺.19^ⴱⴱ/⫺.12^ⴱ .04

13 1 CPIC Threat 1(328) ⫺.19^ⴱⴱ/⫺.16^ⴱⴱ .04

2 ECR Avoidance 2(327) .15^ⴱⴱ .06 9.25^ⴱⴱⴱ

DV SA-45 Somatization

14 1 CPIC Threat 1(328) ⫺.15^ⴱⴱ/⫺.12^ⴱ .02

Note. CPIC⫽Children’s Perceptions of Interparental Conflict Scale; DV⫽Dependent Variable; ECR⫽Experiences in Close Relationships Scale; SA-45⫽Symptom Assessment-45.

ⴱp⬍.05. ^ⴱⴱp⬍.01. ^ⴱⴱⴱp⬍.001.

(11)

A related line of attachment research has indicated that individuals with insecure attachment relationships may deactivate their attachment system and devalue the role of attachment relationships in their lives as a means to mini- mize the distress associated with attachment disruptions (Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991;

Carlson & Sroufe, 1995). Individuals with high attachment avoidance appear emotionally dis- tant and distrustful of others, which may increase vulnerability to distress through the suppression of negative affect and a lack of care-seeking behavior (Riggs & Han, 2009).

Our study supports evidence suggesting that attachment avoidance may be a common coping strategy for individuals who have witnessed conflict in previous romantic relationship situations (Riggio, 2004). In particular, attachment avoidance fully mediated the association between properties of interparental conflict and current symptoms of paranoia and partially mediated the association between perceived threat of conflict and current symptoms of hostility and paranoia. Conceptually, it makes sense that individuals with avoidant attachment orientations would report symptoms of hostility and paranoia if attachment avoidance is marked by a general distrust of others and wariness toward others’ abilities to meet their needs for closeness. Our findings are consistent with previous research reporting that parental discord is associated with offspring’s lack of trust and problems in romantic relationships (Amato &

DeBoer, 2001), although clear evidence of attachment avoidance as a mediator has not been found until now.

We were surprised to find that some of our results were not consistent with previous research. For example, we predicted that attachment avoidance would be significantly associated with somatic symptoms as found in prior studies (e.g., Taylor et al., 2000). It is possible that, as emerging adults, the participants in our sample have not developed emotional suppression strategies that involve somatic symptoms and complaints. These strategies and symptoms may develop further as experience with relationships in general, as well as exposure to relationship distress, increase as adults get older. We were also surprised to find that properties of interparental conflict were not an influential predictor of adult attachment or current psychological symptoms, as found in prior stud-

ies (e.g., Hayashi & Strickland, 1998). How- ever, our results are consistent with previous research suggesting that perceptions of threat from interparental conflict continue to be influential as individuals get older and develop relationships of their own (Amato & Sobolewski, 2001; McDonald & Grych, 2006).

These findings have important implications for understandings how emerging adults’ relationship patterns develop and why certain psychological symptoms are associated with these patterns. It is unclear why attachment avoidance is not a more common mediator, but it is possible that avoidance in romantic relationships may reflect a more socially acceptable way of dealing with difficulties, specifically for emerging adults. More research is needed regarding the role that attachment avoidance plays in adult romantic relationship behavior and general psychological functioning as it relates to early experiences with interparental conflict.

Limitations and Recommendations

Despite interesting findings, the current study is not without limitations. Due to the correlational nature of the data, causal attri- butions cannot be made and we recognize that multiple alternative explanations of our results are possible. In particular, the current results contain information based on retrospective reports of interparental conflict, which may be influenced by current levels of psychological distress (Turner & Kopiec, 2006) or possibly the participants’ perception of current interparental relations. In addition, self-report data carries the risk of common method variance, which can lend itself to more robust associations than those that could be found utilizing diverse methods of measurement. To counteract these possibilities, future research might include relevant partner and parent reports, interviews or behavioral observations, or longitudinal data looking at each participant or couple over time. Another limitation involved the use of a predomi- nantly female sample of college students. Fu- ture research would benefit from targeted re- cruitment of an even number of males and females.

Consistent with statistics indicating that one out of every four American college students have a diagnosable mental disorder

(12)

(Borchard, 2010), the current sample, with about 28% exceeding the clinical cutoff on at least one symptom scale, appears to be fairly representative of an average college student population in the United States. However, with a mean age of 20 and just over 30% of the sample reporting racial backgrounds other than Caucasian, results may not accurately generalize to other age or racial groups. Rep- lication with a sample of community or clinical adults outside of the college environment would address the issue of generalizability.

