Attachment Issues in Adults: What the Phrase Means and What It Does Not Diagnose
Author: Ukrainian Psychological Hub · Published: September 22, 2026 · Editorial Policy
“Attachment issues in adults” is an informal umbrella phrase for recurring difficulties involving closeness, trust, dependence, reassurance, separation, vulnerability, or emotional security in close relationships. The phrase can point to a real pattern of distress, but it is not itself a psychiatric diagnosis, and it does not identify one specific cause.
In adult attachment research, these experiences are usually described more precisely through dimensions such as attachment anxiety and attachment avoidance, through relationship-specific attachment patterns, or through other constructs that depend on the question being studied. Reviews of adult attachment measurement show that researchers use multiple self-report and interview methods rather than a single test for a condition called “attachment issues.” Ravitz et al. (2010).
That distinction matters. A person who repeatedly fears abandonment, a person who becomes uncomfortable when intimacy deepens, and a person who experiences obsessive relationship doubts may all use the same everyday phrase—“I have attachment issues”—while describing psychologically different problems. Good assessment begins by replacing the umbrella phrase with a more specific description of what happens, in which relationships, under what conditions, and with what consequences.
What Does “Attachment Issues” Mean in Adults?
In everyday language, attachment issues usually means that closeness feels unusually difficult, unstable, threatening, consuming, or hard to regulate. The phrase may refer to insecurity in romantic relationships, but people also use it for recurring patterns with family members, friends, or other important attachment figures.
In research, adult attachment is more often represented on two continuous dimensions. Attachment anxiety describes the extent to which a person worries about rejection, abandonment, availability, or not being sufficiently loved. Attachment avoidance describes the extent to which a person is uncomfortable with closeness, dependence, emotional disclosure, or relying on others. These dimensions can vary independently.
Evidence favors treating adult attachment differences as dimensions rather than assuming that every person belongs to one sharply bounded type. Taxometric analyses have found general and relationship-specific adult attachment to be more consistent with dimensional than categorical structure. Fraley et al. (2015).
The familiar labels secure, anxious/preoccupied, dismissive-avoidant, and fearful-avoidant remain useful as summaries. In this framework, secure generally describes low anxiety and low avoidance; anxious/preoccupied summarizes relatively high anxiety and low avoidance; dismissive-avoidant summarizes relatively low anxiety and high avoidance; and fearful-avoidant summarizes high anxiety and high avoidance. These labels are descriptions of patterns, not diagnoses, fixed personality species, or permanent identities. For the full taxonomy, see Attachment Styles in Adults.
Common Signs People May Call Attachment Issues
There is no official symptom checklist for “attachment issues in adults,” because there is no corresponding adult diagnosis by that name. Still, people often use the phrase when one or more recurring patterns create distress or interfere with close relationships.
Patterns that may reflect higher attachment anxiety
Examples include persistent fear that a partner will leave, heightened sensitivity to ambiguous signs of distance, repeated reassurance seeking, difficulty feeling secure after reassurance has been given, intense distress during separation or uncertainty, and a tendency to monitor a partner’s availability closely. Under stress, attachment anxiety is often associated with hyperactivating strategies: attention remains strongly focused on possible relational threat and on restoring proximity. For the dedicated pattern page, see Anxious Attachment Style.
Research on adult romantic attachment under stress distinguishes these anxious hyperactivating tendencies from avoidant deactivating tendencies. Simpson and Rholes (2017).
Patterns that may reflect higher attachment avoidance
Examples include discomfort depending on a partner, reluctance to ask for help, emotional distancing when intimacy increases, suppression of attachment needs, difficulty disclosing vulnerability, or a strong preference for handling distress alone. Avoidance does not mean that a person has no need for connection. In attachment research, it describes a strategy in which closeness and dependence are more likely to be downregulated, minimized, or treated as risky. For the dedicated pattern page, see Avoidant Attachment Style.
A partner’s withdrawal during conflict can have many explanations, so it is risky to infer an avoidant attachment pattern from one behavior. The same outward act—becoming quiet, asking for space, delaying a conversation—can reflect attachment avoidance, overwhelm, anger, fatigue, conflict-management habits, fear, or a sensible attempt to prevent escalation. The demand-withdraw pattern in relationships is one broader relational cycle in which pursuing and withdrawing can reinforce each other without reducing either partner to a label.
