Example: quiz answers

Bartholomewらの4分類愛着スタイル尺度 (RQ)の日本語 …

Journal of Cognitive Processes and Experiencing1998/9, 7, 41-50 bartholomew 1 Japanese adaptation of bartholomew et al. (1991) sadult attachment scale (RQ) Kazuo KatoKyushu UniversityThis study attempted (1) to adapt into Japanese the Relationship Questionnaire (RQ) for adult attachment to "gener-alized other," which bartholomew & Horowitz (1991) originally designed and developed to measure the 4 styles ofadult attachment in close relationships, and (2) to examine its construct validities. 299 college students were asked torespond to a series of questions, including RQ, Rosenberg's self-esteem scale, and Kato's other-view scale for anindex of self-view and other-view.

Bartholomewらの4分類愛着スタイル尺度 (RQ)の日本語版の作成 加藤和生1 九州大学 Japanese adaptation of Bartholomew et al. (1991)’s adult attachment scale (RQ) Kazuo Kato Kyushu University This study attempted (1) to adapt into Japanese the Relationship Questionnaire (RQ) for adult attachment to "gener-

Tags:

  Bartholomew

Information

Domain:

Source:

Link to this page:

Please notify us if you found a problem with this document:

Other abuse

Advertisement

Transcription of Bartholomewらの4分類愛着スタイル尺度 (RQ)の日本語 …

1 Journal of Cognitive Processes and Experiencing1998/9, 7, 41-50 bartholomew 1 Japanese adaptation of bartholomew et al. (1991) sadult attachment scale (RQ) Kazuo KatoKyushu UniversityThis study attempted (1) to adapt into Japanese the Relationship Questionnaire (RQ) for adult attachment to "gener-alized other," which bartholomew & Horowitz (1991) originally designed and developed to measure the 4 styles ofadult attachment in close relationships, and (2) to examine its construct validities. 299 college students were asked torespond to a series of questions, including RQ, Rosenberg's self-esteem scale, and Kato's other-view scale for anindex of self-view and other-view.

2 As a result, this scale was demonstrated to have adequate construct validities withJapanese samples. Furthermore, Preoccupied (47%) was the most prevalent adult attachment style in Japan, fol-lowed by Fearful (29%), Secure (19%), and Dismissing (7%), which is, however, inconsistent to the distributionpattern of attachment styles in the US. Its implications and remaining tasks were discussed in relation to the follow-ing theoretical issues, such as self-report vs. behavioral indices, representational structure of IWMs, cross-culturaldifferences, and attachment vs.

3 : adult attachment, Relationship Questionnaire (RQ), Japanese adaptation, construct validity, measure-ment Relationship Ques-tionnaire, bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991 RQ Bowlby Bowlby 1969/1982, p 371 distressful (disposition)

4 Distressful distress 1 Bowlby Internal workingmodel IWM Fiske & Taylor, 1991 Bowlby IWM Bowlby normative IWM Bowlby Ainsworth, Blehar,Waters.

5 & Wall 1978 2 Strange Situation Procedure SSP Ainsworth (secure) (avoidant) (anxious/ambivalent) unclassifiable Main &Weston 1981 disorganized/disoriented Main & George Main, Kaplan, & Cassidy, 1985 SSP Adult Attachment Interview, AAI Bowlby Ainsworth (romantic love) Hazan & Shaver 1987 p.

6 513 Ainsworth 1978 p. 531 3 1997 bartholomew & Horowitz (1991) , Hazan , Feeney &Noller 1990 Main AAI Kobak &Sceery 1988 Bowlby 1973 IWM (anyone)

7 P. 204 positive negative 2

8 IWM 3 43 bartholomew RQ Positive Positive Positive Negative Negative Positive Negative Negative bartholomew & Horowitz 1991 p.

9 228 Hazan avoidant bartholomew Hazan avoidant bartholomew Hazan bartholomew Hazan Feeney & Noller 1990 avoidant self-doubt Main AAI Kobak & Sceery 1988 dismiss-ive (avoidant distressed avoidant dismissive avoidant dismissive)

10 bartholomew 77 44 bartholomew (1991)


Related search queries