Conclusion

The present study has important implications for parents, educators, marriage and family therapists, as well as individual clinicians working with young adults and unmarried couples. For example, current findings can inform parent ed- ucation programs about the importance of en- hancing attachment relationships between parents and children and, if possible, preventing children’s exposure to interparental conflict.

Parenting classes can be devised using a resil- ience framework that can teach parents how to deal with conflict constructively while teaching children how to manage conflict in relationships. Educators and counselors should be aware of the association between conflict in the home and psychological well-being at any age.

In addition, marriage and family therapists, as well as individual therapists, working with emerging adults and couples can evaluate the importance of parent– child relationships and history of interparental conflict in attempting to understand current relationship behavior and psychological symptoms. More specifically, assessing the history of parental and family experiences as well as attachment orientations can provide unique information about the emotional, psychological, and relational functioning of emerging adults. As a result, clinicians working with emerging adults will gain insight into issues such as psychological symptoms and relationship difficulties that can guide them in treatment planning. In particular, given the im- possibility of changing childhood experiences, counselors can target interventions at the mediators of adult romantic attachment anxiety and/or avoidance in treatment for related psychological symptoms.

References

Amato, P., & DeBoer, D. (2001). The transmission of marital instability across generations: Relationship skills or commitment to marriage?Journal of Mar- riage and Family, 63,1038 –1051. doi:10.1111/j .1741-3737.2001.01038.x

Amato, P. R., & Sobolewski, J. M. (2001). The effects of divorce and marital discord on adult children’s psychological well-being.American So- ciological Review, 66, 900 –921. doi:10.2307/

3088878

Arnett, J. (2004).Emerging adulthood: The winding road from the late teens through the twenties. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Banse, R. (2004). Adult attachment and marital satisfaction: Evidence for dyadic configuration effects. Journal of Social and Personal Relation- ships, 21, 273–282. doi:10.1177/0265407 504041388

Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The modera- tor-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statis- tical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182. doi:10.1037/

0022-3514.51.6.1173

Bartholomew, K., & Horowitz, L. M. (1991). Attach- ment styles among young adults: A test of a four- category model.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61,226 –244. doi:10.1037/0022-3514 .61.2.226

Bickham, N., & Fiese, B. (1997). Extension of the Children’s Perceptions of Interparental Conflict Scale for use with late adolescents. Journal of Family Psychology, 11, 246 –250. doi:10.1037/

0893-3200.11.2.246

Borchard, T. (2010). Statistics about college depression. Retrieved from http://psychcentral.com/blog/

archives/2010/09/02/statistics-about-college- depression/

Bowlby, J. (1969/1982).Attachment and loss: Vol.1, Attachment. New York, NY: Basic Books.

Brennan, K. A., Clark, C. L., & Shaver, P. R. (1998).

Self-report measurement of adult attachment: An integrative overview in attachment theory and close relationships. In J. A. Simpson & W. S.

Rholes (Eds.),Attachment theory and close rela- tionships(pp. 46 –76). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Brennan, K., & Shaver, P. (1995). Dimensions of adult attachment, affect regulation, and romantic relationship functioning. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 267–283. doi:10.1177/

0146167295213008

Bretherton, I. (1985). Attachment theory: Retrospect and prospect.Monographs of the Society for Re- search in Child Development, 50, 3–35. doi:

10.2307/3333824 This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.

(13)

Bretherton, I. (1993). From dialogue to internal working models: The co-construction of self in relationships. In C. A. Nelson (Ed.),Memory and affect in development(pp. 237–263). Hillsdale, NJ:

Lawrence Erlbaum.

Buehler, C., Anthony, C., Krishnakumar, A., &

Stone, G. (1997). Interparental conflict and youth problem behaviors: A meta-analysis. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 6, 233–247. doi:

10.1023/A:1025006909538

Carlson, E., & Sroufe, L. (1995). Contribution of attachment theory to developmental psychopathol- ogy. Developmental psychopathology, Vol. 1:The- ory and methods(pp. 581– 617). Oxford, UK: John Wiley.

