PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY BULLETIN
Granqvist / ATTACHMENT AND RELIGIOSITY IN ADOLESCENCE
Attachment and Religiosity in Adolescence:
Cross-Sectional and Longitudinal Evaluations
Pehr Granqvist
Uppsala University
The study offers the first investigation of cross-sectional and lon-
gitudinal associations between attachment and religiosity with
adolescent participants. Adolescence is a life period linked to
attachment transitions and religious changes. The research was
conducted to help resolve inconsistent results from previous cross-
sectional versus longitudinal studies and studies on attachment
to parents versus peer attachment. Time 1 questionnaire data
was collected from 196 Swedish adolescents (M age = 16 years);
143 participants completed the 15-month follow-up. Results
from the cross-sectional analyses generally supported the social-
ized correspondence and emotional compensation hypotheses,
particularly in relation to attachment to mother. Results from the
longitudinal analyses were more mixed. The discussion inte-
grates the hypotheses with Kirkpatrick’s previous proposal,
argues for a main focus on attachment to parents rather than
peer attachment, and offers suggestions for future attachment
and religion studies.
Attachment theory, as formulated by Bowlby (1969,
1973, 1980) and extended by Ainsworth (Ainsworth,
Blehar, Waters, & Wall, 1978) and others, is an empiri-
cally well-corroborated framework that describes norma-
tive aspects and individual differences of child-parent
relations and their socioemotional correlates in subse-
quent development (see, e.g., Bretherton, 1985, 1987,
1991; Cassidy & Shaver, 1999; Colin, 1996). The theory is
one of the leading relationship-oriented paradigms in
developmental, personality, and social psychology, as
well as in the psychology of religion.
Attachment and Religion: Empirical Complexities
Some believers’ relationships with God bear striking
resemblances to the child’s attachment to caregivers and
appear to meet the most important criteria for defining
attachment relationships, including seeking closeness to
God in prayer and through rituals and using God as a
safe haven during distress and as a secure base for explo-
260
ration of the environment (Kirkpatrick, 1992, 1994,
1995, 1999). Hence, the attachment aspects of religios-
ity, just as the child’s attachment to parents, serve the
ontogenetic function of obtaining/maintaining felt
security (see, e.g., Sroufe & Waters, 1977).
To examine the empirical applicability of attachment
theory to adults’ religiosity, two opposing hypotheses
were derived from attachment theory (Kirkpatrick,
1992; Kirkpatrick & Shaver, 1990). The original corre-
spondence hypothesis was based on Bowlby’s (1969,
1973, 1980) discussion of continuity in inner working
model (IWM) functioning as underlying temporal conti-
nuity in the individual’s relationship orientation. As
applied to religion, security of attachment was hence
proposed to constitute the foundation on which subse-
quent religiosity was built. In contrast, based on
Ainsworth’s (1985) discussion of insecurely attached
persons’ need for surrogate attachment figures, the
compensation hypothesis stated that insecure attach-
ment was the foundation for subsequent religiosity (i.e.,
promoting the use of God as a compensatory attachment
figure).
Retrospective studies of attachment to parents have
found insecure attachment to be linked to significant
religious changes and sudden religious conversions, rep-
resenting attachment main effects in support of the com-
pensation hypothesis (Granqvist, 1998; Granqvist &
Hagekull, 1999, 2001; Kirkpatrick & Shaver, 1990). Com-
Author’s Note: Thanks to Birgitta Brandhofer, Niklas Dahlquist, and
Paula Grinde for assistance with the data collections. Special thanks to
anonymous reviewers and to my advisor, Berit Hagekull, for many good
suggestions on previous drafts of this article. The research presented
herein was supported by a Grant (Dnr 1999-0507:01,02) to Professor
Berit Hagekull from the Bank of Sweden Tercentenary Foundation.
Communication regarding this article should be addressed to Pehr
Granqvist, Department of Psychology, Uppsala University, P.O. Box
1225, SE-751 42, Uppsala, Sweden; e-mail: pehr.granqvist@psyk.uu.se.
PSPB, Vol. 28 No. 2, February 2002 260-270
© 2002 by the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc.
 Granqvist / ATTACHMENT AND RELIGIOSITY IN ADOLESCENCE
pensation effects from attachment to parents have been
obtained on other variables as well (e.g., belief in a per-
sonal God, personal relationship with God), but these
effects have been moderated by parental religiousness.
Insecure participants have had higher religiousness at
low levels of parental religiousness (Granqvist, 1998;
Kirkpatrick & Shaver, 1990).
However, secure participants have had higher reli-
giousness at high levels of parental religiousness, thus
supporting the original correspondence hypothesis
(Granqvist, 1998). Another way to describe these inter-
actions is to say that parental and offspring religiousness
is positively linked in secure dyads and independent in
insecure dyads (Granqvist, 1998; Kirkpatrick & Shaver,
1990).
Cross-sectional studies of peer attachment have
shown secure attachment to be linked to higher reli-
giousness than insecure attachment, hence supporting
the correspondence hypothesis (Granqvist & Hagekull,
2000; Hyde, 2000; Kirkpatrick, 1998b; Kirkpatrick &
Shaver, 1992). The effect sizes of these findings have
been small (typically, d < .20), and level of parental (or
some other attachment figure’s) religiousness has not
been considered in the statistical analyses. In contrast,
longitudinal studies of peer attachment have found
ambivalent/preoccupied and fearful-avoidant attach-
ment to predict increased religiosity over time
(Kirkpatrick, 1997, 1998b), thus supporting the compen-
sation hypothesis. In the latter study, however, dismissing/
avoidance was linked to decreased religiosity.
Two Attempts to Clarify the Complexities
The above complexities in results obtained in studies
on attachment to parents versus peer attachment and
studies using cross-sectional versus longitudinal designs
have yielded two different attempts at clarification.
Kirkpatrick (1998b, 1999) suggested that the discrepant
findings from cross-sectional versus longitudinal studies
highlight how the correspondence effects are more
immediate and are due to corresponding mental models
of self/others and God at a specific time (henceforward
labeled “concurrent correspondence”). In contrast, as
the compensation effects are delayed, it was hypothe-
sized that the religiosity of insecure people is more tied
to attachment system dynamics (henceforward referred
to as “longitudinal compensation”).
