The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
An Exploration of the Relational Schemata Underlying Attachment Styles: Self-Report and Lexical Decision Approaches
Abstract
It is proposed that the cognitive mechanisms underlying attachment styles are expectations about interaction with significant others. Two studies are described that assessed these relational schemata. The first study revealed that individuals of different attachment styles do have different expectations about likely patterns of interaction with a romantic partner in various interpersonal domains. The second study demonstrated the utility of the lexical decision task for examining interpersonal expectancies. When given a related context, secure subjects were quicker to identify words representing positive interpersonal outcomes, whereas insecure subjects were quicker to identify negative outcome words. Methodological and conceptual implications of a relational schema approach to attachment styles are discussed.
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 and Loss. Vol. 1. Attachment
Rever, G. W. (1972) · Psychosomatic Medicine · doi:10.1097/00006842-197211000-00011 · Cited by 8,446
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
Stereotypes and prejudice: Their automatic and controlled components
Devine, P. G. (1989) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.56.1.5 · Cited by 5,673
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
Rempel, J. K., Holmes, J. G., & Zanna, M. P. (1985) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.49.1.95 · Cited by 3,146
(1985) · doi:10.2307/3333824 · Cited by 1,658
Construct accessibility and depression: An examination of cognitive and affective factors
Gotlib, I. H., & McCann, C. D. (1984) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.47.2.427 · Cited by 475
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
The Relationship Context of Human Behavior and Development
Reis, H. T., Collins, W. A., & Berscheid, E. (2000) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.126.6.844 · Cited by 853
Attachment, Caregiving, and Altruism: Boosting Attachment Security Increases Compassion and Helping.
Mikulincer, M., Shaver, P. R., Gillath, O., & Nitzberg, R. A. (2005) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.89.5.817 · Cited by 739
Collins, N. L., & Feeney, B. C. (2004) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.87.3.363 · Cited by 733
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-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Baldwin, M. W., Fehr, B., Keedian, E., Seidel, M., & Thomson, D. W.
- Venue
- Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1993-12
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 746-754
- ISSN
- 0146-1672 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-7433
- OpenAlex
- W1980518262
- Cited by
- 266
- References
- 7
- FWCI
- 8.42
- 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: An Exploration of the Relational Schemata Underlying Attachment Styles: Self-Report and Lexical Decision Approaches. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/0146167293196010
- The paper
- Baldwin, M. W., Fehr, B., Keedian, E., Seidel, M., & Thomson, D. W. (1993). An Exploration of the Relational Schemata Underlying Attachment Styles: Self-Report and Lexical Decision Approaches. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167293196010
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.
