1. society
2. crime
3. property crime
4. larceny

International Journal of Psychology and Behavioral Research. Vol., 4(1), 9-14, 2015
Available online at http:// www. ijpbrjournal.com
ISSN 2322-4002 ©2015 Victor Quest Publications
The Relationship between Identity Styles and Romantic Attachment
among college students
1
2
Sara Mollasaeidi , Mozhgan Arefi , Asghar Aghaei Joshoghani
3
1- M.A. General Psychology, Department of psychology, Khorasgan (Isfahan) Branch, Islamic
Azad University, Isfahan, Iran.
2- Ph.D. Assistant. Psychology group, Department of psychology, Khorasgan (Isfahan) Branch,
Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran.
3- Ph.D. Associate. Family Counseling, Department of psychology, Khorasgan (Isfahan)
Branch, Islamic Azad University, Isfahan, Iran.
Corresponding Author Email: sara_molasaeidi@yahoo.com
Abstract
The aim of this study is to determine the relationship between Identity Styles
(informational, normative, diffuse /avoidant) with Romantic Attachment (anxiety,
avoidance). In current study is used correlation-descriptive research method. The
statistical population is 1250 male and female undergraduate section students of
Islamic Azad University, Dehaghan branch in Iran. The sample includes 307(%60
of female and %40 of male) who are chosen by quota sampling method. The
identity styles inventory (ISI) by Berzonsky (1989) and revised experiences in
close relationships questionnaire (ECR-R) by Fraley et al (2000) are used to
examine the research variables. The data are analyzed by T test, analysis of
variance, Pearson correlation coefficient and multiple of regression analysis. The
obtained data's are analyzed by appropriate statistical techniques through an
application of SPSS 18. The results revealed that the best predictors of avoidant
attachment, were informational identity style (p<0/000), and diffuse/avoidant
identity style (p<0/042), and only predictor of anxiety attachment, was
diffuse/avoidant identity style (p<0/000).
Key words: Attachment anxiety, Attachment avoidance, Diffuse/avoidant identity style,
Informational identity style, normative identity style.
Introduction
Identity formation, and achieve a consistent definition of self, are the most important aspects of
psychosocial-social development in adolescence. According to Erikson's theory, identity provides an
objective sense of internal totality and acts as an interpreting context which is answered the questions
about the "purpose" and "meaning" of life (Erikson, 1968; as quoted by Hejazi and Fartash, 2007).
According to Erikson's theory, when the identity formation goes well, intimacy will form. In this case,
person obtains the ability to create close and lasting relations which are based on release attachment,
deep commitment, trust, affection and support (Erikson, 1968; quoting the ShoariNezhad, 2002).
During past four decades, researches on adolescent identity were conceptualized based on
Marcia's identity paradigm. But recently, some researchers have focused on processes of identity
formation, and cognitive- social processing orientation or styles that adolescents apply to different
identity status. Identity processing style is how people process own information, how they discuss and
make decision about their information and identity subjects (ZareiNezhad, 2011).
Berzonsky raises three identity processing styles: informational identity style is tending to
consider multiple solutions to a problem to find a replacement before committing to one of them. A
normative identity style is tending to cohort with family and community's expectations and a high
degree of commitment to the important people and uses their opinion. Diffuse /avoidant identity style is
tending to procrastination and delaying personal decisions and avoiding the identity issues (Berzonsky
et al, 2011).
Intl. J. Phys. Beh. Res. Vol., 4(1), 9-14, 2015
According to Marcia two dimensions of identity are important: exploration and commitment.
Exploration is discovered career options and personal values. The commitment is decision about
identity path, and personal enterprise in order to achieve desired identity (Santrock, 2010). People,
who rely on informational and normative identity style, have acquired the stronger identity commitment
toward people with diffuse/avoidant style. Lack of strong commitments in people with diffuse/avoidant,
puts them in a vulnerable position (Hejazi & Fartash, 2007).
While adolescents are engaged in identity formation processes, many of them also enter into
romantic-type relationships. During the last decade, there has been increasing attention paid to unique
and valuable contribution that adolescents’ romantic relationships make to their development (Collins
et al, 2009; Meier & Allen, 2009; Roisman, et al 2009; Welsh & Shulman, 2008). Just as parent–
adolescent relationships have been theorized to support adolescent identity formation (Beyers &
Goossens, 2008; Meeus & Weid, 2007), adolescents’ romantic relationships offer a context for youth
to try out different identities as they explore various facets form themselves (Furman & Shaffer, 2003).
