604582

research-article2015
SAP0010.1177/0081246315604582South African Journal of PsychologyVelotti et al.

South African Journal of Psychology 2016, Vol. 46(2) 191202 The Author(s) 2015
Reprints and permissions: sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0081246315604582 sap.sagepub.com

Article
Gender moderates the relationship
between attachment insecurities and
emotion dysregulation

Patrizia Velotti1, Mario DAguanno2,

Gaia de Campora3, Sara Di Francescantonio2,
Carlo Garofalo2, Luciano Giromini4,
Chiara Petrocchi2, Michela Terrasi2
and Giulio Cesare Zavattini2

Abstract
The relation between attachment styles and emotion regulation is well documented, and emotion
dysregulation is considered characteristic of individuals with insecure attachment styles. Although
gender differences in emotion regulation have often been reported, it is not clear whether the
association between attachment styles and aspects of emotion dysregulation may vary across
gender. A sample of 229 newlywed couples completed the Experiences in Close Relationship
Revised scale and the Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale. First, we confirmed previous
evidence on the association between attachment insecurities and emotion dysregulation. Indeed,
attachment anxiety and avoidance were both related to emotional nonacceptance and lack of
emotional clarity. Moreover, attachment anxiety was associated with difficulties in impulse control
and limited access to effective emotion regulation strategies, whereas attachment avoidance was
uniquely related to lack of emotional awareness. Finally, gender was found to moderate the
association that both attachment anxiety and attachment avoidance had with difficulties in pursuing
desired goals when experiencing negative emotions. Specifically, among women (but not men),
attachment anxiety was associated with greater difficulties in engaging in goal-directed behavior
when distressed. Conversely, the association between attachment avoidance and difficulties in
pursuing desired goals when distressed was positive for men and negative for women.

Keywords
Attachment, couple relationship, emotion dysregulation, gender differences

1Department of Educational Sciences, University of Genoa, Italy

2Department of Dynamic and Clinical Psychology, Sapienza University of Rome, Italy
3Department of Pedagogy, Psychology, Philosophy, University of Cagliari, Italy
4Department of Psychology, University of Turin, Italy

Corresponding author:
Patrizia Velotti, Department of Educational Sciences, University of Genoa, Corso Andrea Podest, 2, 16126 Genoa, Italy.
Email: patrizia.velotti@tin.it
192 South African Journal of Psychology 46(2)

Bowlby (1988) suggested that early relationships with primary caregivers result in the develop-
ment of attachment styles, including information about the self and the others, as well as about
their emotional bounds. The attachment theory posits that these attachment styles play a key role
in the way people interpret and understand their relationships throughout the lifespan.
From this point of view, in the last decade, attachment theory has been used as a conceptual
framework for the study of the influence of early attachment experiences on emotion regulation,
with particular regard to couple relationships and marital functioning (Creasey & Ladd, 2004;
Mikulincer, Shaver, & Pereg, 2003). Indeed, several studies have shown an association between
attachment styles and the way people evaluate their relationship (Feeney, 2008; Hazan & Shaver,
1987). Furthermore, emotion regulation and attachment styles interact in predicting conflict man-
agement behavior in intimate relationships (Creasey & Ladd, 2004). Finally, the ability to regulate
emotional reactions to negatively charged experiences in the context of marital relationships is
often considered a crucial competence for developing and maintaining adequate relationship func-
tioning (Velotti etal., 2015).
Several studies have reported that emotional functioning in intimate relationships was associ-
ated with individual differences in attachment styles. In particular, attachment styles were related
to variations in the emotional reactions to signals of distress or pleasure perceived in partners
behavior (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2005). Therefore, attachment-related differences in emotion reg-
ulation may significantly influence relationship interactions (Mikulincer etal., 2003) and particu-
larly conflict resolution between partners (Ben-Naim, Hirschberger, Ein-Dor, & Mikulincer,
2013). In fact, when dealing with stressful situations within the couple, each partner may experi-
ence different levels of anxiety and may rely on different abilities to regulate their negative emo-
tions. Notably, this variability could, at least in part, be captured examining individual differences
in attachment styles.
Interestingly, adult romantic relationships may represent the possibility for individuals to revisit
past attachment experiences, developing a current attachment representation, which is specific to
their romantic partners (Crowell & Treboux, 2001). Recent studies have demonstrated that specific
attachment models (i.e., those related to the current partner) interacted with generalized attachment
models (i.e., those related to the primary caregiver) in predicting couple adjustment and conflict
strategies (Castellano, Velotti, Crowell, & Zavattini, 2014; Velotti, Castellano, & Zavattini, 2011).
During the development and through their relationship with attachment figures, children build
their own emotion regulation abilities (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2008). Nonetheless, significant
events during adulthood, such as a stable intimate relationship, could confirm or disconfirm origi-
nal expectations based on general attachment representations, in turn leading to a modification of
emotion regulation strategies (Feeney, 2008). As a whole, the studies outlined above seem to indi-
cate that attachment dimensions and emotion regulation abilities are important to understand cou-
ple relationships. Furthermore, a more complete understanding could be reached by focusing on
both partners, rather than studying couple functioning at the individual level. For instance, roman-
tic (i.e., current) attachment insecurity has been linked to maladaptive emotion regulation (Goodall,
2015). However, since several studies suggested that different levels of emotional experience
within romantic functioning are affected by gender (Clark, Fitness, & Brissette, 2001), it is still not
clear whether gender differences may affect attachment styles and difficulties in emotion regula-
tion strategies in couple relationships.

