Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Attachment Styles, Coping Strategies, and Posttraumatic Psychological Distress: The Impact of the Gulf War in Israel

Attachment Styles, Coping Strategies, and Posttraumatic Psychological Distress: The Impact of the... This study examines the association between adult attachment style and the way people reacted to the Iraqi missile attack on Israel during the Gulf War. One hundred forty Israeli students were interviewed 2 weeks after the war and classified according to their attachment style (secure, avoidant, or ambivalent) and residence area (dangerous vs. less dangerous). Ambivalent people reported more distress than secure people. Avoidant persons reported higher levels of somatization, hostility, and trauma-related avoidance than secure persons. These results characterized Ss living in dangerous areas. In addition, secure people used relatively more support-seeking strategies in coping with the trauma, ambivalent people used more emotion-focused strategies, and avoidant people used more distancing strategies. Findings are discussed in terms of attachment working models. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of Personality and Social Psychology American Psychological Association

Attachment Styles, Coping Strategies, and Posttraumatic Psychological Distress: The Impact of the Gulf War in Israel

Loading next page...
 
/lp/american-psychological-association/attachment-styles-coping-strategies-and-posttraumatic-psychological-qclNp9gn0W
Publisher
American Psychological Association
Copyright
Copyright © 1993 American Psychological Association
ISSN
0022-3514
eISSN
1939-1315
DOI
10.1037/0022-3514.64.5.817
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

This study examines the association between adult attachment style and the way people reacted to the Iraqi missile attack on Israel during the Gulf War. One hundred forty Israeli students were interviewed 2 weeks after the war and classified according to their attachment style (secure, avoidant, or ambivalent) and residence area (dangerous vs. less dangerous). Ambivalent people reported more distress than secure people. Avoidant persons reported higher levels of somatization, hostility, and trauma-related avoidance than secure persons. These results characterized Ss living in dangerous areas. In addition, secure people used relatively more support-seeking strategies in coping with the trauma, ambivalent people used more emotion-focused strategies, and avoidant people used more distancing strategies. Findings are discussed in terms of attachment working models.

Journal

Journal of Personality and Social PsychologyAmerican Psychological Association

Published: May 1, 1993

There are no references for this article.