Within romantic relationships, adolescents experiment through different ways of being and behaving
and discover new things about who they are as individuals separate from their family of origin. In these
romantic relationships, gender differences emergence are interesting. For example, males reported
greater discomfort with communication (Giordano et al, 2006), whereas females report higher levels of
affective intensity, support, and caregiving (Schulman & Scharf, 2000), more time, closeness and
commitment with friends (Johnson, 2004), and higher intimacy (Montgomery, 2005).
Intimacy is defined as the capacity to receive care from and give it to another person, while
simultaneously maintaining one’s autonomy (Cassidy, 2001; Montgomery, 2005), this capacity is
clearly linked to attachment representations (Mayseless & Scharf, 2007). Bowlby (1969/1982)
maintains that these representations emerge in infancy as a caregiver provides “secure base” from
which the infant can explore the broader world. The caregiver’s responsiveness to infant’s signals
provides a basis for development of a specific attachment style. This attachment process later shapes
individual’s beliefs and interactions regarding interpersonal relationships. Hazan and Shaver (1987,
1990) extended Bowlby’s work by studying attachment styles among adults within a context of
romantic relationships, with a partner as the attachment figure. In adulthood, attachment
representations have been conceptualized in terms of two dimensions, anxiety and avoidance
(Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991; Mickelson et al, 1997; Wei et al, 2007).
Feeney asserts that attachment anxiety results a fear of rejection or abandonment and
represents an extent to which an individual worries that affection for a partner will not be returned,
whereas attachment avoidance results from fear of one’s own incompetence within a relational context
and reflects discomfort with interpersonal closeness. As adolescents gain experience in romantic
relationships, their attachment representations are reshaped, ultimately it will affect future
relationships and life decisions in adulthood (Feeney & Van Vleet, 2010; Meier & Allen, 2009).
When a person achieves to identity commitment, he takes decisions in various fields of his life
such as work and marriage and adherence to particular religious or political views and gains specific
strategies to achieve personal goals and determination life path (AghaMohammadian & Hoseini,
2006). Commitment acts as a map that helps person to focus abilities and efforts on the specific
direction and to avoid the dispersion.
Berman et al (2006) review the relationship between identity status and romantic attachment in
a racially diverse sample of university students. The results of the study showed, individuals in the
foreclosed identity status group had significantly lower relationship avoidance scores than the diffused
identity status group, and the foreclosed group had significantly lower relationship anxiety scores than
both the achieved identity and moratorium groups. Identity status and romantic attachment style were
significantly related among the college sample, but not among the high school sample. Some ethnic
differences in attachment style were noted. Developmental implications are discussed.
McNamara Barry et al )2009(, results in their research indicated that identity achievement was
related positively to four romantic relationship qualities, but not to any friendship qualities. Several
achieved adulthood criteria were related positively to romantic relationship qualities; however,
achieved adulthood criteria were related negatively to friendship qualities. It appears that progress on
salient developmental tasks of adulthood carries important implications for emerging adults’ social
relationships, but in ways that are more differentiated than commonly assumed.
Kerpelman et al (2012) showed that identity styles were found to have unique and direct
associations with identity commitment. Attachment anxiety showed only indirect associations and
attachment avoidance had both direct and indirect associations with identity commitment. Tests of
moderation revealed that gender, race and relationship status had no influence on the direct
01
Intl. J. Phys. Beh. Res. Vol., 4(1), 9-14, 2015
associations of identity styles or romantic attachment with identity commitment. Few differences in
association strength among identity styles and romantic attachment emerged for gender or race.
Therefore, according to importance of romantic attachment, this question was raised to
researcher: What do the factors make the romantic attachment? Among the different factors, does
identity formation can provide romantic attachment to students?
Research hypotheses
The first hypothesis: There is relationship between identity styles (informational, normative, and
diffuse/avoidant) with attachment anxiety.
The second hypotheses: There is relationship between identity styles (informational, normative, and
diffuse/avoidant) with attachment avoidance.
Method
According to aim of the present study, that was the relationship between identity styles with
romantic attachment, it was used to descriptive- correlation research method. Statistical Society were
1250 (750 females and 500 males) undergraduate students of all majors in Islamic Azad University,
Dehaghan branch in Iran. The sample included 307(%60 females and %40 males) who were chosen
by quota sampling method.
