This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (21) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Hardy, G. E. Articles by Barkham, M. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

The Relationship Between Interpersonal Attachment Styles and Work Difficulties

MRC/ESRC Social and Applied Psychology Unit, Department of Psychology, University of Sheffield, Sheffield S10 2TN.

Michael Barkham

MRC/ESRC Social & Applied Psychology Unit, University of Sheffield, Sheffield SlO 2TN.

Hazan and Shaver (1990) have argued that attachment theory can be used to predict relationships between adult attachment types (love) and aspects of work behavior. They found that anxious/ambivalent attachments were associated with poorer work performance. Avoidantly attached individuals tended to be overinvolved with work which resulted in effective work performance but disrupted home life. The present study aimed to develop scales of insecure attachment problems for use with a clinical population and to further replicate Hazan and Shaver's findings. In this context the study also looked at the effects of psychological interventions on attachment difficulties. Using data from 219 depressed clients receiving psychological treatment for stress at work, differences in orientation to work were associated with the two insecure attachment groups as predicted. The anxious/ambivalent scale correlated significantly with reported anxiety about work performance and relationships at work. In contrast, the avoidant scale correlated with concern over hours of work and difficulties in relationships at home and with social life. The study also found that relationship problems associated with insecure attachments were significantly helped by psychological treatments.

Key Words: attachment theory • work orientation • psychological treatments • stress at work

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				P. M. Raskin Women, Work, and Family: Three Studies of Roles and Identity Among Working Mothers American Behavioral Scientist, June 1, 2006; 49(10): 1354 - 1381. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. Conway, K. Audin, M. Barkham, J. Mellor-Clark, and S. Russell Practice-Based Evidence for a Brief Time-Intensive Multi-Modal Therapy Guided by Group-Analytic Principles and Method Group Analysis, September 1, 2003; 36(3): 413 - 435. [Abstract] [PDF]

				T. T. Manning Leadership Across Cultures: Attachment Style Influences Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, January 1, 2003; 9(3): 20 - 30. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. A. Johnston Delegation and Organizational Structure in Small Businesses: Influences of Manager's Attachment Patterns Group Organization Management, March 1, 2000; 25(1): 4 - 21. [Abstract] [PDF]

				T. Cole and L. Leets Attachment Styles and Intimate Television Viewing: Insecurely Forming Relationships in a Parasocial Way Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, August 1, 1999; 16(4): 495 - 511. [Abstract] [PDF]

				P. M. Raskin, P. Kummel, and T. Bannister The Relationship Between Coping Styles, Attachment, and Career Salience in Partnered Working Women With Children Journal of Career Assessment, September 1, 1998; 6(4): 403 - 416. [Abstract]

				F. G. Lopez Student-Professor Relationship Styles, Childhood Attachment Bonds and Current Academic Orientations Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, April 1, 1997; 14(2): 271 - 282. [Abstract]

				D. L. Blustein, M. S. Prezioso, and D. P. Schultheiss Attachment Theory and Career Development: Current Status and Future Directions The Counseling Psychologist, July 1, 1995; 23(3): 416 - 432. [Abstract]