We have instead argued for the need to reformulate
the original hypotheses (see Granqvist, 1998; Granqvist &
Hagekull, 1999). The revised correspondence hypothe-
sis states that the religiosity of individuals in secure
dyads, via social learning, stems from the socialization of
religious standards held by the primary attachment fig-
ures in childhood (“socialized correspondence”). The
individual’s religiosity in secure dyads thus presumably
261
Granqvist and
Hagekull (1999) Kirkpatrick (1998b, 1999)
Secure Socialized correspondence: Concurrent correspondence:
attachment Religiosity reflecting social Correspondence between
learning of parent’s mental models of self/
religious standards others and God at a
given time
Insecure Emotional compensation: Longitudinal compensation:
attachment Religiosity reflecting Religiosity tied to
affect regulation strategy attachment system
to obtain/maintain felt dynamics; prone to
security increases over time
Figure 1 Description of two attempts to clarify previous inconsistent
results on attachment and religiosity.
corresponds to parental religiosity rather than to the
security of the relationship per se. The compensation
hypothesis was slightly revised (Granqvist & Hagekull,
1999) in that a mechanism of affect regulation, in search
of felt security, was proposed to underlie the insecure
individual’s relationship with God (“emotional compen-
sation”). These revisions primarily attempted to resolve
the findings from the studies of attachment to parents
rather than from the peer attachment studies. (See Fig-
ure 1 for a schematic description of Kirkpatrick’s and
our attempts to clarify previous inconsistencies in
results.)
Our revised hypotheses have recently received empir-
ical support (Granqvist & Hagekull, 1999, 2001). The
socialized correspondence hypothesis was supported in
that perceived security of parental attachment was asso-
ciated with a newly constructed Socialization-Based Reli-
giosity Scale (SBRS) that was designed to tap degree of
transmission of parental religious standards to the off-
spring. In addition, security was linked to non-
conversions and gradual increases in religiosity, as
opposed to sudden conversions, the latter of which are
thought by many researchers to reflect an extreme
attempt to resolve emotional turmoil (see Hood, Spilka,
Hunsberger, & Gorsuch, 1996). The increases in religi-
osity of relatively secure offspring were characterized by
early onset and occurred during life situations pointing
to the importance of socialization of significant others’
religious standards (“themes of correspondence,” e.g.,
close friendships with believers, membership in reli-
gious organizations). Life themes of emotional turmoil,
such as relationship problems with parents and peers,
personal crises, mental or physical illness (“themes of
compensation”), were not characteristic of these reli-
gious changes. The emotional compensation hypothesis
was supported in that insecurity was associated with a
newly constructed Emotionally Based Religiosity Scale
(EBRS) that was designed to tap affect regulation strate-
262 PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY BULLETIN
gies with direct reference to the individual’s relationship
with God. In addition, insecurity was linked to sudden
religious conversions and to increases in religiosity, char-
acterized by suddennness/intenseness, late onset, and
themes of compensation, whereas themes of correspon-
dence were uncharacteristic.
It is an open question if the socialized correspon-
dence and emotional compensation hypotheses are
applicable to the links between peer attachment and reli-
giosity in adolescents. Also, no study has examined the
relative ability of attachment to parents and peer attach-
ment to predict unique variance in religiosity.
Attachment and Religion in Adolescence
The work on attachment and religion has relied on
adult samples or, in one case (Kirkpatrick, 1998b), a
young adult sample. It is important also to examine ado-
lescents, for several reasons. First, adolescence repre-
sents a life period during which transition of attachment
takes place, where attachment components are gradu-
ally transferred from parents to peers (e.g., Allen &
Land, 1999; Fraley & Davis, 1997; Hazan & Zeifman,
1999). Although parents remain important in fostering
continuity of adolescent adaptation, adolescents show
an increasing autonomy vis-à-vis parents (e.g., Armsden
& Greenberg, 1987; Lapsley, Rice, & Fitzgerald, 1990;
Moore, 1987; Palladino Schultheiss & Blustein, 1994;
Papini & Roggman, 1992; Rice, 1990). This scenario is
normative but some (particularly insecure) individuals
are less likely to build close, trusting, and satisfactory
peer relations (e.g., Lapsley et al., 1990; Palladino
Schultheiss & Blustein, 1994; Rice, 1990), implying that
felt security cannot be derived either by turning to par-
ents or peers for support. The attachment transitional
period is sometimes also marked by increased conflicts
with parents and by personal uncertainties on behalf of
the adolescent (e.g., Allen & Land, 1999). Again, how-
ever, security of attachment is associated with more
favorable outcomes than insecurity (Allen & Land, 1999;
Kobak, Cole, Ferenz-Gillies, & Fleming, 1993; Kobak &
Ferenz-Gillies, 1995; Kobak, Ferenz-Gillies, Everhart, &
Seabrook, 1994).
Major religious changes and sudden religious conver-
sions appear to be overrepresented in this period of
attachment transition (e.g., James, 1902; Starbuck, 1899;
see also Hood et al., 1996). Such experiences, unlike
more gradual and less intense religious changes, are
often linked to problematic life situations, such as rela-
tionship problems within or outside the family, personal
crises, mental/physical illness, bereavement, and expe-
riences of relationship break-ups (e.g., Granqvist, 1998;
Granqvist & Hagekull, 1999; James, 1902; Kirkpatrick &
Shaver, 1990). However, apostasy, or the often temporary
decline of religiosity among those raised in a religious
home, also is tied to adolescence (Roof & Hadaway,
1979; Roof & McKinney, 1987), making this period of
attachment transition ideal for studying increases as well
as decreases in religiosity.
The Present Study
The present study is the first investigation of cross-
sectional and longitudinal associations between attach-
ment and religiosity using participants in adolescence.
The study sought to clarify previous inconsistencies in
the literature and theory as well as to examine the rela-
tive ability of parental and peer attachment to explain
unique variance in religiosity.
Predictions were derived from our socialized corre-
spondence and emotional compensation hypotheses.
Hence, for cross-sectional relations, the emotional com-
pensation hypothesis predicted that insecurity of attach-
ment to parents and peer attachment at Time 1 (T1)
would be related to religiosity as based on affect regula-
tion (emotionally based religiosity) and religious fluctu-
ations (both increases and decreases). For cross-sectional
and longitudinal relations, and for participants who had
experienced increased religiosity, either prior to T1 or
between T1 and Time 2 (T2), insecurity was expected to
be linked to religious changes marked by suddenness
and intenseness and occurring during life situations of
emotional turmoil (themes of compensation).
The socialized correspondence hypothesis predicted
that security at T1 would be linked to religiosity as based
on social learning of parental religiosity (socialization-
based religiosity) and religious stability (i.e., little fluctu-
ation in religiosity). Insofar as increased religiosity had
been experienced, either prior to T1 or between T1 and
T2, security was expected to be linked to gradual reli-
gious changes occurring during life situations pointing
to the importance of socialization of significant others’
religious standards (themes of correspondence). Due to
its exploratory nature, no predictions were formulated
for the question concerning the relative ability of attach-
ment to parents and peer attachment to explain unique
variance in religiosity.
