Author:
Lelek Aleksandra,Klikovac Tamara
Abstract
The study deals with the relationship between psychosocial development and attachment in late adolescence. The aim is to examine the relationship between the success in resolving the crises of psychosocial development and attachment dimensions and to investigate the differences between attachment styles with respect to the success in resolving the crises of psychosocial development. The Questionnaire for Attachment Assessment, II revision (UPIPAV-R) and The Modified Erikson Psychosocial Stage Inventory (MEPSI) were applied on the sample of 212 students (aged 2026) of faculties and colleges situated in Belgrade. The results indicate that there is a significant relationship between attachment dimensions and the success in resolving tasks of psychosocial development, with three significantly connected pairs of structures between two sets of variables. The securely attached adolescents were significantly and consistently more successful in resolving the crises of psychosocial development in comparison with the insecurely attached adolescents. They also showed a higher level of general psychosocial matureness. Significant differences in resolving the crises of psychosocial development were obtained between adolescents with different forms of insecure attachment. Based on the success in resolving the crises of psychosocial development, 59.4% of respondents were classified in the original attachment group, including: 76.6% with secure attachment, 57.1% with preoccupied, 56.6% with dismissing and 41.3% with fearful attachment.
Publisher
Centre for Evaluation in Education and Science (CEON/CEES)
Reference41 articles.
1. Arnett, J. J. (2000). Emerging adulthood: A theory of development from the late teens through the twenties. American Psychologist, 55(5), 469-480;
2. Allen, J. P., & Land, D. (1999). Attachment in adolescence. In J. Cassidy & P. R. Shaver (Eds.), Handbook of attachment: Theory, research, and clinical applications (pp. 319-335). New York, NY, US: Guilford Press;
3. Allen, J. P., Moore, C., Kuperminc, G., & Bell, K. (1998). Attachment and adolescent psychosocial functioning. Child Development, 69(5), 1406-1419;
4. Bartholomew, K., & Horowitz, L. M. (1991). Attachment styles among young adults: A test of a four-category model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61(2), 226-244;
5. Bartholomew, K., & Shaver, P. R. (1998). Methods of assessing adult attachment: Do they converge? U J. A. Simpson & W. S. Rholes (Eds.), Attachment theory and close relationships (pp. 25-45). New York, NY, US: Guilford Press;