Cassidy, J. (2001). Truth, lies, and intimacy: An attachment perspective.Attachment & Human De- velopment, 3, 121–155. doi:10.1080/146167 30110058999

Cassidy, J., & Shaver, P. (1999). Handbook of at- tachment: Theory, research, and clinical applica- tions. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Collins, N. L., Guichard, A. C., Ford, M. B., &

Feeney, B. C. (2006). Responding to need in inti- mate relationships: Normative processes and individual differences. In M. Mikulincer & G. S.

Goodman (Eds.),Dynamics of romantic love: At- tachment, caregiving, and sex(pp. 149 –189). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Collins, W., & Sroufe, L. (1999). Capacity for inti- mate relationships: A developmental construction.

In W. Furman, B. Brown, C. Feiring, W. Furman, B. Brown, C. Feiring (Eds.), The development of romantic relationships in adolescence (pp. 125–

147). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Conger, R. D., Cui, M., Bryant, C., & Elder, G.

(2000). Competence in early adult romantic relationships: A developmental perspective on family influences.Journal of Personality and Social Psy- chology, 79, 224 –237. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.79 .2.224

Crowell, J., Fraley, R., & Shaver, P. (2008). Mea- surement of individual differences in adolescent and adult attachment. In J. Cassidy & P. R. Shaver (Eds.),Handbook of attachment: Theory, research, and clinical applications(2nd ed., pp. 599 – 634).

New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Cummings, E. M., Davies, P. T., & Simpson, K. S.

(1994). Marital conflict, gender, and children’s appraisals and coping efficacy as mediators of child adjustment.Journal of Family Psychology, 8, 141–149. doi:10.1037/0893-3200.8.2.141 Davies, P. T., & Cummings, E. (1994). Marital con-

flict and child adjustment: An emotional security hypothesis.Psychological Bulletin, 116,387– 411.

doi:10.1037/0033-2909.116.3.387

El-Sheikh, M., & Elmore-Staton, L. (2004). The link between marital conflict and child adjustment: Par- ent-child conflict and perceived attachments as mediators, potentiators, and mitigators of risk.De- velopment And Psychopathology, 16, 631– 648.

doi:10.1017/S0954579404004705

Eng, W., Heimberg, R. G., Hart, T. A., Schneier, F. R., & Liebowitz, M. R. (2001). Attachment in individuals with social anxiety disorder: The relationship among adult attachment styles, social anxiety, and depression. Emotion, 1, 365–380. doi:

10.1037/1528-3542.1.4.365

Feeney, J. A. (1999). Issues of closeness and distance in dating relationships: Effects of sex and attachment style.Journal of Social and Personal Rela- tionships, 16, 571–590. doi:10.1177/026540 7599165002

Fraley, R. C., Garner, J., & Shaver, P. (2000). Adult attachment and the defensive regulation of atten- tion and memory: Examining the role of preemp- tive and postemptive defensive processes.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79,816 – 826. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.79.5.816

Fraley, R. C., & Shaver, P. R. (1997). Adult attachment and the suppression of unwanted thoughts.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 1080 –1091. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.73.5.1080 Fuller, T. L., & Fincham, F. D. (1995). Attachment

style in married couples: Relation to current marital functioning, stability over time, and method of assessment.Personal Relationships, 2,17–34. doi:

10.1111/j.1475-6811.1995.tb00075.x

George, C., Kaplan, N., & Main, M. (1985). The Berkeley Adult Attachment Interview[Unpublished protocol]. Berkeley, CA: University of California, Berkeley.

Grych, J. H., & Fincham, F. D. (1990). Marital conflict and children’s adjustment: A cognitive- contextual framework. Psychological Bulletin, 108,267–290. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.108.2.267 Grych, J. H., Fincham, F. D., Jouriles, E. N., &

McDonald, R. (2000). Interparental conflict and child adjustment: Testing the mediational role of appraisals in the cognitive-contextual framework.

Child Development, 71,1648 –1661. doi:10.1111/

1467-8624.00255

Grych, J. H., Seid, M., & Fincham, F. D. (1992).

Assessing marital conflict from the child’s perspective: The Children’s Perception of Interparen- tal Conflict Scale. Child Development, 63,558 – 572. doi:10.2307/1131346

Hayashi, G. M., & Strickland, B. R. (1998). Long- term effects of parental divorce on love relationships: Divorce as an attachment disruption.

Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 15, 23–38. doi:10.1177/0265407598151002

Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. (1987). Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment process. Journal of This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.