Mixed approach-and-avoid patterns
Some adults report both strong fears of rejection and strong discomfort with dependence or intimacy. In the common two-dimensional self-report framework, high anxiety plus high avoidance is often summarized as fearful-avoidant attachment. This can look like wanting closeness intensely while also feeling threatened by it, moving toward reassurance and then pulling away, or finding intimacy simultaneously compelling and unsafe.
This summary should not be automatically renamed “disorganized attachment.” The terminology comes from several distinct research traditions. Infant disorganized attachment is classified from behavior in procedures such as the Strange Situation; the Adult Attachment Interview can yield an unresolved/disorganized classification based on specific features of discourse around loss or trauma; and newer adult self-report measures attempt to assess disorganization in other ways. A systematic review found multiple adult disorganization measures and concluded that the measurement literature remains methodologically heterogeneous. For the measurement and terminology distinction, see Disorganized Attachment in Adults.
Pollard, Bucci, and Berry (2023) review adult disorganized-attachment measures and the limits of the current evidence.
Attachment Issues Are Not the Same as an Attachment Disorder
This is one of the most important terminology corrections. Insecure adult attachment patterns are not “attachment disorders.” Reactive Attachment Disorder (RAD) and Disinhibited Social Engagement Disorder (DSED) are formal clinical constructs associated with severe early caregiving deprivation and are primarily diagnoses of childhood. For the dedicated RAD/DSED diagnostic clarification, see Attachment Disorder in Adults: Can Adults Have Reactive Attachment Disorder?.
The American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry describes RAD and DSED as psychiatric conditions of young children and emphasizes comprehensive psychiatric assessment. RAD involves markedly withdrawn attachment behavior toward caregivers; DSED involves developmentally inappropriate overfamiliarity with unfamiliar adults. American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry.
Calling an adult “RAD,” saying that ordinary anxious or avoidant relationship patterns are an attachment disorder, or using RAD/DSED as catch-all explanations for adult intimacy problems collapses different clinical and research concepts. An adult can have meaningful attachment-related difficulties without having a childhood attachment-disorder diagnosis. Conversely, a history of severe early deprivation or a childhood attachment disorder requires a developmental and clinical assessment that cannot be reconstructed from an adult attachment-style quiz.
Attachment Issues Are Not a Diagnosis
The phrase “attachment issues” functions best as a starting description, not a diagnostic conclusion. It can identify the area of concern—security and closeness in relationships—while leaving open the questions that matter clinically: What exactly is happening? How persistent is it? Does it occur across relationships or mainly in one relationship? What triggers it? How much impairment does it create? Are obsessions, compulsions, trauma symptoms, mood symptoms, substance use, coercion, or current relational instability also present?
This is also why an insecure attachment score should not be treated as a mental-health diagnosis. Self-report attachment measures estimate patterns such as anxiety and avoidance. The Adult Attachment Interview assesses a different level of the construct through discourse about attachment experiences. These methods have different purposes, scoring systems, and evidence bases; neither turns “attachment issues” into a diagnostic category.
A review of 29 adult attachment instruments illustrates how varied adult attachment assessment actually is and why measure choice must match the research or clinical question. Ravitz et al. (2010).
Adult Attachment Is Usually Better Understood as Anxiety × Avoidance
The internet often presents attachment as a four-box personality system: take a quiz, discover your type, and explain every relationship through it. Research supports a more flexible picture. Anxiety and avoidance are continuous dimensions. People can be low, moderate, or high on each dimension, and small differences near a category boundary do not transform one person into a fundamentally different type. For a full review of the evidence boundaries and common misuses, see Is Attachment Theory Evidence-Based?.
Fraley and colleagues found dimensional models to fit adult attachment differences better than categorical models in both general and relationship-specific attachment. Fraley et al. (2015).
This dimensional view also helps explain why two people who both identify with an “anxious attachment style” may behave differently. One may show intense reassurance seeking but little avoidance. Another may have elevated anxiety together with substantial avoidance, producing more approach-and-retreat behavior. A category can summarize the pattern; the underlying dimensions preserve more information.
Attachment Can Be Relationship-Specific
Someone can feel relatively secure with one person and much less secure with another. That does not automatically mean one of the relationships is “fake” or that a person has misidentified their true attachment style. Adult attachment representations can be organized at different levels, including broader orientations and relationship-specific patterns.
The Experiences in Close Relationships—Relationship Structures questionnaire was developed specifically to assess attachment anxiety and avoidance across different relationship contexts. In a large validation program, relationship-specific scores predicted some interpersonal outcomes better than broad attachment scores. Fraley et al. (2011).
