Pilkonis, Paul
(2018)
Hierarchy of Attachment Organization (HAO) - Personality Studies.
[Dataset]
(Unpublished)
Abstract
This submission contains data and codebooks from several personality studies conducted 1990-2017, organized by assessment instrument. For demographic information about the study participants, please refer to Background Information Questionnaire (BIQ) - Personality Studies (http://d-scholarship.pitt.edu/id/eprint/35424).
Studies:
1. Interpersonal Functioning in Borderline Personality ("Interpersonal Functioning")
2. Interpersonal Functioning and Emotion in Borderline Personality ("Emotion and Interpersonal Functioning")
3. Interpersonal Functioning and Emotion in Borderline Personality ("Couples")
Description:
(From Beeney et al., 2016): “Clinical evaluators rated participants on four different levels of attachment, describing a hierarchy of attachment organization. Each level of attachment had 1–3 styles, totaling eight styles. Evaluators were allotted 100 points to distribute across these eight styles in any manner they felt best captured the participant’s attachment organization and style. The most organized attachment level was named “flexible and balanced structure,” with the single style of secure attachment. The next level was characterized as “functional but not optimal structure,” and consisted of typical insecure attachment styles: preoccupied and dismissive. The subsequent level was described as “excessively rigid structure” and consisted of hostile, controlling patterns of relationships and compulsive caregiving styles. “Excessively rigid structure” refers to the lack of flexibility and limited behavioral repertoire among individuals at this level, particularly in responding to stressful interpersonal situations. Individuals with elevations at this level are likely to respond to most interpersonal situations with hostile control, or compulsive caregiving, regardless of what the situation calls for. The lowest level of organization was dubbed “disorganization and lack of structure” specified by three styles: “high intensity and highly affective incoherence,” “low intensity and low affective incoherence,” and “unresolved.” Neither disorganized types, nor levels of attachment organization, were mutually exclusive; evaluators could give points to all categories that were characteristic of the person.”
In addition to the distribution of points among attachment styles, each style is rated on a scale of 1 (“not at all to very little”) to 5 (“to a marked extent”) to indicate the degree to which each style characterizes the participant. Additionally, the eight styles are ranked from 1-8, according to which styles dominate the participant’s attachment system.
References:
Beeney, J. E., Wright, A. G., Stepp, S. D., Hallquist, M. N., Lazarus, S. A., Beeney, J. R., ... & Pilkonis, P. A. (2017). Disorganized attachment and personality functioning in adults: A latent class analysis. Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, 8(3), 206.
Share
| Citation/Export: |
|
| Social Networking: |
|
Details
Metrics
Monthly Views for the past 3 years
Plum Analytics
Actions (login required)
 |
View Item |
![[img]](https://d-scholarship.pitt.edu/style/images/fileicons/other.png)
![[img]](https://d-scholarship.pitt.edu/style/images/fileicons/application_msword.png)
![[feed]](/images/feed-icon-32x32.png){kind=icon}