METHOD
Participants and Procedure
The sample consisted of 196 adolescents in Stock-
holm, the capital of Sweden. Sweden is a highly secular-
ized country. Even though approximately 90% of the
Swedish population are members of the Lutheran
Church of Sweden, less than 10% of the population are
confessing Christians (Pettersson, 1994). To obtain vari-
ation on the religiousness variables, part of the sample
was drawn from a religious population. The sample
included adolescents from the Christian youth organiza-
 Granqvist / ATTACHMENT AND RELIGIOSITY IN ADOLESCENCE 263

tion of the Lutheran Church of Sweden (n = 82) and TABLE 1: Measurement Characteristics, Descriptive Statistics, and
Swedish upper secondary school classes (n = 114). There Homogeneity Evaluations
were 37% male respondents at T1 (34% at T2) and the
Number
mean age of the sample at T1 was 16.3 years (SD = 1.2, of Scale Mean Alpha
range = 14-19) (corresponding figures at T2: M = 17.6, Variable Items Range (SD) Coefficient
SD = 1.2, range = 15-20).
At T1, the data collections were made at the end of EBRS 10 1-6 2.35 (1.41) .96
SBRS
lectures or at organization gatherings during the early
Maternal items 10 1-6 4.02 (1.40) .91
fall of 1998. Participants were (also at T2) informed of Paternal items 10 1-6 3.94 (1.38) .89
the voluntary and anonymous premises for participa- Increased religiosity 1 1-6 T1: 2.88 (1.85) —
tion. They also were informed about the possibility of a T2: 2.06 (1.42) —
longitudinal follow-up. The study was presented as a Suddenness/intenseness
of change 1 1-3 T1: 1.80 (.72) —
study on intergenerational similarities and differences
T2: 2.00 (.71) —
with respect to religiosity and attitudes. Questionnaires Themes of compensation 5 1-6 T1: 2.23 (1.10) T1: .75
were filled out during approximately 20 mins and then T2: 2.38 (1.21) T2: .75
handed in to the investigator. A total of 6 adolescents, Themes of correspondence 3 1-6 T1: 2.91 (1.60) T1: .73
present at the occasions of data gathering, chose not to T2: 2.75 (1.16) T2: .43
Decreased religiosity 1 1-6 T1: 1.94 (1.47) —
participate, yielding a response rate of 97% at T1.
T2: 1.95 (1.48) —
Because Swedish youths are inclined to move around Insecurity of attachment
internationally during late adolescence, the short-term to mother 13 1-9 2.27 (1.06) .84
longitudinal follow-up was conducted only 15 months Insecurity of attachment
after T1 to maintain a high response rate at T2. At T2, to father 13 1-9 3.23 (1.90) .94
Peer avoidance 9 1-9 3.90 (1.55) .82
questionnaires, including a prestamped response enve-
Peer anxiety 9 1-9 3.29 (1.44) .81
lope, were mailed home to the participants during the
winter of 1999. They were then offered a cinema check NOTE: EBRS = Emotionally Based Religiosity Scale, SBRS = Socialization-
worth approximately U.S.$6 for participation. A Based Religiosity Scale, T1 = Time 1, T2 = Time 2.
reminder was sent 2 weeks later, and after another 2
weeks, a second reminder (including questionnaire and
potentiate an examination of the empirical structure of
response envelope) was sent out, yielding a final
the instrument, evaluate its homogeneity, and increase
response rate of 72% (N = 142). An attrition analysis was
its measurement precision (cf. Fraley & Waller, 1998;
performed on all variables included. Out of a total of 20
Simpson, Rholes, & Nelligan, 1992).
significance tests, only 1 reached significance—mater-
To examine the empirical structure of these mea-
nal religiousness was higher among T2 participants than
sures, two factor analyses (one per parent), with Varimax
in the attrition group (p < .05).
rotation, were undertaken. Using eigenvalue > 1 as crite-
Measurements and Statistical Analyses rion, these analyses yielded four factors for the maternal
items and one factor for the paternal items. Upon rota-
Questionnaire data containing the following vari- tion, the first maternal factor accounted for 63% of the
ables were utilized in the present study (unless noted, explained variance and 24% of the total variance
items were couched as statements, where a low value (eigenvalue = 4.70; eigenvalues for the remaining factors
indicates strong disagreement and a high value indicates were < 1.35). It was difficult to find theoretically mean-
strong agreement; see Table 1 for measurement charac- ingful contents in the factors. In the unrotated solution,
teristics and descriptive statistics). 10 of the 13 items loaded highest on the first factor. To
Attachment measures. Retrospective ratings of 13 items achieve comparability across attachment targets, a one-
were used to assess perceived maternal and paternal factor solution was therefore chosen for both parents
attachment, respectively. These items were drawn from (total variance accounted for in the maternal and pater-
the three retrospective attachment paragraphs pro- nal solutions = 36% and 58%, respectively). Items were
posed by Hazan and Shaver (1986). Hazan and Shaver’s reversed where appropriate to yield global Insecurity of
measure was intended to tap characteristic parenting Attachment to Mother and Father scales (see above for
behaviors in avoidant (e.g., “she was generally distant”), sample items), where low values denote perceptions of
secure (e.g., “he knew when to be supportive”), and sensitive and responsive parenting and high values
ambivalent (e.g., “she was noticeably inconsistent in her denote distant, rejecting, and inconsistent parenting.
reactions to me, sometimes warm and sometimes not”) Collins and Read’s (1990) Adult Attachment Scale
parent-child dyads. The paragraphs were transformed to (AAS) was used to assess peer attachment. At the time of
a continuous multi-item measure in the present study to T1 measurement in early 1998, Brennan, Clark, and
264 PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY BULLETIN
Shaver’s (1998) recently constructed and since then
widely used Experiences in Close Relationships Scale
(ECR) was not available to the author. However, when
subjected to factor analysis, the AAS and ECR have been
shown to yield relatively similar factor solutions. Three
factors (labeled Depend, Close, and Anxiety by Collins
and Read) have been obtained in some studies, whereas
other studies (Brennan et al., 1998; cf. Simpson et al.,
1992) have supported a two-factor solution, with factors
labeled Avoidance and Anxiety.
A factor analysis (varimax rotation) was run on the
AAS. Unlike results in previous studies, a four-factor
solution was obtained in the present study (according to
the eigenvalue criterion). Upon rotation, the first two
factors accounted for 51% of the explained variance and
29% of the total variance (eigenvalues = 5.04 and 2.85,
respectively; eigenvalues for the remaining factors were
< 1.40). In the unrotated solution, 16 of the 18 items
loaded highest on one of the first two factors. A two-
factor solution yielded dimensions highly comparable in
content to those of Simpson et al. (1992) and Brennan
et al. (1998). In keeping with the current attachment
research agenda, a two-factor solution, accounting for
44% of the total variance, was therefore chosen (items
were reversed where appropriate). The factors were
labeled Peer Avoidance (e.g., “Often, love partners want
me to be more intimate than I feel comfortable being,” “I
find it difficult to allow myself to depend on others”) and
Peer Anxiety (“I often worry that my partner does not
really love me,” “I am not sure that I can always depend
on others to be there when I need them”).1
Religiousness measures. The EBRS (Granqvist &
Hagekull, 1999) was used to tap the affect regulating
functions of turning to and maintaining contact with
God and religion to obtain/maintain felt security (e.g.,
“When I am under mental stress [e.g., during moments
of sadness or anxiety] I may feel an urgent need for
God’s support,” “I feel most content when I experience a
close communion with God”).
The SBRS (Granqvist & Hagekull, 1999) was used to
tap the degree of participant adoption of parents’ reli-
gious standards/nonstandards (e.g., “I will probably
give/I give my children an equally religious/nonreli-
gious upbringing as my mother gave me,” “Religion is
equally important/unimportant to me as it was to my
father during my childhood”).
At T1 and T2, Increased Religiosity was assessed with
the following statement: “I have experienced a change
which meant that religion became more important to
me during a period of my life” (Granqvist & Hagekull,
2000). This measure was adapted from Kirkpatrick and
Shaver (1990). Those who agreed with this statement
(i.e., scored > 3) were assigned to increased religiosity
groups (ns = 78 at T1 and 23 at T2).
Characteristics of religious change were assessed by
having participants in the increased religiosity groups
choose one of the following alternatives to describe the
Suddenness/Intenseness of Change: (a) “A slow, grad-
ual change over a long period of time”; (b) “A slow, grad-
ual change with one or more relatively intense experi-
ences and changes”; and (c)”An intense and sudden
personal experience.” This measure was taken from
Kirkpatrick and Shaver (1990).
Other characteristics of religious change were
assessed by having respondents in the increased religios-
ity groups mark Granqvist and Hagekull’s (1999)
Themes of compensation and Themes of correspon-
dence scales, describing empirically derived (Granqvist,
1998) life factors associated with increased religiosity.
Themes of compensation consists of life factors pointing
to religion as filling a supportive role for a person in
emotional need: problem in love relationship or
divorce, relationship problem within family, relation-
ship problem with others, mental or physical illness, and
personal crisis. Themes of correspondence consists of
three items concerning life factors pointing to the
importance of significant others’ religious beliefs: close
friendships with believers, meetings or discussions with
believers, and membership in religious youth
association.
At T1 and T2, Decreased Religiosity was assessed with
the following item: “I have experienced a change which
meant that religion became less important to me during
a period of my life.”
Partial correlations were utilized to test bivariate rela-
tions between each attachment and religiosity variable.
Standard multiple regression analyses were run to exam-
ine the relative ability of attachment to parents and peer
attachment to explain unique religiosity variance.2 In
view of some previous findings showing sex differences
in the associations between attachment and religiosity
(Kirkpatrick, 1998b), the influence of sex was controlled
in all analyses.
RESULTS
Relations between the attachment dimensions were
in most cases modest in strength (Mdn r = .27, range of rs =
.06 to .38). For the sake of describing results in relation to
the socialized correspondence and emotional compen-
sation hypotheses, both of which make predictions in
terms of security and insecurity, high scores on the four
attachment dimensions will be referred to as high inse-
curity, with low values representing high security.
Cross-Sectional Relations Between
Attachment and Religiousness at T1
Partial correlations were first computed to test the
predictions of concurrent relations between each of the
 Granqvist / ATTACHMENT AND RELIGIOSITY IN ADOLESCENCE
TABLE 2: Time 1 Correlations Between Attachment and Religiousness Variables for the Total Sample and for the Increased Religiosity Group,
Controlling for Sex
Total Sample (N = 196)
Decreased
Attachment Variable EBRS SBRS a Religiosity
Insecurity (mother) .16* –.24*** .08
Insecurity (father) .14 –.25**** –.04
Peer avoidance .15* –.11 –.08
Peer anxiety .21*** –.23*** .05
NOTE: EBRS = Emotionally Based Religiosity Scale, SBRS = Socialization Based Religiosity Scale.
a. Denotes maternal items for correlations with maternal attachment, paternal items for correlations with paternal attachment, and combined pa-
rental items for correlations with peer attachment.
*p < .05. ***p < .005. ****p < . 001.
attachment and religiousness variables. Results from
these analyses are presented in Table 2, showing (left
panel) that insecurity of attachment to mother was
directly related to EBRS and inversely associated with
SBRS, which was in line with predictions. Also in line
with predictions, insecurity of attachment to mother was
positively linked to increased religiosity as occurring
prior to T1, but no association was obtained with
decreased religiosity. Examining relations between inse-
curity of attachment to mother and characteristics of
religious change among participants who had experi-
enced increased religiosity prior to T1 (right panel)
showed insecurity to be positively associated with themes
of compensation but to be unrelated to suddenness/
intenseness of change and themes of correspondence.
The direction of results for insecurity of attachment
to father was similar, although associations with EBRS
and increased religiosity failed to reach significance.
Results for peer attachment also pointed in the same
direction, particularly for peer anxiety. Peer anxiety was
directly linked to EBRS and themes of compensation, as
well as inversely related to SBRS. Peer avoidance was pos-
itively associated with EBRS but was unrelated to the
remaining religiosity variables.3
Standard multiple regression analyses were run to
analyze the ability of attachment to parents and peer
attachment to explain unique variance in each of the
religiosity variables that were significantly associated
with at least two of the attachment dimensions, that is, on
EBRS, SBRS (combined parental items), and themes of
compensation. Only the attachment dimensions that
displayed significant associations with the religiosity vari-
ables in question (see Table 2) were included as predic-
tors in the regression equations.
The regression equation for EBRS was significant,
F(4, 187) = 5.68, p < .001. However, only peer anxiety
made an independent (marginally) significant contribu-
tion, t = 1.93, β = .15, p = .055, whereas insecurity of
attachment to mother and peer avoidance failed to
265
Increased Religiosity Group (n = 78)
Increased Suddenness/ Themes of Themes of
Religiosity Intenseness Compensation Correspondence
.22*** .16 .45**** .19
.05 .05 .38**** .15
.09 .03 .09 .02
.12 .02 .25* .11
make independent contributions, ps > 10. The equation
for SBRS was also significant, F(4, 171) = 5.66, p < .001,
with an independent contribution made by insecurity of
attachment to mother, t = –2.57, β = –.21, p < .02, whereas
results for insecurity of attachment to father and peer
avoidance failed to reach significance, ps > .10. Finally,
the equation for themes of compensation was signifi-
cant, F(4, 87) = 8.73, p < .001. Insecurity of attachment to
both mother and father made independent contribu-
tions, ts = 3.44 and 2.51, βs = .35 and .25, ps < .001 and .02,
respectively, whereas peer anxiety did not, p > .10.
