Attachment Security Balances Perspectives: Effects of Security Priming on Highly Optimistic and Pessimistic Explanatory Styles.

Yanhe Deng,Mengge Yan,Henry Chen,Xin Sun,Yue Lye,Peng Zhang,Xiangping Liu,Xianglong Zeng

doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01269

Yanhe Deng, Mengge Yan + Show 6 more

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01269

Copy DOI

Abstract

Highly optimistic explanatory style (HOES) and highly pessimistic explanatory style (HPES) are two maladaptive ways to explain the world and may have roots in attachment insecurity. The current study aims to explore the effects of security priming – activating supportive representations of attachment security – on ameliorating these maladaptive explanatory styles. 57 participants with HOES and 57 participants with HPES were randomized into security priming and control conditions. Their scores of overall optimistic attribution were measured before and after priming. Security priming had a moderating effect: the security primed HOES group exhibited lower optimistic attribution, while the security primed HPES group evinced higher scores of optimistic attribution. Furthermore, the security primed HOES group attributed positive outcomes more externally, while the security primed HPES group attributed successful results more internally. The results support the application of security priming interventions on maladaptive explanatory styles. Its potential mechanism and directions for future study are also discussed.

Highlights

Based on the model of learned helplessness (Abramson et al, 1978), Seligman et al (1979) defined the concept of explanatory style as individuals’ habitual explanations toward events of success and failure
An independent t-test demonstrated a significant difference in CPCN before priming between the Highly optimistic explanatory style (HOES) (M = 4.88, SD = 1.78) and highly pessimistic explanatory style (HPES) groups (M = 0.04, SD = 1.56), t(112) = 15.47, p < 0.001, d = 2.924, and no significant difference prior to priming between the security (M = 2.58, SD = 2.52) and control conditions (M = 2.33, SD = 3.36; p = 0.657)
We would caution in concluding that HOES and HPES are rooted in attachment insecurity, the present study empirically supports the efficacy of security priming on moderating both HOES and HPES

Summary

Introduction

Based on the model of learned helplessness (Abramson et al, 1978), Seligman et al (1979) defined the concept of explanatory style as individuals’ habitual explanations toward events of success and failure. Individuals with an optimistic explanatory style tend to make internal, stable, and global attributions following successful events (e.g., I got an A in the final exam because of my higher intelligence), and the opposite when failures occur (e.g., I failed in the final exam because the room was noisy). A person with a pessimistic explanatory style is likely to generate such internal, stable, and global explanations for failures (e.g., I failed because of my lower intelligence) and the opposite for success (e.g., I got an A because the test items were easy; Gillham et al, 2001)

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusion