Cited by 1,198Attachment and Relationship DynamicsPersonality Traits and PsychologyPsychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research

The experiences in close relationships—Relationship Structures Questionnaire: A method for assessing attachment orientations across relationships.

Fraley, R. Chris, Heffernan, Marie E., Vicary, Amanda M., Brumbaugh, Claudia Chloe·2011·Psychological Assessment

Abstract

Most research on adult attachment is based on the assumption that working models are relatively general and trait-like. Recent research, however, suggests that people develop attachment representations that are relationship-specific, leading people to hold distinct working models in different relationships. The authors report a measure, the Relationship Structures questionnaire of the Experiences in Close Relationships-Revised (ECR-RS; R. C. Fraley, N. G. Waller, & K. A. Brennan, 2000), that is designed to assess attachment dimensions in multiple contexts. Based on a sample of over 21,000 individuals studied online, it is shown that ECR-RS scores are reliable and have a structure similar to those produced by other measures. In Study 2 (N = 388), it is shown that relationship-specific measures of attachment generally predict intra- and interpersonal outcomes better than broader attachment measures but that broader measures predict personality traits better than relationship-specific measures. Moreover, it is demonstrated that differentiation in working models is not related to psychological outcomes independently of mean levels of security.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/a0022898

Cites

45 of 45 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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Fraley, R. C., Heffernan, M. E., Vicary, A. M., & Brumbaugh, C. C.
Affiliations
  • University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (US)
  • Queens College, CUNY (US)
Corresponding author
Fraley, R. Chris
Venue
Psychological Assessment
Published
2011-09
Volume
23
Issue
3
Pages
615-625
ISSN
  • 1040-3590 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-134X
OpenAlex
W2151427716
Cited by
1,198
References
45
Citations by year
2026: 102 · 2025: 113 · 2024: 98 · 2023: 115 · 2022: 112 · 2021: 126 · 2020: 98 · 2019: 77 · 2018: 90 · 2017: 63 · 2016: 60 · 2015: 52 · 2014: 48 · 2013: 23 · 2012: 15
FWCI
40.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychological Assessment (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Digital Commons at Illinois Wesleyan University (Illinois Wesleyan University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Science Foundation (0443783)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Attachment and Relationship Dynamics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research
Keywords
adult attachment, attachment working models, Experiences in Close Relationships-Revised, attachment security, personality traits, interpersonal outcomes
MeSH terms
Adult, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Female, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Male, Object Attachment, Psychological Tests, Surveys and Questionnaires, Sex Factors, Reproducibility of Results

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