Longitudinal Predictions of
Religious Change From T1 Attachment
Partial correlations were first computed to test the
predictions of longitudinal relations between the attach-
ment and religious change variables. Results from these
analyses are presented in Table 3, showing (left panel)
that insecurity of attachment to mother was positively
linked to decreased religiosity, which was in line with pre-
dictions. However, insecurity of attachment to mother
was unrelated to increased religiosity. Examining rela-
tions between insecurity of attachment to mother and
characteristics of religious change among participants
who had experienced an increased religiosity between
T1 and T2 (right panel) showed that insecurity was posi-
tively linked to suddenness/intenseness of change,
again in line with predictions. No significant associations
were obtained between insecurity and themes of com-
pensation or themes of correspondence. Also, insecurity
of attachment to father and peer avoidance were unre-
lated to all religious change variables investigated.
Peer anxiety was positively related only to decreased
religiosity.4
A multiple regression analysis was run on decreased
religiosity with insecurity of attachment to mother and
peer anxiety as predictors. The equation was significant,
F(3, 133) = 4.83, p < .005. Insecurity of attachment to
mother explained unique variance in decreased religios-
266 PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY BULLETIN
TABLE 3: Correlations Between Attachment Variables at Time 1 and Aspects of Religious Change at Time 2 for the Total Sample and for the In-
creased Religiosity Group, Controlling for Sex
Total Sample (N = 143)
Decreased Increased
Attachment Variable Religiosity Religiosity
Insecurity (mother) .26**** .11
Insecurity (father) .04 .06
Peer avoidance .03 .04
Peer anxiety .25**** .15
**p < .01. ****p < .001.
ity, t = 2.18, β = .20, p < .05. Peer anxiety made a margin-
ally significant contribution, t = 1.95, β = .17, p = .052.
DISCUSSION
Summary of the Findings
Results of the present study were, as a whole, in line
with our hypotheses. Supporting the socialized corre-
spondence predictions, security (i.e., low values on the
insecurity dimensions) was linked to a religiosity based
on parental socialization and characterized by small fluc-
tuations. Supporting the emotional compensation
hypothesis, insecurity was related to an unstable religios-
ity (both increases and decreases) based on affect regula-
tion. When increases in religiosity had been experi-
enced, insecurity also was linked to sudden and intense
increases occurring during life situations of emotional
turmoil. These findings emerged particularly in the
cross-sectional analyses, whereas results from the longi-
tudinal analyses were more mixed.
Concerning the ability of attachment to parents and
peer attachment to explain unique variance in religios-
ity, attachment to parents made six significant independ-
ent contributions, of which five were from attachment to
mother. Peer attachment only made two marginally sig-
nificant independent contributions, both from anxiety.
These results seem to highlight the relative importance
of attachment to parents, particularly to mother, in pre-
dicting adolescent religiosity.
Socialized (vs. Concurrent) Correspondence
and Emotional (vs. Longitudinal) Compensation
The cross-sectional findings showing that insecurity
of attachment to parents is associated with less socializa-
tion-based religiosity replicate our previous findings on
adults (Granqvist & Hagekull, 1999). These results sug-
gest that there are important individual differences with
respect to adolescent apostasy. Relatively secure off-
spring seems to be less likely to turn down the influence
of parental standards, just as has been shown to be true
for young children (e.g., Londerville & Main, 1981;
Increased Religiosity Group (n = 23)
Suddenness/ Themes of Themes of
Intenseness Compensation Correspondence
.58** .20 .16
.06 –.19 .25
–.14 –.08 .31
.07 .01 .18
Maccoby, 1984; Matas, Arend, & Sroufe, 1978; Richters &
Waters, 1991).
The cross-sectional results showing that insecurity of
attachment to parents is linked to emotionally based reli-
giosity, and that insecurity of attachment to mother is
related to increased religiosity, also replicate previous
adult findings (Granqvist, 1998; Granqvist & Hagekull,
1999; Kirkpatrick & Shaver, 1990). Further support for
the hypotheses emerged in the cross-sectional findings
showing peer attachment anxiety to be negatively linked
to socialization-based religiosity and anxiety as well as
avoidance to be positively linked to emotionally based
religiosity. These findings on emotionally based religios-
ity seem to be in opposition to Kirkpatrick’s (1998b,
1999) suggestion of concurrent correspondence
between security and religiousness. However, insofar as
the EBRS taps an affect regulating strategy of turning to
God, it could be that this strategy is more closely tied to
attachment system dynamics than to IWMs. In that case,
the links between emotionally based religiosity and inse-
curity are in line with Kirkpatrick’s interpretation.
The emotional compensation hypothesis also was
supported by the prospective results showing that inse-
curity of attachment to mother and peer attachment
anxiety are linked to decreased religiosity. These results
represent new findings, which are in opposition to
Kirkpatrick’s interpretation of longitudinal compensa-
tion. That interpretation was based, in part, on results
showing ambivalent and fearful attachment (i.e., con-
taining individuals scoring high on the anxiety dimen-
sion) (see Brennan et al., 1998) to predict increased reli-
giosity over time. Our findings suggest that insecurity
may be related to a general instability in religiosity rather
than simply to prospective increases. Furthermore, the
direction of religious change (increase or decrease) for
those high in insecurity may depend on developmental
phase issues. The results suggest that adolescence repre-
sents a developmental period of general religious insta-
bility, whereas (early) adulthood is associated with
increased religiousness (Granqvist, 1998; Granqvist &
Hagekull, 1999; Kirkpatrick, 1997, 1998b).
 Granqvist / ATTACHMENT AND RELIGIOSITY IN ADOLESCENCE
The emotional compensation hypothesis further pro-
poses that increases in religiosity for relatively insecure
individuals should be relatively intense and sudden and
occur during life situations of emotional turmoil. The
cross-sectional relations between indices of insecurity
and themes of compensation lent support to these prop-
ositions, as did the prospective link between insecurity of
attachment to mother and suddenness/intenseness of
change. These results are also in line with Kirkpatrick’s
(1998b, 1999) suggestion of longitudinal compensation.
In fact, our and Kirkpatrick’s interpretations of the com-
pensation effects converge nicely in that both tie the reli-
giosity of insecure individuals to attachment system
dynamics. However, our hypothesis has two advantages.
First, it adds affect regulation as the mechanism respon-
sible for the compensation effects. Second, it accounts
for cross-sectional, not only longitudinal, relations
between insecurity and religiosity.