Gender differences in emotion regulation

We refer here to emotion regulation as a multidimensional construct involving the awareness,
understanding, and acceptance of emotions; the ability to access adaptive strategies for modulating
Velotti et al. 193

the intensity and/or duration of emotional responses; the willingness to experience emotional dis-
tress as part of pursuing desired goals; and the ability to control behavior when experiencing emo-
tional distress (Gratz & Roemer, 2004). The relative absence of any or all of these skills is referred
to as emotion dysregulation.
It has often been reported that emotional functioning in close relationships is based on gender
stereotypes (Hess etal., 2000). For instance, women are often described as those who provide
emotional support to others, seek emotional support from others, and use high person-centered
comforting messages in the effort to relieve stress (Debrot, Cook, Perrez, & Horn, 2012). Women
are also usually considered more emotionally responsive and able to express more intensely a
range of broad emotions (van Middendorp etal., 2005). On the other hand, men are deemed more
inclined to express specific emotions such as anger, while they are associated with a greater ten-
dency to suppress negative emotions (e.g., sadness; Flynn, Hollenstein, & Mackey, 2010).
Moreover, women usually report greater emotional awareness than men (Barrett, Lane, Sechrest,
& Schwartz, 2000). Other scholars have shown that wives benefit more than their husbands from
the expression of negative emotions and that emotional expression was considered a sign of inti-
macy that women find more desirable than men in couple relationships (Monin, Martire, Schulz,
& Clark, 2009). Also, it has been reported that women tend to use a greater variety of emotion
regulation strategies (Garnefski, Teerds, Kraaij, Legerstee, & van den Kommer, 2004), express
their emotions more often (Mendes, Reis, Seery, & Blascovich, 2003), and experience their emo-
tions more intensely (Williams & Barry, 2003).
However, the extant literature on this topic frequently reports inconsistent results, failing to
describe coherent gender differences in terms of emotion regulation within romantic relationships
(Velotti, Casselman, Garofalo, & McKenzie, 2015; Velotti, Zavattini, & Garofalo, 2013). For
example, a study conducted by Debrot etal. (2012), aimed at investigating interpersonal emotion
regulation processes within romantic relationships, highlighted only small and somewhat incon-
sistent gender differences between partners. Similarly, van Middendorp etal. (2005) did not find
any gender difference regarding the difficulty in experiencing and describing emotions, as well as
in emotional control. Such inconsistency could be clarified by introducing a third variable. Indeed,
it is possible that men and women do not differ in their emotion regulation abilities in absolute
terms, but that this difference is relative to their attachment style. However, to the best of our
knowledge, no studies have investigated whether attachment styles could better explain gender
differences in emotion regulation.
Finally, emotion regulation is considered to play a key role in determining healthy functioning
in both women and men, as in their couple functioning. However, only few studies have looked at
gender differences in emotion regulation within couples considering both partners (Garofalo,
Velotti, & Zavattini, 2015; Nolen-Hoeksema & Aldao, 2011).
In an effort to address this gap, this study examined how gender differences in emotion regula-
tion could be understood considering underlying attachment styles. In other words, we sought to
investigate whether the relationship between attachment styles and emotion regulation, rather than
emotion regulation only, was affected by gender differences. Accordingly, we examined in a large
sample of heterosexual couples whether women showed a greater ability to regulate their emotions
as compared to men. Yet, given the controversial findings mentioned above, no specific predictions
were made concerning distinct dimensions of emotion dysregulation. Furthermore, we expected
that no differences in attachment styles would emerge across gender. Finally, it was expected that
higher scores on each insecure dimension (i.e., avoidance and anxiety) were related to higher
degrees of emotion dysregulation. However, given the expected gender differences in emotion
regulation, we hypothesized that gender would moderate the relationship between attachment
dimensions and emotion regulation facets.
194 South African Journal of Psychology 46(2)

Method
This study is part of an ongoing longitudinal research focused on the first years of marriage (see
also Velotti etal., 2015). Information relevant to this study is presented below.

