Adult Attachment Insecurity and Positive Emotions: The Mediating Role of Dispositional Mindfulness Facets

Abstract

This study explored the mediating roles of mindfulness facets in the relationship between adult attachment and positive emotions. Specifically, it examined the subjective experiences and regulation strategies associated with positive emotions. A total of 513 participants completed self-report questionnaires assessing dispositional mindfulness, adult attachment, discrete positive emotion, and regulation strategies related to positive emotions. The parallel multiple mediation analysis indicated that nonjudging repeatedly emerged as significant mediator in the relationship between attachment insecurity (anxiety and avoidance) and discrete positive emotions and the regulation strategies used. Describe facet only emerged as a significant mediator in the context of attachment avoidance and positive emotions and regulation strategies. The effects of attachment insecurity on positive emotions differed through various mindfulness facets. The current findings extend understanding of the mechanisms that may explain why individuals differ in the extent to which they engage in positive emotional experiences. This insight may inform the adaptation of mindfulness-based programs to better address individual differences.

Keywords

positive emotions attachment anxiety attachment avoidance dispositional mindfulness

Introduction

Growing research has demonstrated that repeatedly experiencing positive emotions serves as an upward spiral towards better resilience and well-being (Chang, 2025; Roth et al., 2024). Fredrickson’s (2001) (Fredrickson, 2001) broaden-and-build theory suggests that positive emotions broaden mindsets and expand think-action repertoires (Sugawara & Sugie, 2021), leading to more enduring personal and social resources (Fredrickson & Joiner, 2018). Conversely, difficulties with experiencing positive emotions can negatively impact mental health, increasing risks for depressive and anxiety symptoms (Silton et al., 2020). Individuals employ a wide range of strategies to regulate positive emotion, which may involve down-regulating or dampening - use of strategies that reduce intensity and persistence of the emotional experience (Feldman et al., 2008), and up-regulating or savouring - actively engaging in and enhancing positive emotions. Reduced savouring has been linked to depression and a reduced frequency and intensity of positive affect (Silton et al., 2020; Vanderlind et al., 2022). Similarly, suppressing positive emotions is associated with poorer stress coping abilities (Millgram et al., 2019), reduced sleep quality (Latif et al., 2019) and lower psychological resilience (Polizzi & Lynn, 2021). Despite the growing body of literature exploring the impacts of positive emotions, there remains limited research on the mechanisms underlying individual differences in experiencing or regulating positive emotions.

Previous research has identified several mechanisms contributing to individual differences in emotion regulation, yet there remains a lack of a focus specifically on positive emotion (Gross, 2015). Gross proposed the need for an integrative framework, emphasising that individual differences in emotion regulation can be understood as originating from distal antecedents and further shaping by emotional understanding and values (Gross, 2014). Studies on positive emotion have highlighted the role of adult attachment as a significant antecedent factor and mindfulness as a subsequent trait essential for promoting emotional regulation (Goodall, 2015; Mikulincer et al., 2013).

Early experiences with caregivers and significant others contribute to the development of internalised cognitive representations, or internal working models (IWMs), which are thought to underpin adult attachment orientations (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2016). IWMs shape perceptions of self and others and influence behaviours in interpersonal and intimate relationships (Bosmans et al., 2020; Fearon & Roisman, 2017), as well as influencing how people manage attention, thoughts and emotions (Waters et al., 2021), which are the key components of the attachment-behavioural system, explaining how the early caregiving interactions affect social and emotional functioning throughout life (Gillath et al., 2016; Mikulincer & Shaver, 2016). Attachment anxiety in adulthood is associated with IMWs characterised by a view of the self as vulnerable and dependent, alongside heightened fear of abandonment (e.g., Mikulincer & Shaver, 2007). In response to perceived threat, the attachment system tends to become hyperactivated with heightened reassurance-seeking, intensified distress, and efforts to maintain proximity to attachment figures (Domic-Siede et al., 2024). This pattern is, in turn, associated with selective attentional processing towards negative and threatening stimuli (Peng et al., 2024; Wang et al., 2024). Attachment avoidance, by contrast, is associated with an IWM characterised by self-reliance and a mistrust of others (e.g., Mikulincer & Shaver, 2007), and a hypo-activating strategy which involves denial or suppression of upsetting stimuli and a tendency to be unclear about emotions experienced (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2019). Both insecure attachment dimensions have been associated with differential experiencing of positive emotion. For example, attachment anxiety correlates with lower levels of joy, pride and contentment, whereas attachment avoidance is negatively associated with feelings of love and compassion (Shiota et al., 2006). It is assumed that attachment-related differences in the experience of negative emotions are underpinned by attachment related goals (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2019), however, it remains unclear that whether these patterns are the same when regulating positive emotions. For example, some studies did not find significant negative associations between attachment anxiety and savouring positive emotions (Goodall, 2015; Verhees et al., 2021).