Unlike Granqvist and Hagekull (1999), who found
security of attachment to parents to be associated with
themes of correspondence, the present study failed to
find any such relations. These discrepant findings could
be an effect of developmental differences between ado-
lescents and adults. Also note that the internal consis-
tency of themes of correspondence was low at T2 in this
study.
Insofar as adolescents high in security of attachment
to mother had experienced increased religiosity
between T1 and T2, these changes were gradual and
were not marked by themes of compensation. These
results are in line with the socialized correspondence
hypothesis. Important to note here is that Kirkpatrick’s
suggestion of concurrent correspondence fails to make
any predictions concerning religious change for secure
individuals.
Comparing our socialized correspondence hypothe-
sis with Kirkpatrick’s suggestion of concurrent corre-
spondence leads to the conclusion that both hypotheses
are necessary. Using the concurrent correspondence
hypothesis in isolation fails not only to predict the reli-
gious changes of secure individuals but also to account
for the theoretically relevant moderating influence of
parental religiousness (Granqvist, 1998; Kirkpatrick &
Shaver, 1990). Using the socialized correspondence
hypothesis in isolation fails to account for the links
observed between attachment security and some con-
tent aspects of religiousness, such as a loving God image
as opposed to, for instance, a distant God image (Hyde,
2000; Kirkpatrick, 1998b; Kirkpatrick & Shaver, 1992).
Therefore, it is henceforward hypothesized that the reli-
giosity of secure individuals originates from social learn-
ing and partial adoption of parental religious standards.
Social learning in the context of secure attachment also
creates a religiosity that is not prone to intense fluctua-
267
tions due to current affect regulation needs (socialized
correspondence). In addition, the IWMs derived from
the attachment relationship subsequently affect the indi-
vidual’s image of a loving God (mental models corre-
spondence). Such an integrative hypothesis will be
labeled “two-level correspondence.” The first level
denotes a primary mechanism of social learning of
parental standards in the context of a secure relation-
ship and the second level a secondary effect reflecting
mental models correspondence between self/other and
God.
Correspondence and Compensation in
Relation to Which Attachment Targets?
In answering which attachment targets (i.e., parents
and/or peers) that the correspondence and compensa-
tion hypotheses should refer to, there are empirical,
attachment theoretical, and historical factors that need
to be taken into account. Concerning empirical factors,
the results of the present study seem to suggest that
attachment to parents, particularly to mother, should
constitute the primary frame of reference for the corre-
spondence and compensation hypotheses.
The present results were based on participants in
midadolescence, representing a life period during
which attachment transition from parents to peers has
generally been initiated but not concluded (see Fraley &
Davis, 1997; Hazan & Zeifman, 1999). Therefore, it is
possible that different results will emerge for older, adult
samples. However, although results from previous stud-
ies on adults have not made direct comparisons, the find-
ings on attachment to parents (Granqvist, 1998;
Granqvist & Hagekull, 1999, 2001; Kirkpatrick & Shaver,
1990) have generally tended to be stronger, in terms of
effect sizes, than those on peer attachment (Granqvist &
Hagekull, 2000; Kirkpatrick, 1997, 1998b; Kirkpatrick &
Shaver, 1992).
Concerning attachment theoretical factors, child-
parent relations represent a purer version of attachment
than do romantic relations. The former are asymmetri-
cal (i.e., the attachment figure is stronger and wiser) and
have proximity/protection as the predictable outcomes,
whereas romantic relations are symmetrical and have
reproduction as the most central outcome (see also
Kirkpatrick, 1998a). With respect to the individual’s rela-
tionship with God, a reading of religious literature and
of research in the psychology of religion suggests that it
resembles child-parent attachment more than romantic
attachment. The believer-God relationship is asymmetri-
cal (i.e., God is stronger and wiser) and is tied to a sense
of protection (see Hood et al., 1996) rather than to
reproduction.
Regarding historical factors, the attachment analysis
of religion was preceded by classic psychoanalytic writers
268 PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY BULLETIN
(e.g., Freud, 1927/1964), ego psychologists (e.g., Erik-
son, 1950), and object relationists (e.g., Rizzuto, 1979).
These theoreticians all delved into the functional and
structural similarities between the individual’s child-
hood relationships with the parents and his or her rela-
tionship with God. Although the perspectives were based
on a database of qualitative, biographical, and clinical
case material, marked by post hoc reconstructions of the
individual’s past (see also Kirkpatrick, 1995), their main
emphases on child-parent and adult-God relationships
converge with the above arguments.
Notwithstanding this preference for attachment to
parents, there may be indirect links between peer attach-
ment and religiosity. Such links are expected if attach-
ment orientation in peer relations is empirically linked
to attachment to parents. Relations between peer attach-
ment and religiosity also may be expected if love rela-
tionship experiences transform the individual’s IWMs,
thereby affecting his or her way of relating to God (cf.
Kirkpatrick & Shaver, 1992). However, the opposite sce-
nario is also possible, that is, that the relationship with
God transforms the IWMs, hence affecting the individ-
ual’s peer attachment orientation.
Methodological Directions and Future Studies
The present study had the advantage over all previ-
ously published studies on religion and attachment to
parents to be based on a prospective longitudinal design
instead of only cross-sectional comparisons. However,
the short time span between T1 and T2 resulted in a low
frequency of participants who had experienced
increased religiosity between the measurement occa-
sions. Significant religious changes and conversions
have been shown to peak at ages 15 and 16 (see Hood et
al., 1996). A recommendation for future studies is there-
fore to collect T1 data at an earlier age and to increase
the time span between measurements. Future studies on
attachment and religious change also should explore life
themes associated with attachment in the context of
decreased religiosity. The emotional compensation
hypothesis suggests that decreased religiosity occurs for
insecure individuals in situations where their attach-
ment needs may have the potential to be met (e.g., dur-
ing romantic relationship formation). In contrast, the
IWM-level of the correspondence hypothesis suggests
that insofar as secure individuals experience decreases
in religiosity, these experiences occur during situations
of attachment deprivation (e.g., following divorce,
bereavement).
Future studies should complement the simple attach-
ment self-reports with measures (e.g., the Adult Attach-
ment Interview) (George, Kaplan, & Main, 1996) that
are less prone to defensive strategies and more promis-
ing for tapping the unconscious components of IWMs.
To move the attachment and religion research further in
a developmental direction, longitudinal research in
younger child populations should be conducted with
measurement procedures such as the Separation Anxi-
ety Test (Main, Kaplan, & Cassidy, 1985).
A complementary way of handling the potential
biases of self-reports would be to study the effects on reli-
giousness from experimental activation of participants’
attachment systems (cf. Burris, Batson, Altstaedten, &
Stephens, 1994). Such studies may be revealing in that
they may undermine avoidant/dismissing individuals’
deactivating attachment strategies (e.g., Mikulincer,
1998) as well as overcome limitations inherent in some
religiosity self-reports (e.g., Batson, Natifeh, & Pate,
1978). They also may help solve the causal ambiguities
that have resulted from the sole reliance on
correlational designs. Such investigative efforts could
finally test hypothesized effects derived from the norma-
tive attachment framework.
