The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
On the instability of attachment style ratings
Abstract
We examined the stability of ratings on the Hazan and Shaver (1987) single‐item attachment style scale in a number of data sets, gathered by us and other researchers. Approximately 30% of subjects overall changed their attachment style classifications over a relatively short time span (ranging from 1 week to several months). The highest rate of instability was observed in subjects who classified themselves as anxious‐ambivalent–the majority of whom changed their ratings from one time to the next. Given these findings, we explore the methodological and conceptual implications of instability in attachment style ratings. With regard to the former, we question the current practice of selecting subjects for participation in research based on responses to the attachment style questionnaire administered on a different occasion. Our findings suggest that a substantial proportion would change their style rating in the interim. In terms of conceptualization, we examine a number of different explanations for the observed instability and propose that it may reflect variability in the underlying construct, rather than a lack of continuity in style or unreliability of measurement. From this perspective, an individual's response to an attachment style questionnaire reflects the relational schema that is activated at that moment, rather than an enduring general disposition or trait. Stability in ratings is therefore neither assumed nor expected.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Attachment styles among young adults: A test of a four-category model.
Bartholomew, K., & Horowitz, L. M. (1991) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037//0022-3514.61.2.226 · Cited by 8,384
Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment process.
Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. (1987) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.52.3.511 · Cited by 6,247
Security in Infancy, Childhood, and Adulthood: A Move to the Level of Representation
Main, M., Kaplan, N., & Cassidy, J. (1985) · Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development · doi:10.2307/3333827 · Cited by 4,567
Adult attachment, working models, and relationship quality in dating couples.
Collins, N. L., & Read, S. J. (1990) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.58.4.644 · Cited by 3,678
Toward a cognitive social learning reconceptualization of personality
Mischel, W. (1973) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/h0035002 · Cited by 3,181
Affect Grid: A single-item scale of pleasure and arousal.
Russell, J. A., Weiss, A., & Mendelsohn, G. A. (1989) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037//0022-3514.57.3.493 · Cited by 2,068
(1985) · doi:10.2307/3333824 · Cited by 1,658
Cited by
Fraley, R. C., & Shaver, P. R. (2000) · Review of General Psychology · doi:10.1037/1089-2680.4.2.132 · Cited by 1,601
Chris Fraley, R. (2002) · Personality and Social Psychology Review · doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr0602_03 · Cited by 1,066
Adult attachment measures: A 25-year review
Ravitz, P., Maunder, R., Hunter, J., Sthankiya, B., & Lancee, W. (2010) · Journal of Psychosomatic Research · doi:10.1016/j.jpsychores.2009.08.006 · Cited by 709
Baldwin, M. W., Keelan, J. P. R., Fehr, B., & Enns, V. (1996) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037//0022-3514.71.1.94 · Cited by 671
Self-citationSibley, C. G., Fischer, R., & Liu, J. H. (2005) · Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin · doi:10.1177/0146167205276865 · Cited by 549
Metadata
- Authors
- BALDWIN, M. W., & FEHR, B.
- Venue
- Personal Relationships
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1995-09
- Volume
- 2
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 247-261
- ISSN
- 1350-4126 (ISSN-L)
- 1475-6811
- OpenAlex
- W2005641547
- Cited by
- 266
- References
- 7
- FWCI
- 12.50
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: On the instability of attachment style ratings. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1475-6811.1995.tb00090.x
- The paper
- BALDWIN, M. W., & FEHR, B. (1995). On the instability of attachment style ratings. Personal Relationships. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6811.1995.tb00090.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.