Attachment Styles and Bids For Emotional Connection in Romatic Relationships

Coflin, K., & Powell, D. N. (2024). Comparison of emerging adults’ bid responses based on their gender and attachment. Couple and Family Psychology: Research and Practice, 13(3), 224–236. https://doi.org/10.1037/cfp0000236

Rationale

Previous research has demonstrated that how partners respond to each other’s bids for emotional connection contributes to romantic relationship quality and longevity (Gottman et al., 1998).

Three types of bid responses have been identified: turning toward, turning away, and turning against (Gottman & DeClaire, 2001).

1. Turning toward: Responding positively and engaging with the partner’s bid.
2. Turning away: Ignoring or dismissing the bid, often by changing the subject.
3. Turning against: Responding negatively or hostilely to the bid.

These responses can significantly impact relationship quality and longevity. Turning toward is associated with relationship satisfaction, while turning away and turning against are linked to relationship dissatisfaction and potential dissolution.

While turning toward responses are associated with relationship satisfaction, turning away and turning against responses are linked to relationship dissatisfaction and dissolution (Gottman et al., 1998).

However, individual differences in bid responses have not been extensively explored, particularly among emerging adults (ages 18-25) in a developmental period characterized by romantic exploration and instability (Arnett, 2007).

Additionally, the potential impact of attachment styles on bid responses has been theorized (Smith, 2007) but not empirically examined. Given that emerging adulthood is a critical time for developing romantic relationship skills, understanding factors that influence bid responses could inform relationship education programs and interventions.

This study aimed to address these gaps by examining how gender and attachment styles relate to emerging adults’ likelihood of using different bid responses in hypothetical romantic interactions.

The researchers hypothesized that turning toward responses would be most common overall, that women would use more turning toward responses than men, and that securely attached individuals would use more turning toward responses compared to those with insecure attachments.

Method

The study employed a mixed-methods approach, consisting of a pilot study to refine vignettes and response options, followed by a main study using quantitative measures to assess bid responses and attachment styles.

Procedure

Participants completed an online survey containing:

1. Demographic questions
2. 11 vignettes depicting hypothetical romantic interactions
3. For each vignette, participants rated their likelihood of using turning toward, turning away, and turning against responses on a 7-point Likert scale
4. The Relationship Structures Questionnaire to assess attachment styles for romantic partners, friends, and family members

Sample

Main study participants (N = 172) were emerging adults aged 18-25 (M = 22.04, SD = 2.40) recruited through Prolific. The sample was 43.6% women, 55.2% men, and 1.2% other genders. Racial/ethnic composition was 59.9% White/Caucasian, 14% Asian, 11% Black/African American, 6.4% Hispanic/Latino, 5.8% biracial, and 4% not disclosed.

Sexual orientation was 64% heterosexual, 25% bisexual, 9.3% gay/lesbian, and 1.7% asexual. Relationship statuses included 43.6% single, 5.8% talking, 6.4% dating casually, 41.9% dating seriously, and 2.3% engaged.

Measures

• Vignettes: 11 scenarios depicting hypothetical romantic interactions
• Bid Response Ratings: 7-point Likert scale (1 = not at all likely to 7 = extremely likely) for turning toward, turning away, and turning against responses to each vignette
• Relationship Structures Questionnaire: 9-item measure assessing attachment anxiety and avoidance for romantic partners, friends, and family members

Statistical measures

• Descriptive statistics
• Paired-samples t-tests
• Repeated measures ANOVAs
• Follow-up ANOVAs with Bonferroni post hoc analyses

Results

Hypothesis 1: Overall, participants will be significantly more likely to endorse turning toward responses than turning away or turning against responses.

Results: Supported. Participants were significantly more likely to endorse turning toward responses (M = 5.26, SD = .67) than turning away (M = 3.13, SD = .82) or turning against responses (M = 2.01, SD = .71).

---

Hypothesis 2: Female participants will be more likely to endorse turning toward responses than male participants, who will be more likely to endorse turning against responses more frequently than female participants.

Result: Not supported. There were no significant gender differences in likelihood of using turning toward, turning away, or turning against responses.

---

Hypothesis 3: Participants with a secure attachment style will be more likely to endorse turning toward bidding responses than those with other attachment styles.

Participants with an insecure-avoidance attachment style will be more likely to endorse turning away bidding responses than those with other attachment styles.

Result: Partially supported. There was a significant interaction between romantic partner attachment style and use of turning away responses. However, post-hoc comparisons did not reach significance, likely due to the small number of participants with insecure attachments.