Results from investigations of relevance to the norma-
tive attachment framework have been interpreted in
attachment theory terms by Kirkpatrick (1992, 1994,
1995, 1999). Studies also should be conducted that
derive a priori attachment predictions, which are subse-
quently subjected to empirical trials. One such cross-
sectional study, on relationship status and religiousness,
has currently been published (Granqvist & Hagekull,
2000). That study needs to be complemented with pro-
spective longitudinal investigations that permit within-
subject analyses addressing real-time effects on religios-
ity from formation of new relationships, separation,
divorce, and the like.
NOTES
1. The Avoidance factor consisted of all of Collins and Read’s
(1990) Close factor items as well as half of their Depend (D) factor
items (1, 3, and 5; see their Table 2). The Anxiety factor consisted of all
of their corresponding Anxiety factor items as well as their D2, D4, and
D6.
2. To avoid the problem of confounding within-group with
between-group variance, all analyses to be presented controlled for the
influence of a dummy-coded subsample (i.e., members of Christian
youth organization vs. ordinary upper secondary school students).
Attachment made an independent and significant contribution in the
same analyses as when only sex was controlled (see Results), with the
exceptions that the cross-sectional links between the Emotionally
Based Religiosity Scale (EBRS) on one hand and insecurity of attach-
ment to mother and peer attachment avoidance on the other turned
out to be nonsignificant. The subsample was so strongly correlated with
EBRS (r = .77) that the variance on the outcome measure may have been
too restricted to allow for attachment to make a contribution.
3. Partial correlation analyses were performed on attachment and
religiosity for low and high parental religiousness groups (cf.
Granqvist, 1998). In general, results remained and were somewhat
strengthened at low parental religiousness and disappeared at high
parental religiousness. A more detailed description will be obtained
from the author on request.
4. Given the low n in the increased religiosity group at Time 2 (T2),
outliers on the attachment and characteristics of religious change vari-
ables were searched according to a criterion of ±2.5 standard score
 Granqvist / ATTACHMENT AND RELIGIOSITY IN ADOLESCENCE
deviations (Hair, Anderson, Tatham, & Black, 1995). Two outliers were
detected (one each on insecurity to mother and peer attachment anxi-
ety); excluding the outlier on insecurity to mother resulted in signifi-
cant associations between insecurity to mother in relation to themes of
compensation and themes of correspondence (partial rs = .49 and .45,
respectively; ps < .05). Remaining results were unchanged.
REFERENCES
Ainsworth, M. D. (1985). Attachments across the life-span. Bulletin of
the New York Academy of Medicine, 61, 792-812.
Ainsworth, M.D.S., Blehar, M. C., Waters, E., & Wall, S. (1978). Pat-
terns of attachment: A psychological study of the strange situation.
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Allen, J. P., & Land, D. (1999). Attachment in adolescence. In
J. Cassidy & P. R. Shaver (Eds.), Handbook of attachment theory and
research (pp. 319-335). New York: Guilford.
Armsden, G. C., & Greenberg, M. T. (1987). The inventory of parent
and peer attachment: Individual differences and their relation-
ship to psychological well-being. Journal of Youth and Adolescence,
16, 427-453.
Batson, C. D., Natifeh, S. J., & Pate, S. (1978). Social desirability, reli-
gious orientation, and racial prejudice. Journal for the Scientific
Study of Religion, 17, 31-41.
Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and Loss: Vol. 1. Attachment. New York:
Basic Books.
Bowlby, J. (1973). Separation anxiety and anges: Vol. 2. Attachment and
Loss. New York: Basic Books.
Bowlby, J. (1980). Attachment and Loss: Vol. 3. Loss. New York: Basic
Books.
Brennan, K. A., Clark, C. A., & Shaver, P. R. (1998). Self-report mea-
surement of adult attachment: An integrative overview. In J. A.
Simpson & W. S. Rholes (Eds.), Attachment theory and close relation-
ships (pp. 46-76). New York: Guilford.
Bretherton, I. (1985). Attachment theory: Retrospect and prospect.
In I. Bretherton & E. Waters (Eds.), Growing points of attachment the-
ory and research. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Develop-
ment, 50(1-2, Serial No. 209), 3-35.
Bretherton, I. (1987). New perspectives on attachment relations:
Security, communication, and internal working models. In J. D.
Osofsky (Ed.), Handbook of infant development (2nd ed., pp. 1061-
1100). New York: John Wiley.
Bretherton, I. (1991). The roots and growing points of attachment
theory. In C. M. Parkes, J. Stevenson-Hinde, & P. Marris (Eds.),
Attachment across the life-cycle (pp. 9-32). London: Tavistock/
Routledge.
Burris, C. T., Batson, C. D., Altstaedten, M., & Stephens, K. (1994).
“What a friend . . . ”: Loneliness as a motivator of intrinsic religion.
Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 33, 326-334.
Cassidy, J., & Shaver, P. R. (Eds.). (1999). Handbook of attachment: The-
ory, research, and clinical applications. New York: Guilford.
Colin, V. L. (1996). Human attachment. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Collins, N. L., & Read, S. J. (1990). Adult attachment, working mod-
els, and relationship quality in dating couples. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 58, 644-663.
Erikson, E. (1950). Childhood and society. New York: Norton.
Fraley, R. C., & Davis, K. E. (1997). Attachment formation and trans-
fer in young adults’ close friendships and romantic relationships.
Personal Relationships, 4, 131-144.
Fraley, R. C., & Waller, N. G. (1998). Adult attachment patterns: A test
of the typological model. In J. A. Simpson & W. S. Rholes (Eds.),
Attachment theory and close relationships (pp. 77-114). New York:
Guilford.
Freud, S. (1964). The future of an illusion. Garden City, NY: Double Day.
(Original work published 1923)
George, C., Kaplan, N., & Main, M. (1996). Attachment interview for
adults (3rd ed.). Unpublished manuscript, University of Califor-
nia, Berkeley.
Granqvist, P. (1998). Religiousness and perceived childhood attach-
ment: On the question of compensation or correspondence. Jour-
nal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 37, 350-367.
269
Granqvist, P., & Hagekull, B. (1999). Religiousness and perceived
childhood attachment: Profiling socialized correspondence and
emotional compensation. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion,
38, 254-273.
Granqvist, P., & Hagekull, B. (2000). Religiosity, adult attachment,
and why “singles” are more religious. International Journal for the
Psychology of Religion, 10, 111-123.
