CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 87Attachment and Relationship DynamicsPsychoanalysis and Psychopathology ResearchPsychotherapy Techniques and Applications

Adult attachment, intimacy and psychological distress in a clinical and community sample

Pielage, Suzanne B., Luteijn, Frans, Arrindell, Willem A.·2005·Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy
DOI 10.1002/cpp.472
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Attachment theory predicts that early experiences with caregivers affect the quality of individuals' later (romantic) relationships and, consequently, their mental health. The present study examined the role of intimacy in the current romantic relationship as a possible mediator of the relationship between adult attachment and psychological distress in a clinical and community sample. Results indicated that attachment security was positively, whereas attachment insecurity was negatively, related to intimacy in the current romantic relationship. Furthermore, security of attachment was negatively related to loneliness and depression and positively to satisfaction with life. The reverse held for attachment insecurity. Mediational analyses revealed that intimacy in the current relationship only partially mediated the relationship between attachment and psychological distress. Although near perfect mediation was found for fearful attachment in the clinical sample and for preoccupied attachment in the community sample, the findings with regard to the other attachment styles were less clear-cut. Apart from the hypothesized indirect effect of attachment on psychological distress through intimacy, a direct effect of attachment on psychological distress remains. The implications of these findings and suggestions for future research are discussed. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/cpp.472

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

4 of the 41 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Pielage, S. B., Luteijn, F., & Arrindell, W. A.
Affiliations
University of Groningen (NL)
Corresponding author
Pielage, Suzanne B.
ORCID
Arrindell, Willem A.
Venue
Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2005
Volume
12
Issue
6
Pages
455-464
ISSN
  • 1063-3995 (ISSN-L)
  • 1099-0879
DOI
10.1002/cpp.472
OpenAlex
W2097143477
Cited by
87
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 3
FWCI
1.79
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tdm_license_1.1 (tdm, 3895 d)
Locations
  • Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy (publishedVersion)
  • University of Groningen research database (University of Groningen / Centre for Information Technology) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Attachment and Relationship Dynamics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychotherapy Techniques and Applications
Keywords
adult attachment, intimacy, psychological distress, romantic relationships, attachment security, insecure attachment, attachment styles, loneliness, depression, life satisfaction, mediation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review