Insight

The study’s findings support previous research showing that individuals generally prefer and intend to use turning toward responses in romantic interactions.

This suggests that emerging adults recognize the value of responding positively to their partner’s bids for connection, which is associated with relationship satisfaction and stability.

Contrary to expectations and some previous literature, no gender differences were found in bid response preferences. This aligns with more recent research showing similarities rather than differences in men’s and women’s communication styles in romantic relationships.

It suggests that contemporary emerging adults may be more egalitarian in their approach to romantic interactions than previous generations.

The partial support for attachment style differences in bid responses, specifically for turning away responses, extends previous theoretical work linking attachment to relationship behaviors.

While the results were not conclusive due to sample limitations, they provide initial empirical evidence that an individual’s romantic attachment style may influence their tendency to use turning away responses.

Future research could explore:

1. How bid responses in hypothetical scenarios relate to actual behavior in romantic relationships
2. The development of bid response tendencies over time and across different relationships
3. The effectiveness of interventions targeting bid responses in improving relationship outcomes for emerging adults
4. Strengths:

The study had many methodological strengths including:

• Use of a diverse sample recruited through Prolific, extending beyond college students
• Development and refinement of vignettes through a pilot study
• Examination of attachment across multiple relationship types (romantic, friend, family)
• Preregistration of hypotheses and methods
• Consideration of both gender and attachment as potential factors influencing bid responses

Limitations

• Reliance on self-report measures, which may be influenced by social desirability bias
• Use of hypothetical vignettes rather than observation of real romantic interactions
• Limited variability in attachment styles, with a majority of participants reporting secure attachments
• Cross-sectional design, preventing conclusions about causality or development of bid response tendencies over time
• Potential lack of cultural sensitivity in vignettes for participants from diverse backgrounds

These limitations impact the generalizability of the findings and the ability to draw strong conclusions about the relationship between attachment and bid responses. Future research should address these limitations by using observational methods, recruiting a more diverse sample with greater representation of insecure attachment styles, and employing longitudinal designs.

Implications

The results have significant implications for relationship education programs and clinical interventions targeting emerging adults.

The finding that emerging adults generally intend to use turning toward responses suggests that educational efforts should focus on helping individuals translate these intentions into actual behaviors in romantic interactions.

The lack of gender differences in bid responses implies that relationship education programs do not need to tailor their content differently for men and women regarding communication strategies. Instead, they can focus on universal skills for positive relationship interactions.

The potential influence of romantic attachment on turning away responses highlights the importance of addressing attachment issues in relationship interventions.

Clinicians and educators should consider assessing clients’ attachment styles and tailoring interventions to address specific attachment-related behaviors, particularly for those with insecure attachments who may be more prone to using turning away responses.

Variables that may influence the results and should be considered in future research include:

• Cultural background and relationship norms
• Previous relationship experiences
• Individual personality traits
• Relationship duration and commitment level
• Contextual factors (e.g., stress, external pressures)

References

Primary reference

Coflin, K., & Powell, D. N. (2024). Comparison of emerging adults’ bid responses based on their gender and attachment. Couple and Family Psychology: Research and Practice, 13(3), 224–236. https://doi.org/10.1037/cfp0000236

Other references

Arnett, J. J. (2007). Emerging adulthood: What is it, and what is it good for? Child Development Perspectives, 1(2), 68-73.

Gottman, J. M., Coan, J., Carrere, S., & Swanson, C. (1998). Predicting marital happiness and stability from newlywed interactions. Journal of Marriage and Family, 60(1), 5-22.

Gottman, J. M., & DeClaire, J. (2001). The relationship cure. Three Rivers Press.

Smith, W. B. (2007). Karen Horney and psychotherapy in the 21st century. Clinical Social Work Journal, 35(1), 57-66.

Keep Learning

Socratic questions for a college class to discuss this paper:

1. How might cultural differences impact the way emerging adults respond to bids for connection in romantic relationships?
2. What are some potential explanations for the lack of gender differences in bid responses found in this study? How does this compare to your own observations or experiences?
3. How might the use of hypothetical vignettes limit our understanding of real-world bid responses? What alternative methods could researchers use to study this topic?
4. Given the prevalence of secure attachments in this sample, what strategies could researchers employ to better understand the relationship between insecure attachment styles and bid responses?
5. How might the findings of this study inform the development of relationship education programs for emerging adults? What specific skills or topics should such programs address?
6. In what ways might social media and technology impact the nature of bids and bid responses in contemporary romantic relationships among emerging adults?
7. How might bid response patterns change over the course of a romantic relationship? What factors could influence these changes?