Participants
The following criteria were used to select participants: all participants had to be in the first 6
months of a heterosexual marriage; participants did not have children and were not expecting a
child at the beginning of the study; none of the participants had been previously married; all par-
ticipants had to be Italian and they were not planning to leave the country. These criteria were
chosen in order to avoid that the impact of stressful events (e.g., parenthood and divorce; Brown &
Robinson, 2012) that could alter the assessment of the variables of interest. The sample consisted
of 229 newlywed couples (N=458). They had been married for an average of 4.2months, and their
mean age was 31.29years (standard deviation [SD]=3.63) for females and 32.97years (SD=3.55)
for males. Spouses had been dating for an average of 5.4years (SD=3.31) before they were mar-
ried. Regarding educational level, 41.2% of husbands and 56.7% of the wives had university edu-
cation. Less than 10% of the first-time marriage applicants who were approached declined to
participate in the research.

Instruments
Difficulties in Emotion Regulations Scale. The Difficulties in Emotion Regulations Scale (DERS;
Gratz & Roemer, 2004) is a 36-item self-report scale developed to assess difficulties in six
domains of emotion regulation. Participants were asked to indicate how often each item applied
to them using a 5-point Likert-type scale, ranging from 1 (almost never) to 5 (almost always).
Higher scores reported on each DERS scale indicate greater emotion dysregulation in the follow-
ing areas: Nonacceptance of emotional responses (Nonacceptance, for example, When Im
upset, I become embarrassed for feeling that way); Difficulty engaging in goal-oriented behavior
when experiencing negative emotions (Goals, for example, When Im upset, I can still get things
done); Difficulties with impulse control when experiencing negative emotions (Impulse, for
example, When Im upset, I feel out of control); Lack of attention for, and awareness of, per-
sonal emotions (Awareness, for example, I pay attention to how I feel); Limited access to emo-
tion regulation strategies (Strategies, for example, When Im upset, it takes me a long time to
feel better); and Difficulties in identifying and labeling ones emotions (Clarity, for example, I
know exactly how I am feeling). Both the original (Gratz & Roemer, 2004) and the Italian
(Giromini, Velotti, de Campora, Bonalume, & Zavattini, 2012) versions of the DERS showed
good internal consistency and construct validity. In this study, Cronbachs alphas were .92 for the
DERS total score and equal to or greater than .67 for each subscale (the only scale with an alpha
lower than .70 was Awareness, in line with previous studies with the Italian version of the DERS;
for example, Velotti & Garofalo, 2015).

Experiences in Close RelationshipsRevised.The Experiences in Close RelationshipsRevised

(ECR-R; Fraley, Waller, & Brennan, 2000) is a 36-item self-report questionnaire which provides a
dimensional evaluation of current attachment style between romantic partners. Participants are
asked to indicate their feelings regarding their couple relationship according to a 7-point Likert-
type scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). The questionnaire produces
scores on two subscales, resembling the two main dimensions of romantic attachment styles: (1)
Velotti et al. 195

Anxiety, that is, intense worry about ones romantic relationship, strong involvement in the rela-
tionship, along with fear of abandonment and frequent seeking of the partners attention and care
(e.g., I often worry that my partner doesnt really love me); Avoidance, which involves difficul-
ties in establishing a deep intimate connection to the partner and a tendency to feel discomfort with
intimacy (e.g., I find it difficult to allow myself to depend on my partner). Low scores on both
dimensions are indicative of relatively secure attachment.
In this study, we used the dimensional evaluation, as recommended by the ECR-R authors
(Fraley etal., 2000), so that the differences among individuals could be more easily observed,
compared to a categorical evaluation. Several studies have examined the validity and reliability of
this measure and supporting its adequate psychometric properties (Sibley, Fischer, & Liu, 2005).
Picardi, Bitetti, Pasquini, and Puddu (2000) translated and validated the Italian version of the ECR-
R, which confirmed its sound psychometric properties. In this study, internal consistency was good
for both the avoidance and the anxiety subscale (=.88 and .90, respectively).