This matters for the phrase “attachment issues.” If distress occurs only with one partner, the explanation may involve the interaction between a person’s attachment tendencies and the actual relationship: inconsistency, conflict, trust violations, incompatibility, poor communication, ambiguous commitment, or a partner’s own behavior can all shape felt security. A global label can hide this context.
Attachment Issues in Relationships
In romantic relationships, attachment insecurity can influence how people interpret distance, seek support, respond to vulnerability, and manage conflict. Meta-analytic evidence links both attachment anxiety and attachment avoidance with poorer romantic relationship quality, although the pattern differs across outcomes. For the broader application hub, see Attachment Styles in Relationships.
A meta-analysis of 73 studies with 118 independent samples and 21,602 participants found that both anxiety and avoidance were associated with poorer cognitive, emotional, and behavioral relationship outcomes. Avoidance showed stronger negative associations with general satisfaction, connectedness, and support, whereas anxiety showed a stronger positive association with conflict. Li and Chan (2012).
These are average associations, not deterministic rules. An attachment dimension does not tell you whether a specific relationship is healthy, whether a partner is compatible, or who is responsible for a conflict. It also does not justify interpreting every disagreement as an attachment trigger.
When people use “attachment issues” to describe emotional distance, it is especially important not to diagnose a partner from the outside. The phrase emotionally unavailable spouse is another popular label that can describe very different processes. Observable behavior, context, reciprocity, safety, and willingness to repair are more informative than assigning an attachment identity from a few signs.
Attachment Anxiety Is Not the Same as Relationship OCD
Attachment anxiety and relationship-centered obsessive-compulsive symptoms can overlap at the level of everyday experience. Both may involve doubts, distress about the relationship, sensitivity to signs of rejection, and repeated attempts to feel certain or reassured. Their mechanisms are not interchangeable. The dedicated differential is Attachment Anxiety vs Relationship OCD.
Relationship OCD, or ROCD, refers to obsessive-compulsive symptoms focused on relationships. The central clinical pattern involves intrusive, unwanted doubts or preoccupations and compulsive responses intended to reduce distress or obtain certainty—for example repeated checking of feelings, comparison, reassurance seeking, or mental review. Attachment anxiety concerns insecurity about availability, rejection, and abandonment; it does not require obsessions and compulsions.
Clinical research on ROCD describes substantial interference associated with relationship-centered obsessive-compulsive symptoms. Doron et al. (2016). For a fuller differential explanation, see Relationship OCD: What Is ROCD?.
A person can also have both elevated attachment anxiety and OCD. The presence of one construct does not rule out the other. When repetitive relationship doubts become time-consuming, feel difficult to control, or drive compulsive checking and reassurance rituals, assessment for OCD is more useful than assuming that everything is an attachment-style problem.
Attachment Issues Are Not Proof of Trauma
“Attachment trauma” and “attachment wounds” are common phrases in therapy culture and online mental-health language. They can be meaningful ways to describe painful relational histories, but the phrases do not by themselves establish a formal diagnosis, a specific event, or a proven cause of present-day behavior.
Early caregiving experiences matter in attachment theory, and severe neglect or maltreatment can have major developmental consequences. Yet adult attachment cannot be read backward like a forensic record. An adult’s anxiety or avoidance score does not reveal exactly what happened in childhood, identify a particular caregiver as the cause, or prove that trauma occurred.
Later relationships and life events can also be associated with shifts in adult attachment. In a longitudinal study of more than 4,000 people, many life events were followed by immediate attachment changes; some of those changes endured, while many people moved back toward their prior trajectory. Individual responses varied substantially.
Fraley, Gillath, and Deboeck (2021) provide longitudinal evidence for both continuity and change in adult attachment around life events.
Attachment Patterns Are Relatively Stable—and Also Capable of Change
Attachment is neither a momentary mood nor an immutable identity. Longitudinal research supports a stable component underlying adult attachment while also documenting short-term fluctuations and longer-term change.
In two intensive longitudinal studies, daily and weekly attachment assessments were best described by a model with a relatively stable underlying prototype plus temporary variation. Fraley et al. (2011).
This is why a difficult month in one relationship should not automatically become a lifelong label, and why a long-standing pattern should not be dismissed as merely a bad week. A useful formulation asks how much of the pattern is broad and recurrent, how much is specific to one relationship, and how much changes with stress, safety, responsiveness, or major life events.
The practical implication is straightforward: attachment-related patterns can be worked with. Change is usually better understood as a gradual shift in expectations, emotional regulation, behavior, relationship experience, and felt security rather than as “deleting” an attachment style or completing a fixed 30-day reset.
