Attachment relationships and psychological outcomes: a comparison of Singaporean and Australian young adults
Creators: name: Lin, Hong-Hui
Publisher: name: The Australian National University
Year: 2015
Subjects: Attachment relationships
adult attachment
attachment network
attachment transfer
cross cultural
cultural orientation
Asian
Singaporean
individualism
collectivism
culture fit
perceived norm
personal endorsement
psychological outcomes

description: The impact close relationships have on development, functioning, and wellbeing makes its research important in enriching understanding about the social conditions that support better socio-emotional functioning. While the literature has seen voluminous research on close relationships, cross-cultural research on the topic has received relatively less attention. This dissertation addresses this literature gap by studying close relationships across two cultures, using attachment theory as the theoretical framework. A review of available adult attachment studies between Western and East Asian populations show that: 1) East Asians typically score higher culture level means in attachment insecurity (i.e., attachment anxiety and avoidance) on survey measures, and 2) attachment insecurity appears to more strongly predict worse psychological functioning among East Asians, than Westerners. These differences have been largely attributed to East-West differences in individualism and collectivism levels or related reasons, which are often vaguely defined and not systematically evaluated in existing studies. Current cross-cultural studies also almost overwhelmingly examine individual differences but not attachment normative processes. These findings informed two cross-cultural, cross-sectional studies that sampled college students from Western (Australian) and Eastern/Asian (Singaporean) backgrounds to examine if attachment differences are associated with individualism and collectivism at the individual level. The first study assessed participants’ (Australian n = 143; Singaporean n = 146) personal endorsement of individualism and collectivism, their associations with attachment orientation, and their roles in moderating the relation between attachment and psychological outcomes (i.e., attachment-psychological outcomes link). It also compared the attachment networks and transfer between Singaporeans and Australians. The second study (Australian n = 206; vii Singaporean n = 322) used two complementary approaches to assess culture to tease apart the separate associations of personal endorsement and perceived norms of individualism and collectivism with attachment, and assessed the moderating role of person-culture fit in the attachment-psychological outcomes link. Results showed that, across two studies using different attachment scales, the two populations did not score reliably differently in their culture level means of individualism and collectivism or attachment constructs. The two studies corroborated results showing that individual differences in personal endorsement of individualism and collectivism (also perceived norm of collectivism) were associated with individual differences in avoidance, in directions consistent with their conceptual definitions. However, personal endorsement and perceived norm of individualism and collectivism showed non-significant associations with attachment anxiety. At the individual level, there was qualified support that personal endorsement of individualism and collectivism and person-culture fit moderated the attachment-psychological outcomes association. Comparisons of attachment network and transfer showed that Singaporean and Australian late adolescents/young adults showed typical sequential attachment transfer. Romantic partners appeared to play a central role as attachment figures among individuals in a romantic relationship. Entering a romantic relationship seemed to accentuate differences in young adults’ preferences towards different relationship targets as attachment figures between cultures. Overall, results highlighted more similarities than differences in attachment patterns between the cultures examined. It is argued that cultural influences on attachment is better understood through directly examining associations between them rather than comparisons of culture level means. Implications of results, limitations of studies, and future directions for research are discussed.