Cited by 6,331Attachment and Relationship DynamicsEvolutionary Psychology and Human BehaviorPersonality Traits and Psychology

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment process.

Hazan, Cindy, Shaver, Phillip·1987·Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0022-3514.52.3.511

Cites

0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

Citations

Cites

The publisher hasn’t deposited this paper’s reference list.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 4,301–4,400 of 6,331

Metadata

Authors
Hazan, C., & Shaver, P.
Venue
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology
Published
1987
Volume
52
Issue
3
Pages
511-524
ISSN
  • 0022-3514 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1315
OpenAlex
W4244925768
Cited by
6,247
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 185 · 2025: 267 · 2024: 209 · 2023: 287 · 2022: 331 · 2021: 348 · 2020: 407 · 2019: 357 · 2018: 326 · 2017: 271 · 2016: 248 · 2015: 257 · 2014: 193 · 2013: 229 · 2012: 231
FWCI
14.32
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Attachment and Relationship Dynamics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Evolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
Keywords
romantic love, attachment, attachment theory, concept of love, interpersonal relationships

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