Procedure
In order to maximize the sample size, couples were recruited from premarital courses (N=426;
93%) or when they applied for marital license in the District Office (N=32; 7%) in different
cities in Central Italy, and then screened to determine whether both partners met the eligibility
criteria described above. Following the initial screening process, letters were sent to couples
meeting the above criteria, inviting them to participate in a 2-year longitudinal study on mar-
riage. Partners interested in participating were given their own individual questionnaire pack
after providing written informed consent. The completion of the survey took between 45 and
60min, and the respondents were instructed not to discuss their answers with their partners. All
measures were completed either in a room where the premarital courses took place or at partici-
pants home. In both cases, a trained clinical psychologist was present during the administration
of the questionnaires.

Ethical considerations
The research received formal approval from the Research Ethics Committee at Sapienza University
of Rome (Italy). The study complied with American Psychological Association (APA) ethical
standards in the treatment of human research participants and conformed to the provisions of the
Declaration of Helsinki in 1995 (as revised in Edinburgh 2000).

Data analysis
A linear mixed model analysis was used to estimate the level of difficulty an individual experi-
enced with regard to emotion regulation and attachment dimensions within their marriage, as well
as their interaction. This technique is well suited for the analysis of multi-actor data structures, as
it takes into account the dependency of the observation and estimate variance at different levels.

Results
Descriptive analyses for the DERS and the ECR-R
Table 1 presents the means and standard deviations for difficulties in emotion regulation and
attachment dimensions.
196 South African Journal of Psychology 46(2)

Table 1. Means and standard deviations for the DERS and ECR-R subscales, for men (N=229), women
(N=229), and for the overall sample (N=458).

Men (N=229) Women (N=229) Total (N=458)

M SD M SD M SD
DERS
Nonacceptance 12.56 4.50 13.26 4.69 12.91 4.61
Goals 12.21 3.99 13.48 4.21 12.84 4.15
Impulse 10.86 4.14 11.92 4.81 11.39 4.52
Awareness 14.53 3.28 14.48 2.65 14.51 2.98
Strategies 14.12 4.79 15.90 5.83 15.01 5.40
Clarity 6.61 2.43 6.99 2.48 6.80 2.46
Total score 70.89 16.84 76.00 17.99 73.44 17.60
ECR-R
Anxiety 2.63 0.77 2.78 0.82 2.70 0.80
Avoidance 2.31 0.69 2.23 0.65 2.27 0.67

DERS: Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale. ECR-R: Experiences in Close RelationshipsRevised; SD: standard deviation.

In line with the mean scores found in the nonclinical sample used by Gratz and Roemer (2004),
scores in our sample were distributed in the lower-middle range of difficulties in emotion regula-
tion. Data analysis revealed significant variation across gender. Specifically, women reported
higher scores on the following DERS subscales: Goals (F=11.05; p<.001), Strategies (F=12.75;
p<.001), as well as on the DERS total score (F=9.85; p<.01). Conversely, no gender differences
were found regarding attachment dimensions.
Regarding attachment styles, participants reported a central distribution on the dimensional
continuum, placing this sample in the range of attachment security. Our sample reported relatively
lower levels of anxiety and avoidance than those found in the validation sample from Fraley etal.s
(2000) study.

Associations among DERS and ECR-R scales and gender effect

Both attachment anxiety and attachment avoidance positively predicted overall emotion dysregula-
tion (i.e., DERS total score). In detail, results showed that anxiety and avoidance were positively
associated with scores on several DERS dimensions. First, Nonacceptance was positively related
to anxiety (Est.=1.87; t=8.05; p<.001) and avoidance (Est.=0.52; t=1.90; p<.001). Moreover,
only anxiety had a positive relation with the Impulse subscale of the DERS (Est.=1.54; t=2.07;
p<.001), whereas avoidance did not emerge as significant predictor (Est.=0.04; t=0.181; p>.05).
As for Awareness, only avoidance showed a significant positive effect (Est.=0.77; t=3.92;
p<.001), while anxiety was not significantly related to this subscale of the DERS (Est.=0.132;
t=0.710; p>.05). For the Strategies subscale, only anxiety had a significant positive effect
(Est.=2.36; t=8.03; p<.001), with avoidance being not significantly associated with this dimen-
sion of the DERS (Est.=0.189; t=0.512; p>.05). Then, both anxiety (Est.=0.92; t=5.13; p<.001)
and avoidance (Est.=1.08; t=7.11; p<.001) were significantly and positively related to scores on
the Clarity subscale. Finally, in the prediction of Goals scores, the effect of anxiety (Est.=0.55;
t=1.61; p<.001) and avoidance scores (Est.=0.86; t=2.25; p<.001) interacted with gender, as
follows. Regarding the anxietygender interaction (Est.=1.29; t=2.76; p<.001), greater levels
of anxiety corresponded to higher scores on the Goals subscale only among females. As for
Velotti et al. 197