Granqvist, P., & Hagekull, B. (2001). Seeking security in the new age:
On attachment and emotional compensation. Journal for the Scien-
tific Study of Religion, 40, 529-547.
Hair, J. F., Jr., Anderson, R. E., Tatham, R. L., & Black, W. C. (1995).
Multivariate data analysis with readings (4th ed.). Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice Hall.
Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. R. (1986). Parental Caregiving Style Question-
naire. Unpublished document, Cornell University.
Hazan, C., & Zeifman, D. (1999). Pair bonds as attachments: Evalu-
ating the evidence. In J. Cassidy & P. R. Shaver (Eds.), Handbook of
attachment: Theory, research, and clinical applications (pp. 336-355).
New York: Guilford.
Hood, R. W., Jr., Spilka, B., Hunsberger, B., & Gorsuch, R. L. (1996).
The psychology of religion: An empirical approach (2nd ed.). New York:
Guilford.
Hyde, J. A. (2000). Adult attachment and the representation of God.
Unpublished manuscript, Illinois School of Professional Psychol-
ogy, Chicago.
James, W. (1902). Varieties of religious experience. New York: Longmans,
Green.
Kirkpatrick, L. A. (1992). An attachment-theory approach to the psy-
chology of religion. International Journal for the Psychology of Reli-
gion, 2, 3-28.
Kirkpatrick, L. A. (1994). The role of attachment in religious belief
and behavior. In K. Bartholomew & D. Perlman (Eds.), Advances in
personal relationships (Vol. 5, pp. 239-265). London: Jessica
Kingsley.
Kirkpatrick, L. A. (1995). Attachment theory and religious experi-
ence. In R. W. Hood, Jr. (Ed.), Handbook of religious experience (pp.
446-475). Birmingham, AL: Religious Education.
Kirkpatrick, L. A. (1997). A longitudinal study of changes in religious
belief and behavior as a function of individual differences in adult
attachment style. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 36, 207-
217.
Kirkpatrick, L. A. (1998a). Evolution, pair-bonding, and reproduc-
tive strategies: A reconceptualization of adult attachment. In J. A.
Simpson & W. S. Rholes (Eds.), Attachment theory and close relation-
ships (pp. 353-393). New York: Guilford.
Kirkpatrick, L. A. (1998b). God as a substitute attachment figure: A
longitudinal study of adult attachment style and religious change
in college students. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24,
961-973.
Kirkpatrick, L. A. (1999). Attachment and religious representations
and behavior. In J. Cassidy & P. R. Shaver (Eds.), Handbook of attach-
ment theory and research (pp. 803-822). New York: Guilford.
Kirkpatrick, L. A., & Shaver, P. R. (1990). Attachment theory and reli-
gion: Childhood attachments, religious beliefs and conversions.
Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 29, 315-334.
Kirkpatrick, L. A., & Shaver, P. R. (1992). An attachment-theoretical
approach to romantic love and religious belief. Personality and
Social Psychology Bulletin, 18, 266-275.
Kobak, R., & Ferenz-Gillies, R. (1995). Emotion regulation and
depressive symptoms during adolescence: A functionalist per-
spective. Development and Psychopathology, 7, 183-192.
Kobak, R., Ferenz-Gillies, R., Everhart, E., & Seabrook, L. (1994).
Maternal attachment strategies and emotion regulation with ado-
lescent offspring. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 4, 553-566.
Kobak, R. R., Cole, H. E., Ferenz-Gillies, R., & Fleming, W. S. (1993).
Attachment and emotion regulation during mother-teen prob-
lem solving: A control theory analysis. Child Development, 64, 231-
245.
Lapsley, D. K., Rice, K. G., & Fitzgerald, D. P. (1990). Adolescent
attachment, identity, and adjustment to college: Implications for
the continuity of adaptation hypothesis. Journal of Counseling and
Development, 68, 561-565.
270 PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY BULLETIN
Londerville, S., & Main, M. (1981). Security of attachment, compli-
ance, and maternal training in the second year of life. Developmen-
tal Psychology, 17, 289-299.
Maccoby, E. E. (1984). Socialization and developmental change.
Child Development, 55, 317-328.
Main, M., Kaplan, N., & Cassidy, J. (1985). Security in infancy, child-
hood and adulthood: A move to the level of representation. In
I. Bretherton & E. Waters (Eds.), Growing points of attachment theory
and research. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Develop-
ment, 50(1-2, Serial No. 209), 66-104.
Matas, L., Arend, R. A., & Sroufe, L. A. (1978). Continuity of adapta-
tion in the second year: The relationship between quality of
attachment and later competence. Child Development, 49, 547-556.
Mikulincer, M. (1998). Adult attachment style and affect regulation:
Strategic variations in self-appraisals. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 75, 420-435.
Moore, D. (1987). Parent-adolescent separation: The construction of
adulthood by late adolescents. Developmental Psychology, 23, 298-
307.
Palladino Schultheiss, D. E., & Blustein, D. L. (1994). Role of adolescent-
parent relationships in college student development and adjust-
ment. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 41, 248-255.
Papini, D. R., & Roggman, L. A. (1992). Adolescent perceived attach-
ment to parents in relation to competence, depression, and anxi-
ety: A longitudinal study. Journal of Early Adolescence, 12, 420-440.
Pettersson, T. (1994). Svensk mentalitet i ett internationellt per-
spektiv. Ungdomars välfärd och värderingar [Swedish mentality in
an international perspective: Welfare and values of youths].
Statens Offentliga Utredningar, 73. Stockholm: Civildepartementet.
Rice, K. G. (1990). Attachment and adolescence: A narrative and
meta-analytic review. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 19, 511-538.
Richters, J. E., & Waters, E. (1991). Attachment and socialization: The
positive side of social influence. In M. Lewis & S. Feinman (Eds.),
Social influences and socialization in infancy: Genesis of behavior series
(Vol. 6, pp. 185-213). New York: Plenum.
Rizzuto, A.-M. (1979). The birth of the living God: A psychoanalytical
study. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Roof, W. C., & Hadaway, C. K. (1979). Denominational switching in
the seventies: Going beyond Stark and Glock. Journal for the Scien-
tific Study of Religion, 18, 363-379.
Roof, W. C., & McKinney, W. (1987). American mainline religion: Its
changing shape and future. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University
Press.
Simpson, J. A., Rholes, W. S., & Nelligan, J. S. (1992). Support seeking
and support giving within couples in an anxiety provoking situa-
tion: The role of attachment styles. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 62, 434-446.
Sroufe, L. A., & Waters, E. (1977). Attachment as an organizational
construct. Child Development, 48, 1184-1199.
Starbuck, E. D. (1899). The psychology of religion. New York: Scribner.
Received March 29, 2000
Revision accepted July 25, 2001