CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 39Attachment and Relationship DynamicsMental Health via WritingPsychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research

Language use in the adult attachment interview: evidence for attachment-specific emotion regulation

BORELLI, JESSICA L., DAVID, DARYN H., RIFKIN‐GRABOI, ANNE, SBARRA, DAVID A., MEHL, MATTHIAS R., MAYES, LINDA C.·2013·Personal Relationships
DOI 10.1111/j.1475-6811.2012.01394.x
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Adult attachment classification is traditionally based on qualitative coding of participants' discourse about their attachment history. Word count‐based analyses have proven useful for assessing emotional states from narrative. To expand the understanding of how language is used in emotion regulation processes related to attachment, the authors assess 102 college‐aged adults' language on the Adult Attachment Interview (AAI). Autonomous adults use more emotion words and, in particular, negative emotion words. Preoccupied adults use more anger words. Disorganized adults use more experientially connected language and more death/dying words, but also use more second‐person pronouns when discussing loss. Language use during the AAI explains variability in self‐reported emotional distress above and beyond attachment classifications. Results are discussed in terms of their relevance to emotion and attachment.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1475-6811.2012.01394.x

Cites

60 of 60 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?

  • First-person singular pronoun use is a proposed measure of self-immersed processing.

    “Finally, the use of first-person singular pronouns (“I,” “me.” “my”), a proposed measure of self-immersed processing (24, 25) has emerged as a predictor of depression (9, 26, 27) and general psychopathology (28) in prior research.”

    From Early Linguistic Markers of Trauma-Specific Processing Predict Post-trauma Adjustment (2018) · cites this paper as [24]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
BORELLI, J. L., DAVID, D. H., RIFKIN‐GRABOI, A., SBARRA, D. A., MEHL, M. R., & MAYES, L. C.
Affiliations
  • Pomona College (US)
  • Yale University (US)
  • University of Arizona (US)
Corresponding author
BORELLI, JESSICA L.
ORCID
Venue
Personal Relationships
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2012-02-13
Volume
20
Issue
1
Pages
23-37
ISSN
  • 1350-4126 (ISSN-L)
  • 1475-6811
DOI
10.1111/j.1475-6811.2012.01394.x
OpenAlex
W1996463584
Cited by
39
References
60
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 2 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 1
FWCI
0.97
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor)
Locations
Personal Relationships (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Attachment and Relationship Dynamics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health via Writing
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Psychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research
Keywords
Adult Attachment Interview, attachment, emotion regulation, language use, emotional words, negative emotion words, anger, disorganized attachment, preoccupied attachment, death and dying, second-person pronouns, loss, emotional distress, attachment classification

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