Figure 1. Moderating effect of gender in the association between both attachment anxiety and avoidance
with DERS Goals dimension. Specifically, higher scores on attachment anxiety were related to more
difficulties on the DERS Goals dimension among women, but not men. Conversely, among men, the higher
the score of attachment avoidance, the greater the difficulties reported on the DERS Goals dimension,
whereas the opposite was true for women (i.e., a negative association between attachment avoidance and
Goals emerged).

the avoidancegender interaction (Est.=-1.64; t=-2.97; p<.001), the opposite pattern emerged:
avoidance scores were related to higher Goals scores only for males, whereas females with higher
avoidance scores showed lower scores on Goals (see Figure 1 for a graphical depiction of this
moderation effect).1

Discussion
Consistent with prior studies (Bakermans-Kranenburg & van IJzendoorn, 2009), and in line with
the expectations, our findings confirmed that gender differences did not characterize attachment
styles such as anxiety and avoidance. However, this study adds to the literature by examining
gender differences in the associations between attachment insecurities and emotion regulation
difficulties.
Regarding difficulties in emotion regulation, our results seem to suggest possible gender differ-
ences. In fact, women reported greater difficulties in the regulation of negative emotions than men.
Specifically, women had greater overall difficulties in emotion regulation (i.e., higher scores on the
DERS total score), as well as in concentrating on tasks at hand when experiencing negative emo-
tions and in accessing effective emotion regulation strategies (i.e., higher scores on the Goals and
Strategies subscales, respectively). It is worth noting that, in the validation study of the DERS,
Gratz and Roemer (2004) reported a different pattern of gender differences in their sample, with
men having higher scores on the Awareness subscale than women. However, the authors of the
Italian adaptation of the DERS (Giromini etal., 2012) did not find any gender difference, suggest-
ing that variability in emotion dysregulation may not depend directly on gender, but rather gender
differences may stem from variability in a third intervening variable (here, attachment style).
Thus, in this study, we examined whether, rather than playing a direct effect on emotion dys-
regulation dimensions, gender could play a moderating role in the association between attachment
198 South African Journal of Psychology 46(2)

styles and emotion dysregulation. First, our findings corroborated previous evidence on the rela-
tion between attachment insecurities and emotion dysregulation. In particular, both attachment
anxiety and attachment avoidance were related to difficulties in emotional acceptance, as well as
to lack of emotional clarity and overall emotion dysregulation. However, only attachment anxiety
significantly predicted negative urgency (i.e., difficulties in refraining from impulsive behavior
when distressed) and limited access to effective emotion regulation strategies. On the other hand,
attachment avoidance was uniquely related to lack of awareness for emotions. As a whole, these
findings seem to suggest that attachment insecurity in general (i.e., either in the form of anxiety or
in the form of avoidance) is related to nonacceptance of emotional responses and lack of emotional
clarity. These two dimensions of emotion dysregulation partially reflect a mentalizing deficit
(Velotti & Garofalo, 2015) often associated with attachment insecurity (Allen & Fonagy, 2006).
Consistent with this framework, an insecure attachment style could undermine the ability to think
of and reflect on ones own emotions, in turn compromising emotion regulation efforts. Nonetheless,
this mentalizing deficit could be associated with selected difficulties in emotion regulation, as a
function of attachment. Indeed, people with an anxious attachment style seemed characterized by
a lack of confidence in abilities to engage an effective emotion regulation strategy and an associ-
ated difficulty with impulse control. In contrast, individuals with an avoidant attachment style may
not present these deficits in emotion regulation while showing a lack of emotional awareness.
Interestingly, the Awareness scale of the DERS actually captures the individual tendency to attend
to and acknowledge upsetting emotions. Hence, this pattern of emotion dysregulation is consistent
with the conceptualization of avoidant individuals as dismissing attachment-related issues and
detaching from emotional experiences (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2008).
Finally, and perhaps more importantly, the relation between attachment styles and the difficulty
in engaging in goal-oriented behaviors when experiencing negative emotions was moderated by
gender. Indeed, attachment anxiety was related to this dimension of emotion dysregulation only
among women. This may indicate that women with an anxious attachment style are less willing to
experience negative emotions as part of pursuing an individual goal, while this ability (also referred
to as distress tolerance, or persistence) could remain intact in men with the same attachment style.
Conversely, the unwillingness to tolerate negative emotions while engaging in goal-directed
behavior was related to attachment avoidance among males only. Taken together, this moderation
effect suggests that a mentalizing deficitor a limited ability to reflect upon mental statescould
undermine the individuals capacity to rely on their emotional states as a source of information to
guide their behavior, in a different way among men and women. Indeed, anxious (with respect to
attachment) women and avoidant men, but not anxious men and avoidant women, could manifest
this difficulty in controlling and directing behavior toward a personal goal when upset. In other
terms, the ability to behave in accordance with desired goals could be selectively impaired in anx-
ious women and avoidant men. Of note, women with an avoidant attachment style showed a greater
willingness to tolerate negative emotions while engaging in goal-directed behavior than women
low in attachment avoidance. However, it should be noted that women in our sample reported lev-
els of attachment avoidance in the range of (relative) attachment security. Therefore, this finding
seems to suggest that, to a certain extent, attachment avoidance could be somehow functional
among women, whereas it is linked to difficulties in regulating emotions among men. Likewise,
our findings suggest that relatively higher levels of attachment anxiety could be more detrimental
for women than for men. The relevance of this particular dimension of emotion dysregulation (i.e.,
in the ability to behave in accordance with desired goals when experiencing negative emotions) in
couple relationships is supported by the fact that a willingness to express (and experience) negative
emotions was associated with positive relationship outcomes, such as elicitation of mutual support
and enhancing intimacy in romantic relationships (Graham, Huang, Clark, & Helgeson, 2008).
Velotti et al. 199