How Attachment Issues Relate to Mental Health
Adult attachment insecurity is associated with mental-health outcomes at the population level, but association is not diagnosis. A person with high attachment anxiety does not thereby have an anxiety disorder, and a person with high avoidance does not thereby have depression, a personality disorder, or another psychiatric condition.
A large meta-analysis of 224 studies, 245 samples, and 79,722 participants found that higher attachment anxiety and avoidance were associated with more negative mental-health indicators and lower positive mental health. Attachment anxiety showed the larger overall associations in that meta-analysis. Zhang et al. (2022).
These findings establish robust correlations across studies. They do not mean that insecure attachment is a mental illness, that attachment insecurity causes every associated symptom, or that improving an attachment score alone treats a psychiatric disorder. If someone meets criteria for OCD, PTSD, depression, an anxiety disorder, or another condition, that condition deserves assessment and treatment on its own terms.
When “Attachment Issues” May Be the Wrong Explanation
An attachment lens can be useful, but it becomes misleading when it absorbs every relationship problem. Several situations require a wider differential view.
The relationship itself is unstable or unsafe
Fear, vigilance, or reluctance to depend on a partner may be understandable responses to current behavior. If a partner repeatedly lies, disappears, threatens, humiliates, coerces, or violates boundaries, interpreting the resulting insecurity only as an internal attachment problem can obscure the relational reality. Psychological formulation should not turn adaptive caution into a character flaw.
Obsessions and compulsions dominate the picture
When the central problem is intrusive relationship doubt followed by checking, comparison, reassurance rituals, avoidance, or mental review, Relationship OCD becomes an important differential concept. Attachment anxiety can coexist with OCD, but the treatment logic for compulsions is not the same as generic advice about becoming “more secure.”
Trauma symptoms are prominent
Intrusive memories, nightmares, trauma-related avoidance, hyperarousal, dissociation, and persistent trauma-linked beliefs require assessment as trauma symptoms rather than being relabeled as attachment issues. A relational history may be relevant without attachment language replacing a trauma diagnosis.
The problem is primarily mood, generalized anxiety, or another mental-health condition
Withdrawal, reassurance seeking, irritability, low interest in intimacy, and difficulty concentrating can occur in many psychological states. The behavior alone does not identify attachment as the primary mechanism. Timing, symptom clusters, severity, duration, and functional impairment matter.
The concern is ordinary incompatibility or communication difficulty
Two people can want different levels of contact, disclosure, independence, sex, commitment, or time together without either person having an attachment pathology. Sometimes the most accurate description is a mismatch in preferences or a recurring communication cycle. Our pages on perceived partner responsiveness and emotional intimacy in marriage examine relationship processes that can matter independently of attachment labels.
How Adult Attachment Is Actually Assessed
There is no single clinical test that answers, “Do I have attachment issues?” Adult attachment assessment depends on what is being measured.
Self-report attachment measures
Questionnaires in the adult romantic-attachment tradition commonly estimate anxiety and avoidance. They can assess general orientations or attachment in a specific relationship. Validated measures can be useful in research and sometimes in clinical formulation, but a score is not a psychiatric diagnosis and should not be read as a complete explanation of a person.
Adult Attachment Interview
The Adult Attachment Interview belongs to a different assessment tradition. It evaluates the organization of a person’s discourse about attachment experiences and uses classifications that are not interchangeable with the four popular self-report style labels. A person cannot reliably translate an internet quiz result into an AAI classification.
Adult disorganization measures
Researchers have developed interviews and self-report approaches to adult disorganization, but this area remains less standardized than the broad anxiety/avoidance model. That is one reason “fearful-avoidant” and “disorganized” should not be casually treated as exact synonyms.
For measurement context, see Ravitz et al. (2010) on adult attachment instruments and Pollard et al. (2023) on adult disorganized-attachment measures.
What a More Precise Formulation Sounds Like
Replacing the umbrella phrase with observable patterns makes the problem easier to understand and easier to work on. Instead of “I have attachment issues,” a person might say:
• “When communication is uncertain, I quickly assume I am being rejected and seek reassurance repeatedly.”
• “I want closeness, but when a relationship becomes emotionally intense I withdraw and stop sharing what I feel.”
• “I feel secure with close friends but become highly anxious in romantic relationships.”
• “I repeatedly check whether I still love my partner and ask other people for certainty about the relationship.”
• “After betrayal in a previous relationship, I become vigilant for signs that a new partner is hiding something.”