The Identity Styles Inventory (ISI) by Berzonsky (1989) and Revised Experiences in Close
Relationships (ECR-R) by Fraley et al (2000) were used to examine the research variables:
Identity Styles Inventory (ISI); Berzonsky (1989): To evaluation identity styles and identity
commitment was used this inventory. The questionnaire was made by Berzonsky (1989, 1992) and
then was revised twice by himself. The questionnaire has 33 items that 7 items was in connection with
informational style, 9 items related to diffuse/avoidant identity style and 8 questions was about the
normative identity style. 9 items related to identity commitment. Responses were on a 5-point Likerttype scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Higher scores indicate stronger use
of a given identity style and stronger identity commitment. Ghazanfari (2007) reported inventories’
consistency coefficient 0.67 for informational style, 0.52 for normative style, 0.62 for diffuse/avoidant
style and 0.57 for identity commitment. The alpha coefficient reported for informational, normative and
diffuse/avoidant identity styles, respectively, 0.58, 0.50 and 0.67 by Piri et al (2005).
Revised Experiences in Close Relationships (ECR-R); Fraley et al (2000): This scale was
made by Brennan, Clark, and Shaver in 1998 for measure the attachment dimensions of anxiety and
avoidance using 9 selected items for each dimension. The revised edition of this scale was made by
Fraley et al (2000). This questionnaire that is a self-report instrument has 36 items. Responses were
on a 7-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree); higher scores
indicate greater avoidance and anxiety. When answering the items, respondents were asked to think
about all of the romantic relationships they had had rather than a specific one. If they had never had a
relationship that would be considered romantic, they were asked to answer the questions for how they
expected they would feel if they were in such a relationship. Brennan et al reported reliabilities for the
full anxiety and avoidance scales (18 items per scale, a=.91 for anxiety and a=.94 for avoidance). For
the abbreviated scales, the nine anxiety items had an alpha of 0.86 and the nine avoidance items had
an alpha of 0.89 in the college sample (N = 294). The 18 and nine item scales were correlated 0.97. In
this study, the alpha coefficient was obtained for all of the questionnaire, anxiety and avoidance,
respectively, 0.83, 0.88 and 0.70.
Result
The first hypothesis: There is a relationship between identity styles (informational, normative, and
diffuse/avoidant) with attachment anxiety. Findings related to the first hypothesis are presented in
tables 1 and 2.
Table 1: Correlation coefficients and squared multiple correlation coefficient for predicting attachment
anxiety
2
2
Model
R
R
Adjusted R
SE
00
Intl. J. Phys. Beh. Res. Vol., 4(1), 9-14, 2015
Stage 1
0.235
0.055
0.052
20.929
According to findings of table 1, the diffuse/avoidant identity style only predicts %5.5 of attachment
anxiety.
Table 2
The results of stepwise regression analysis to predict attachment anxiety
Stage1
model
Invariant coefficient
B
45.416
SE
0.369
T
8.459
p-value
0.000
Diffuse/avoidant identity
style
0.863
0.204
4.225
0.000
According to findings of table 2, the predictor of attachment anxiety is diffuse/avoidant identity style
(p<0.000).
The second hypotheses: There is relationship between identity styles (informational, normative, and
diffuse/avoidant) with attachment avoidance.
Table 3: Correlation coefficients and squared multiple correlation coefficient predicting attachment
avoidance
model
Stage 1
R
0.274
R2
0.075
Adjusted R2
0.072
SE
14.021
Stage 2
0.296
0.088
0.082
13.949
According to findings of table 3, with the arrival the diffuse/avoidant identity style increases amount
predicting of attachment avoidance %8.8.
Table 4: The results of stepwise regression analysis to predict the attachment avoidance
model
B
SE
T
p-value
Invariant coefficient
61.206
3.763
16.267
0.000
Informational identity style
-0.687
0.138
-4.982
0.000
Invariant coefficient
53.581
5.283
10.143
0.000
Informational identity style
-0.705
0.137
-5.127
0.000
Diffuse/avoidant identity style
0.279
0.136
2.045
0.042
Stage 1
Stage 2
According to findings of table 4, the best predictors of attachment avoidance are, respectively,
informational identity style (p<0.000), and diffuse/avoidant identity style (p<0.042).