Mindfulness, defined as “paying attention in a particular way: on purpose, in the present moment, non-judgmentally” (Kabat-Zinn, 1990, p. 4), offers an important framework for understanding positive emotions. While mindfulness can be cultivated through training, individuals vary in their dispositional mindfulness, or their tendency to sustain mindful awareness of the present moment (Brown & Ryan, 2003). Dispositional mindfulness comprises five facets: nonreacting (nonreactivity to inner and external experiences), observe (noticing or attending to experiences), acting with awareness (paying attention to the present moment rather than behaving automatically), describe (expressing one’s experiences in words), and nonjudging (adopting nonjudgmental stances towards experiences) (Baer et al., 2006). The core features of dispositional mindfulness – open curiosity, attentiveness, nonjudging, and nonreacting (Gilbert et al., 2012), may expand individuals’ capacity to experience and regulate positive emotions. Facet-level studies further highlight nuanced differences in how mindfulness components relate to positive emotions. For example, nonjudging has robustly predicted increasing positive emotions (Mahlo & Windsor, 2021; Raynes & Dobkins, 2025). While associations between act with awareness and positive emotion range from weak (Medvedev et al., 2021) to strong (Raynes & Dobkins, 2025). Evidence for other mindfulness facets such as observe, nonreacting and describe, remains inconsistent where some studies show positive associations but some find nothing significant (e.g., Medvedev et al., 2021; Raynes & Dobkins, 2025). These discrepancies may reflect differences in how both mindfulness facets and positive emotions are measured, needing further investigation.

Altogether, as a distal antecedent factor, adult attachment plays a key role in explaining why individuals differ in how they experience and regulate positive emotions. According to attachment theory, Mikulincer and Shaver (2015, 2020) proposed the “broaden-and-build” effects of attachment security. Attachment security allows for creative, non-defensive interactions with the environment, and cultivates a receptive perception and effective awareness of both self and other mental states (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2015). This process broadens cognitive repertoires and enhances the optimal functioning of the behavioural systems, such as mindful awareness and emotion regulation (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2020). Growing evidence demonstrates that securely attached individuals tend to exhibit higher levels of trait mindfulness (Quickert, 2022; Stevenson, 2019). Similarly, attachment security priming – a way to experimentally enhance one’s sense of love, comfort and safety (Gillath et al., 2022) – has been shown to effectively increase state mindfulness both in the present-moment and over time (Melen et al., 2017; Pepping et al., 2015). Such evidence indicates that mindfulness might be an important mechanism linking attachment patterns to positive emotion. Indeed, Garland et al. (2010) proposed the upward spiral of trait mindfulness and positive dispositionality, suggesting that the capacity of being mindful is proposed to expand cognitive flexibility, thereby facilitating savouring of positive emotional experiences by enhancing flexible attention and awareness (Garland et al., 2010; Johnson et al., 2021). In the context of positive emotion, key unanswered questions include: (a) whether mindfulness facets function differently in discrete positive emotions; and (b) which mindfulness facets contribute to different regulation strategies among insecurely attached individuals.