• “During conflict I pursue a resolution immediately, while my partner shuts down; the cycle escalates both of us.”
Each sentence points toward a different assessment question. Some may involve attachment anxiety or avoidance. Some may involve relationship-specific learning, OCD, trauma, trust after betrayal, or a reciprocal couple pattern. Precision prevents a popular label from becoming a substitute for explanation.
What Can Help With Attachment-Related Difficulties?
Because “attachment issues” is not one disorder, there is no single protocol for treating it. The useful intervention depends on the actual mechanism and the level of impairment.
Track the pattern before trying to change the label
Notice the sequence: trigger, interpretation, emotion, urge, behavior, partner response, and aftermath. This makes it easier to distinguish fear of abandonment from compulsive certainty seeking, discomfort with dependence from ordinary need for space, and a broad attachment pattern from one relationship’s specific dynamics.
Work on communication and responsiveness where the relationship is basically safe
Feeling understood, valued, and cared for is a well-studied relationship process. When both people are willing, clearer requests, responsive listening, repair after conflict, and reliable follow-through can improve the interpersonal environment in which attachment concerns are activated. See Perceived Partner Responsiveness for the evidence behind this process.
Use psychotherapy when the pattern is persistent or impairing
Psychotherapy can address interpersonal expectations, emotion regulation, avoidance, reassurance cycles, trauma-related learning, and relationship behavior, depending on the case. Evidence does not support promising that one branded technique will “heal your attachment style” on a fixed schedule.
A meta-analysis of 36 psychotherapy studies found that pretreatment attachment security was associated with treatment outcome and that increases in security during therapy coincided with better outcomes, while also emphasizing limitations in the evidence. Levy et al. (2018).
Treat a diagnosable condition as the condition it is
If assessment indicates OCD, PTSD, depression, an anxiety disorder, or another clinical condition, treatment should target that condition rather than treating “attachment issues” as a replacement diagnosis. Attachment can remain part of the formulation without becoming the only explanation.
When to Consider Professional Assessment
Professional assessment is especially useful when relationship fears or avoidance are persistent, cause substantial distress, repeatedly damage important relationships, interfere with daily functioning, or are accompanied by compulsions, trauma symptoms, severe mood symptoms, substance misuse, dissociation, or major functional decline.
It is also useful when the same label seems to explain everything. A clinician can help separate trait-like attachment tendencies from relationship-specific reactions, psychiatric symptoms, current interpersonal conditions, and the effects of life events. The goal is not to assign a more dramatic label; it is to identify the process that most accurately explains the problem.
Frequently Asked Questions
What are attachment issues in adults?
Attachment issues in adults is an informal phrase for recurring difficulties with security, closeness, trust, dependence, reassurance, separation, or vulnerability in close relationships. In research, these experiences are more precisely described using constructs such as attachment anxiety, attachment avoidance, relationship-specific attachment, and other well-defined relational or clinical mechanisms.
What are the signs of attachment issues in adults?
Common experiences may include strong fear of rejection, repeated reassurance seeking, distress when a partner is unavailable, discomfort relying on others, emotional withdrawal when intimacy increases, difficulty trusting closeness, or a push-pull pattern combining anxiety and avoidance. None of these signs is diagnostic by itself.
Are attachment issues a mental-health diagnosis?
No. “Attachment issues” is not a standard psychiatric diagnosis. Adult attachment anxiety and avoidance are research constructs. RAD and DSED are formal attachment disorders associated with severe early deprivation and are primarily childhood diagnoses.
Is insecure attachment a mental illness?
No. Insecure attachment describes patterns or dimensions in close relationships, not a mental disorder. Insecurity is statistically associated with mental-health outcomes, but an association does not convert the attachment construct into a diagnosis.
Can you have attachment issues without childhood trauma?
Yes. Adult attachment patterns cannot be used to infer that childhood trauma occurred. Early caregiving can matter, but relationship-specific experiences, later life events, current relationships, and individual differences also shape adult attachment. A trauma history should be established from the person’s actual history and symptoms, not inferred from an attachment label.
Are attachment issues the same as attachment disorder?
No. “Attachment issues” is a broad informal phrase. Reactive Attachment Disorder and Disinhibited Social Engagement Disorder are specific clinical diagnoses centered on early development and severe caregiving deprivation. Ordinary adult anxious or avoidant patterns should not be relabeled RAD or DSED.
Can attachment style change?