Discussion and Conclusion
The aim of this study was determine the relationship between identity styles (informational,
normative, diffuse /avoidant) with romantic attachment (anxiety, avoidance).
First hypothesis regarding the relationship between identity styles (informational, normative,
and diffuse/avoidant) with attachment anxiety, was confirmed only in the case of diffuse/avoidant
identity style and the second hypothesis regarding the relationship between identity styles
(informational, normative, and diffuse/ avoidant) with attachment avoidance showed, that informational
and diffuse/ avoidant identity styles predict avoidance attachment. This relationship correspond to
findings results of Kerpelman et al (2012); Berman et al (2006) and McNamara et al (2009).
Informational identity style had a negative significant relationship with avoidance attachment.
This means in the current study, students who had informational identity style, used avoidance
approach in their close relationships less than others. People with avoidant attachment, escape from
01
Intl. J. Phys. Beh. Res. Vol., 4(1), 9-14, 2015
close relationships with their partners and expression of their feelings and to depend in relations. And
this explanation is inconsistent with the informational identity style that people have good interpersonal
relationships.
According to results of this study, the second predictor of avoidant attachment and only
predictor of anxiety attachment is diffuse/avoidant identity style. This correlations were positive
correlation, that shows students who have diffuse/ avoidant identity style, were tended to insecure
attachment (anxiety and avoidance) approach in relation with its partners. Young or adolescent that
avoids to their exploration in a growth area of identity formation, may tries to avoid entring in other
areas (for example attachment) and shows less identity exploration.That means (she/he) may does
not achieve informational identity style. Young who has avoided the identity exploration in the time of
identity formation, and (she/he) is confused in (her/ his) identity, may adopt an avoidant approach to
romantic relationships.
According to results of this study, there was no significant relationship between normative
identity style with attachment avoidance and informational and normative identity styles with
attachment anxiety. Other studies such as Kerpelman et al (2012) and Berman et al (2006), have
pointed out to negative relation between normative and informational identity styles with insecure
attachment) avoidance and anxiety). People with normative identity style conformance of important
persons and reference groups in important decisions and expressing opinions and expectations and
commands and do not search and evaluate information actively. But they defense of their identity
structure without the research and exploration. So these people are influenced by ideas and opinions
of important people in their life namely the people who interact with them closely. Thus, the
attachment of these groups appears to be safe. Because this attachment can stays with person until
the end of lifetime, therefore secure attachment will continue in adult romantic relationships of the
person. However, in this study, contrary to what was expected, it was found significant relationship
between secure romantic attachments with this identity style. Therefore it can be concluded that to
achieve the intimacy in romantic relationships and gain the secure attachment, is require achieving the
identity successfully.
Research suggests
Variables of this study are considered in a longitudinal study from early adolescence to early
adulthood. Also topic of this research is studied at other universities and in other social and cultural
context. Current topic is investigated in other courses.
References
Agha Mohammadian H, Hosseini M. 2006. Maturity and adolescence psychology. 5rd Edition ,
Mashhad. Ferdowsi University of Mashhad.
Bartholomew K, Horowitz LM. 1991. Attachment styles among young adults: A test of four-category
model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 61: 226–243.
Berman S.L, Weems C.F, Rodriguez E.T & Zamora I.J. 2006. The relation between identity status and
romantic attachment style in middle and late adolescence: Journal Adolescence. 29: 737-748 .
Berzonsky MD, Dunkel CS, Soenens B, Papini DR. 2011. Identity processing style, parental
dimensions, and parental identification. In Paper presentation at the Society for Research on
Identity Formation Annual Conference, Daytona, Florida.
Beyers W, Goossens L. 2008. Dynamics of perceived parenting and identity formation in late
adolescence. Journal of Adolescence, 31: 165–184.
Bowlby J. 1969/1982. Attachment and loss, Vol. 1. Attachment. NY: Basic Bowlby, J. (1990). A secure
base: Parent–child attachments and healthy human development. NY: Basic.
Cassidy J. 2001. Truth, lies, and intimacy: an attachment perspective. Attachment & Human
Development. 3: 121–155.
Collins WA, Welsh DP, Furman W. 2009. Adolescent romantic relationships. Annual Review of
Psychology. 60: 631–652.
Feeney BC, Van Vleet M. 2010. Growing through attachment: the interplay of attachment and
exploration in adulthood. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships.27: 226–234.