Accordingly, an attachment-informed approach to treat a difficulty in this aspect of emotion dys-

regulation could be of great help in couple therapy (Kazdin, 2015; Kirby & Baucom, 2007). The
different pattern of findings for men and women may result from different gender role norms for
goals achievement. Women are typically expected to take a less active role, which may produce
more tension in anxious women who experience heightened distress and more intense emotions
with an associated need to express their fears (Davis, Shaver, & Vernon, 2003). Men, on the other
hand, are expected to act in accordance with their desired goals even when they are experiencing
negative emotions; therefore, meeting this expectancy could be difficult for avoidant men who
prefer to disengage themselves.
Although our study has a number of strengths (e.g., the recruitment of a large sample of couples
and a sophisticated data analytic approach to examine relations in a paired sample), a number of
limitations warrant mention. First, the cross-sectional data analytic approach presented here pre-
vents us from understanding causal relationships between attachment styles and emotion dysregu-
lation dimensions. Our hypothesis, in line with the mainstream theoretical models (e.g., Mikulincer
& Shaver, 2008), was that an insecure attachment style could undermine the individuals ability to
regulate emotions, but this cannot be confirmed using the present data. For example, it is unclear
whether the high levels of emotional unawareness reported by individuals with an avoidant attach-
ment style were due to their attachment style or whether the direction of causation was inverted,
such that lack of emotional awareness may have led to the development of an avoidant attachment
style. In other words, it is possible that emotion regulation patterns may serve as a means for mod-
eling ones attachment orientation within romantic relationships: this possibility should be explored
in future research. Moreover, it is even possible that a mutual relationship may characterize these
constructs or that a third variablesuch as attachment representations with respect to parental
figuresmay have influenced the development of both emotion regulation and romantic attach-
ment style. Further research is needed to obtain a better understanding of the causal link between
emotion regulation and romantic attachment.
Second, this study relied on self-report measures of attachment styles and emotion dysregula-
tion, which may raise concerns about self-presentation biases, lack of insight, and about the effects
of shared-method variance on the observed correlations. Future research using different assess-
ment methods of these constructs are needed to validate our conclusions.
Third, this study involved newlywed heterosexual young adults, which may limit the generaliz-
ability of the findings. For instance, replications are needed in different national contexts, where
same-sex marriages are legal, in order to also compare gay and lesbian couples. Furthermore, it is
possible that the associations between romantic attachment styles and emotion dysregulation vary
across developmental periods and marital stages. As a result of this uncertainty, future research
may benefit from the inclusion of younger and/or older individuals as well as individuals not yet
married or married for a longer time.

Conclusion
As a whole, these results seem to suggest that different dimensions of emotion dysregulation may
stem from different attachment dimension and that this relation differs across gender. These find-
ings are related to interesting clinical implications. Indeed, when dealing with couples suffering
from difficulties in emotion regulation, an appropriate treatment should be tailored based on the
attachment style of each partner. In particular, if it is well known that targeting dysfunctional
aspects of attachment anxiety or avoidance is an integral part of marital therapy (Castellano,
Velotti, & Zavattini, 2014; Kazdin, 2015), treatment approaches priorities may differ when treating
men or women with attachment insecurities. Notwithstanding these distinctions, specific aspects of
200 South African Journal of Psychology 46(2)

attachment insecurity were related to selected difficulties in emotion regulation, as described

above, supporting the relevance of attachment-based approaches for the treatment of individuals
and couples with emotion dysregulation problems.