Yes, adult attachment shows both continuity and change. Longitudinal research supports a relatively stable component, temporary fluctuations, relationship-specific variation, and enduring changes for some people after life events. Change is therefore possible without implying that every short-term fluctuation represents a new “type.”
How do I know whether it is attachment anxiety or relationship OCD?
Attachment anxiety centers on insecurity about closeness, availability, rejection, and abandonment. ROCD involves obsessive-compulsive processes: intrusive relationship doubts or preoccupations and compulsive attempts to reduce uncertainty, such as checking, comparing, repeated reassurance seeking, or mental review. They can coexist. If compulsions and intrusive doubts dominate, see our guide to Relationship OCD and consider professional assessment.
Do attachment issues always mean a relationship will fail?
No. Attachment dimensions are probabilistic research variables, not relationship verdicts. Relationship outcomes depend on many factors, including each partner’s behavior, communication, stress, responsiveness, compatibility, safety, and capacity for repair. Meta-analytic associations describe averages across samples, not destiny for an individual couple.
The Bottom Line
“Attachment issues in adults” is useful as everyday language for a real area of difficulty, but it becomes scientifically useful only after the phrase is unpacked. Adult attachment research most consistently describes insecurity through attachment anxiety and attachment avoidance, with meaningful relationship-specific variation. Secure, anxious/preoccupied, dismissive-avoidant, and fearful-avoidant labels can summarize those dimensions, but they are not diagnoses or fixed personality types.
The phrase also does not diagnose Reactive Attachment Disorder, Disinhibited Social Engagement Disorder, trauma, OCD, or any other mental disorder. It does not prove a childhood cause. It does not tell you whether the main problem lies in a broad attachment tendency, one particular relationship, a compulsive cycle, a trauma response, or the current behavior of another person.
The most useful next question is therefore not “Which attachment issue do I have?” It is: “What pattern is actually happening, where does it occur, what triggers it, what maintains it, and what better-defined construct explains it?” That shift turns a vague label into a workable psychological formulation.
Related Articles
References
American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. (2017). Attachment Disorders. https://www.aacap.org/AACAP/Families_and_Youth/Facts_for_Families/FFF-Guide/Attachment-Disorders-085.aspx
Doron, G., Derby, D., Szepsenwol, O., Nahaloni, E., & Moulding, R. (2016). Relationship Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder: Interference, Symptoms, and Maladaptive Beliefs. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 7, 58. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2016.00058
Fraley, R. C., Gillath, O., & Deboeck, P. R. (2021). Do life events lead to enduring changes in adult attachment styles? A naturalistic longitudinal investigation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 120(6), 1567–1606. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000326
Fraley, R. C., Heffernan, M. E., Vicary, A. M., & Brumbaugh, C. C. (2011). The Experiences in Close Relationships—Relationship Structures questionnaire: A method for assessing attachment orientations across relationships. Psychological Assessment, 23(3), 615–625. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022898
Fraley, R. C., Hudson, N. W., Heffernan, M. E., & Segal, N. (2015). Are adult attachment styles categorical or dimensional? A taxometric analysis of general and relationship-specific attachment orientations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 109(2), 354–368. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000027
Fraley, R. C., Vicary, A. M., Brumbaugh, C. C., & Roisman, G. I. (2011). Patterns of stability in adult attachment: An empirical test of two models of continuity and change. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101(5), 974–992. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024150
Levy, K. N., Kivity, Y., Johnson, B. N., & Gooch, C. V. (2018). Adult attachment as a predictor and moderator of psychotherapy outcome: A meta-analysis. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 74(11), 1996–2013. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.22685
Li, T., & Chan, D. K.-S. (2012). How anxious and avoidant attachment affect romantic relationship quality differently: A meta-analytic review. European Journal of Social Psychology, 42(4), 406–419. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.1842
Pollard, C., Bucci, S., & Berry, K. (2023). A systematic review of measures of adult disorganized attachment. British Journal of Clinical Psychology, 62(2), 329–355. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjc.12411
Ravitz, P., Maunder, R., Hunter, J., Sthankiya, B., & Lancee, W. (2010). Adult attachment measures: A 25-year review. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 69(4), 419–432. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychores.2009.08.006
Simpson, J. A., & Rholes, W. S. (2017). Adult attachment, stress, and romantic relationships. Current Opinion in Psychology, 13, 19–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2016.04.006
Zhang, X., Li, J., Xie, F., Chen, X., Xu, W., & Hudson, N. W. (2022). The relationship between adult attachment and mental health: A meta-analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 123(5), 1089–1137. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000437