Fraley R C, Waller N J, Brennan K A. 2000. An item response theory analysis of self-report measures
of adult attachment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 78, 350–365.
Furman W, Shaffer L. 2003. The role of romantic relationships in adolescent development. In
Adolescent romantic relations and sexual behavior: Theory, research, and practical implications.
Mahwah NJ US: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, pp: 3–22.
01
Intl. J. Phys. Beh. Res. Vol., 4(1), 9-14, 2015
Ghazanfari A. 2007. Validity and Standardization of Identity Style Inventory (ISI-6G). Journal of
Educational and Psychological Studies. 1, 37-65.
Giordano PC, Manning WD, Longmore MA. 2006. Adolescent romantic relationships: an emerging
portrait of their nature and developmental significance. In AC Crouter, A Booth (Eds).Romance
and Sex in Adolescence and Emerging Adulthood: Risks and Opportunities, pp.: 127–150.
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Hazan C, Shaver P. 1987. Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment process. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology.52 (3): 511–524.
Hazan C, Shaver PR. 1990. Love and work: an attachment-theoretical perspective. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology. 59: 270–280.
Hejazi E, Frtash S. 2007. Investigate the Relationship Between Identity Styles, Identity Commitment
and Quality of Friendship. Journal of Psychology and Educational Sciences. 3: 167-184.
Johnson, H.D. 2004. Gender, grade and relationship differences in emotional closeness with
adolescent friendships, Adolescence. 39: 243–255.
Kerpelman JL, Pittman if, Cadely HS, Tuggle FJ, Harrel- Levy MK, Adler-Baeder FM. 2012. Identity
and intimacy during adolescence: Connections among identity styles, romantic attachment and
identity commitment: Journal of Adolescence.35: 1427-1439.
Mayseless, O. & Scharf, M. 2007. Adolescents’ attachment representations and their capacity for
intimacy in close relationships. Journal of Research on Adolescence. 17: 23–50.
McNamara CM, Madsen SD, Nelson LJ, Carroll JS, Badger S. 2009. Friendship and romantic
relationship qualities in emerging adulthood: Differential associations with identity development
and adulthood criteria, Journal of Adult development.16: 209-22.
Meeus, W. & Weid, M. 2007. Relationship with parents and identity in adolescence: a review of 25
years of research. In: M Watzlawik, A Born (Eds).Capturing identity: Quantitative and
Qualitative Methods, MD, US: University Press of America. pp: 131–147.
Meier A, Allen G. 2009.Romantic relationships from adolescence to young adulthood. Evidence from
the national longitudinal study of adolescent health. Sociological Quarterly. 50: 308–336.
Mickelson KD, Kessler RC, Shaver PR.1997. Adult attachment in a nationally representative sample.
Journal of Personal and Social Psychology. 73: 1092–1106.
Montgomery MJ. 2005. Psychosocial intimacy and identity: from early adolescence to emerging
adulthood. Journal of Adolescent Research. 20(3): 346–374.
Piri L, Shahraray M, Farzad V. 2005. Investigate the relationship between identity styles and life skills.
Journal of Psychological Studies.2, 55-39.
Roisman GI, Booth-LaForce C, Cauffman E, Spieker S. 2009.The developmental significance of
adolescent romantic relationships. Parent and peer predictors of quality and engagement at age
15. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 38: 1294–1303.
Santrock, .2010. Santrock Psychology. Translation by Firoozbakht, Volume I, 3rd edition. Tehran:
Rasa.
Schulman S, Scharf M. 2000. Adolescent romantic behaviors and perceptions: age- and genderrelated differences, and links with family and peer relationships. Journal of Research on
Adolescence.10: 99–118.
Shoari Nezhad .2002. Developmental psychology . 11rd edition ,Tehran, Publishing Information.
Wei M, Russell DW, Mallinckrodt B,Vogel DL. 2007. The experiences in close relationship scale
(ECR)-short form: reliability, validity, and factor structure. Journal of Personality Assessment.
88: 187–204.
Welsh DP, Shulman S. 2008. Directly observed interaction within adolescent romantic relationships:
what have we learned? Journal of Adolescence, 31: 877–891.
Zarei Nezhad E. 2011. Comparison of Identity Status and Life Style in Criminal and Normal Girls 16 to
24 Years Old in Isfahan. Master's thesis, Education College, Khorasghan (Isfahan) Branch.
01