Acknowledgements
We are especially grateful to the couples who contributed to this project as participants.

Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Note
1. All other interaction terms were nonsignificant. For the sake of parsimony, details regarding these non-
significant results are not presented here, but are available from the first author upon request.

References
Allen, J. G. & P. Fonagy (Eds.). (2006). Handbook of mentalization-based treatment. Chichester, UK: John
Wiley.
Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J., & van IJzendoorn, M. H. (2009). No reliable gender differences in attachment
across the lifespan. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 32, 2223.
Barrett, L. F., Lane, R. D., Sechrest, L., & Schwartz, G. E. (2000). Sex differences in emotional awareness.
Personal and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 10271035.
Ben-Naim, S., Hirschberger, G., Ein-Dor, T., & Mikulincer, M. (2013). An experimental study of emotion
regulation during relationship conflict interactions: The moderating role of attachment orientations.
Emotion, 13, 506519.
Bowlby, J. (1988). A secure base: Parent-child attachment and health human development. New York, NY:
Basic Books.
Brown, O., & Robinson, J. (2012). Resilience in remarried families. South African Journal of Psychology,
42, 114126.
Castellano, R., Velotti, P., Crowell, J., & Zavattini, G. C. (2014). The role of parents attachment configura-
tions at childbirth on marital satisfaction and conflict strategies. Journal of Child and Family Studies,
23, 10111026.
Castellano, R., Velotti, P., & Zavattini, G. C. (2014). What makes us stay together? Attachment and the out-
comes of couple relationships. London, England: Karnac Books.
Clark, M. S., Fitness, J., & Brissette, I. (2001). Understanding peoples perceptions of relationships is crucial
to understanding their emotional lives. In B. B. Marilynn & M. Hewstone (Eds.), Emotion and motiva-
tion (pp. 253278). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
Creasey, G., & Ladd, A. (2004). Negative mood regulation expectancies and conflict behaviors in late adoles-
cent college student romantic relationships: The moderating role of generalized attachment representa-
tions. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 14, 235255.
Crowell, J., & Treboux, D. (2001). Attachment security in adult partnerships. In C. Clulow (Ed.), Adult attach-
ment and couple psychotherapy: The Secure Base in practice and research (pp. 2842). London,
England: Routledge.
Davis, D., Shaver, P. R., & Vernon, M. L. (2003). Physical, emotional, and behavioral reactions to break-
ing up: The roles of gender, age, emotional involvement, and attachment style. Personality and Social
Psychology Bulletin, 29, 871884.
Debrot, A., Cook, W. L., Perrez, M., & Horn, A. B. (2012). Deeds matter: Daily enacted responsiveness and
intimacy in couples daily lives. Journal of Family Psychology, 26, 617627.
Feeney, J. (2008). Adult romantic attachment: Development in the study of couple relationship. In J. Cassidy
& P. R. Shaver (Eds.), Handbook of attachment: Theory, research, and clinical applications (2nd ed.,
pp. 456481). New York, NY: Guilford.
Velotti et al. 201

Flynn, J. J., Hollenstein, T., & Mackey, A. (2010). The effect of suppressing and not accepting emotions
on depressive symptoms: Is suppression different for men and women? Personality and Individual
Differences, 49, 582586.
Fraley, R. C., Waller, N. G., & Brennan, K. A. (2000). An item response theory analysis of self-report meas-
ures of adult attachment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 350365.
Garnefski, N., Teerds, J., Kraaij, V., Legerstee, J., & van den Kommer, T. (2004). Cognitive emotion regu-
lation strategies and depressive symptoms: Differences between males and females. Personality and
Individual Differences, 36, 267276.
Garofalo, C., Velotti, P., & Zavattini, G. C. (2015). Emotion dysregulation and hypersexuality: Review and
clinical implications. Manuscript submitted for publication.
Giromini, L., Velotti, P., de Campora, G., Bonalume, L., & Zavattini, G. C. (2012). Cultural adaptation of the
difficulties in emotion regulation scale: Reliability and validity of an Italian version. Journal of Clinical
Psychology, 68, 9891007.
Goodall, K. (2015). Individual differences in the regulation of positive emotion: The role of attachment and
self esteem. Personality and Individual Differences, 74, 208213.
Graham, S. M., Huang, J. Y., Clark, M. S., & Helgeson, V. S. (2008). The positives of negative emotions:
Willingness to express negative emotions promotes relationships. Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin, 34, 394406.
Gratz, K. L., & Roemer, L. (2004). Multidimensional assessment of emotion regulation and dysregulation:
Development, factor structure, and initial validation of the difficulties in emotion regulation scale.
Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 26(1), 4154.
Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. R. (1987). Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment process. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 511524.
Hess, U., Sencal, S., Kirouac, G., Herrera, P., Philippot, P., & Kleck, R. E. (2000). Emotional expressivity in
men and women: Stereotypes and self-perceptions. Cognition and Emotion, 14, 609642.
Kazdin, A. E. (2015). Evidence-based psychotherapies II: Changes in models of treatment and treatment
delivery. South African Journal of Psychology, 45, 321.
Kirby, J. S., & Baucom, D. H. (2007). Treating emotion dysregulation in a couples context: A pilot study of a
couples skills group intervention. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 33, 375391.
Mendes, W. B., Reis, H. T., Seery, M. D., & Blascovich, J. (2003). Cardiovascular correlates of emotional
expression and suppression: Do content and gender context matter? Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 84, 771792.
Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2005). Attachment theory and emotions in close relationships Exploring
the attachment-related dynamics of emotional reactions to relational events. Personal Relationships, 12,
149168.
Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2008). Adult attachment and affect regulation. In J. Cassidy & P. R. Shaver
(Eds.), Handbook of attachment: Theory, research, and clinical applications (2nd ed., pp. 503531).
New York, NY: Guilford.
Mikulincer, M., Shaver, P. R., & Pereg, D. (2003). Attachment theory and affect regulation: The dynamics, devel-
opment and cognitive consequences of attachment-related strategies. Motivation and Emotion, 27, 77102.
Monin, J. K., Martire, L. M., Schulz, R., & Clark, M. S. (2009). Willingness to express emotion to caregiving
spouses. Emotion, 9(1), 101106.
Nolen-Hoeksema, S., & Aldao, A. (2011). Gender and age differences in emotion regulation strategies and
their relationship to depressive symptoms. Personality and Individual Differences, 51, 704708.
Picardi, A., Bitetti, D., Pasquini, P., & Puddu, P. (2000). La scala experiences in close relationships (ECR), un
nuovo strumento per la valutazione dellattaccamento negli adulti: Traduzione, adattamento e validazi-
one della versione italiana [The Experiences in Close Relationships scale (ECR), a new tool for assessing
attachment in adults: Translation, adaptation and validation of the Italian version]. Rivista Psichiatrica,
35(3), 113120.
Sibley, C. G., Fischer, R., & Liu, J. H. (2005). Reliability and validity of the revised experiences in close rela-
tionships (ECR-R) self-report measure of adult romantic attachment. Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin, 31, 15241536.
202 South African Journal of Psychology 46(2)

van Middendorp, H., Geenen, R., Sorbi, M. J., Hox, J. J., Vingerhoets, A. J. J. M., van Doornen, L. J. P.,
& Bijlsma, J. W. J. (2005). Gender differences in emotion regulation and relationships with perceived
health in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Women & Health, 42(1), 7597.
Velotti, P., Balzarotti, S., Tagliabue, S., English, T., Zavattini, G. C., & Gross, J. J. (2015). Emotional sup-
pression in early marriage: Actor, partner, and similarity effects on marital quality. Journal of Social and
Personal Relationships. Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/0265407515574466.
Velotti, P., Casselman, R. B., Garofalo, C., & McKenzie, M. D. (2015). Emotion dysregulation and aggres-
sion among young adults in the U.S.A. and Italy: A cross-cultural comparison. Manuscript submitted
for publication.
Velotti, P., Castellano, R., & Zavattini, G. C. (2011). Adjustment of couples following childbirth: The role of
generalized and specific states of mind in an Italian sample. European Psychologist, 16(1), 110.
Velotti, P., & Garofalo, C. (2015). Personality styles in a non-clinical sample: The role of emotion dysregula-
tion and impulsivity. Personality and Individual Differences, 79, 4449.
Velotti, P., Zavattini, G. C., & Garofalo, C. (2013). Lo studio della regolazione delle emozioni: Prospettive
future [The study of emotion regulation: Future perspectives]. Giornale Italiano di Psicologia, 2,
247262.
Williams, L. M., & Barry, J. (2003). Do sex differences in emotionality mediate sex differences in traits of
psychosis-proneness? Cognition and Emotion, 17, 747758.
Copyright of South African Journal of Psychology is the property of Sage Publications, Ltd.
and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without
the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or
email articles for individual use.