This current study aimed to explore the mediating role of dispositional mindfulness facets in the relationship between attachment insecurity dimensions and (1) discrete positive emotions and (2) the regulation of positive emotions. Based on the research outlined above, the following hypotheses were developed. This study was pre-registered prior to conducting the research on OSF: https://osf.io/qr3mh/?view_only=46fb438c41224e06aa6cb6c234095041.

1. The relationships between adult attachment dimensions and discrete positive emotions (PE) will be mediated by dispositional mindfulness (DM) facets.

2. The relationships between adult attachment dimensions and regulation of PE will be mediated by DM facets.

Method

Participants

In total, 517 participants completed an anonymous online survey. As no financial incentive was offered for participation, the likelihood of fraudulent responses was reduced (Salinas, 2023). To further ensure data integrity, responses were checked for internet bot participation. Each response was evaluated based on the completion duration, IP address, and conflicting answers (e.g., reporting difficulties describing feelings while also indicating proficiency in doing so), repetitive answers across all questions, specific response patterns, and identical timestamps. 4 responses completed in under 5 min were removed. This threshold was determined by the research team during pre-testing, as 5 min was deemed insufficient for a human to complete the survey (Salinas, 2023).

Sample size estimation was based on prior similar studies (e.g., Calvo et al., 2022; Chen et al., 2021; Stevenson et al., 2022), and path sizes were estimated for the α and β paths. Following recommendations from Fritz and MacKinnon (2007), the required sample size to detect a small-medium mediation effect (α = 0.14, β = 0.39), using percentile bootstrapping, was 406. The remaining participants (n = 513) were 67% female and age 16 to 70 years (M = 30.25, SD = 10.83). See Table 1 for detailed participants characteristics.

Table 1.

Participants Demographic Characteristics

Characteristics	Total n = 513
Age, years, mean ± SD	30.25 ± 10.83
Gender, n (%)
Female	345 (67.3%)
Male	119 (23.2%)
Non-binary	35 (6.8%)
Prefer not to say	4 (0.8%)
Other	10 (1.9%)
Nationality
UK	168 (32.7%)
Other	329 (64.1%)
Prefer not to say	16 (3.1%)
Ethnicity, n (%)
Asian or Asian British	54 (10.5%)
Black, African, Caribbean or Black British	13 (2.5)
Mixed	26 (5.1%)
White	401 (78.2%)
Other	15 (2.9%)
Prefer not to say	4 (0.8%)
Education, n (%)
High school	97 (18.9%)
College	91 (17.7%)
Bachelor	160 (31.2%)
Master	127 (24.8%)
PhD or doctoral	38 (7.4%)
Meditation experience, n (%)
Never	147 (28.7%)
Infrequently	276 (53.8%)
Monthly	38 (7.4%)
Weekly	34 (6.6%)
Daily	18 (3.5%)

Procedure

This study was approved by the University Ethics Committee. Participants were recruited through online social media platforms (Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, LinkedIn, WhatsApp group chats and WeChat group chat), and through flyers posted on campus buildings. The survey was hosted on Qualtrics. Participants accessed the survey by clicking a link or scanning the QR code provided in the flyer. After being directed to the survey page, they were presented with an information sheet and consent form, which they were required to agree to before proceeding. The data was collected between March 2023 and May 2023.

Measures

Participants provided demographic information including age, gender, nationality, ethnicity and education. They were asked to indicate how frequently they meditated, choosing from the following options: never, infrequently, monthly, weekly, daily.

The Experience in Close Relationship Scale – Short Form (ECR-S; Wei et al., 2007) yields two dimensions of attachment insecurity(avoidance and anxiety). Participants rate 12 statements reflecting their general experience in relationships (e.g., “I want to get close to my partner, but I keep pulling back”) on a 7-point scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree), with higher scores indicating greater attachment insecurity. The ECR-S has psychometric properties similar to the 36-item ECR, good test-retest reliability and acceptable internal consistency (Wei et al., 2007). In this study, Cronbach’s Alpha was .77 for the anxiety subscale and .84 for the avoidance subscale.

The Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire (FFMQ; Baer et al., 2006) was used to measure dispositional mindfulness. The 39-item FFMQ yields five subscales: observe, describe, act with awareness, non-reacting and non-judging. Participants rated the extent to which each statement applied to them, such as (e.g., “I pay attention to how my emotions affect my thoughts and behaviour”) on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (never or very rarely true) to 5 (very often or always true). Higher scores in each facet reflect greater capacity in each mindfulness facet. The FFMQ has good convergent validity and acceptable internal consistency (Christopher et al., 2012). In this study, the internal consistency for all facets ranged from α = .79 to .93.

The Intensity and Time Affect Scale (ITAS; Diener et al., 1995) is a 24-item self-report measure of the frequency of discrete emotion. For this study, only 8 items from the positive emotion subscales (love subscale: affection, love, caring, fondness; joy subscale: happiness, joy, contentment, pride) were used. Participants reported how frequently they had experienced these emotions over the past week, using a 7-point Likert-scale ranging from 1 (never) to 7 (always). The positive emotion subscales have good internal consistency (McMahan & Estes, 2012) and strong evidence of validity (Lucas et al., 2009). The internal consistency for the love subscale was .89, and for the joy subscale was .84.

The Emotion Regulation Profile-Revised (ERP-R; Nelis et al., 2011) is a vignette-based measure of the regulation of positive and negative emotion. It includes 15 scenarios describing emotion-eliciting situations. For this study, only the positive emotion components were used. Participants were presented with 6 vignettes featuring specific emotions (i.e., joy, contentment, awe, gratitude, excitation, pride) and asked to select as many options as they wished from eight strategies describing their likely reactions. The ERP-R yields scores for four adaptive strategies and four maladaptive strategies (see Table 2). The ERP-R has good validity (Nelis et al., 2011) and acceptable internal consistency (Szkody & Mckinney, 2019). The mean scores of the four adaptive strategies comprise the savouring subscale (α = .88), while the mean of the four maladaptive strategies comprises the dampening subscale (α = .79).

Table 2.

Adaptive and Maladaptive Strategies for the Regulation of Positive Emotion (ERP-R)

Adaptive	Maladaptive
Behavioural display – expressing one’s positive emotions with non-verbal behaviours such as facial expression	Inhibition of emotion expression – suppressing one’s positive emotions
Savouring – intentionally being aware of one’s present positive emotional experiences	Fault finding – focusing on negative elements in positive situations
Capitalisation – sharing and celebrating positive events with others	Inattention – distracting from the ongoing positive events to unrelated activities such as worries and uncompleted tasks
Positive mental time travel – remembering or anticipating positive events	Negative mental time travel – engaging in negative reminiscence such as reflecting on the external causes for the positive event, and negatively anticipating its future consequences

Statistical Analysis

Statistical analyses were conducted using SPSS version 29. Descriptive statistics and bivariate correlations among all the main study variables are preliminary analyses. To test whether facets of dispositional mindfulness mediated the relationship between attachment and positive emotions, a series of eight parallel multiple mediation analyses (PMMAs) were conducted using PROCESS model 4.3 (Hayes, 2013) (see Figure 1). PMMAs allow the independent variable (X) to have both a direct effect on the dependent variable (Y) and an indirect effect through multiple independent mediators (M₁, M₂, …). In this study, it was hypothesised that attachment insecurity dimensions ((X: attachment anxiety and attachment avoidance) would have an indirect effect on positive emotions ((Y: discrete positive emotion and regulation strategies), through different facets of dispositional mindfulness (M_i).

Figure 1.

Parallel multiple mediation model.

Results

Table 3 presents the correlations, means, standard deviations for all study variables. To explore differences across demographic groups (i.e., gender, nationality, ethnicity, education, and meditation experiences), a series of one-way independent ANOVA were conducted. In terms of meditation experiences, significant differences were found in all mindfulness facets, regulation strategies and discrete positive emotions based on meditation frequency (never, infrequently, monthly, weekly, daily). Table 4 presents the demographics differences with post hoc results in supplemental materials.

Table 3.

Correlations, Means, and Standard Deviation of Study Variables (N = 513)

	Mean	SD	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12
1. Age	30.25	10.83	1
2. ECR-S-anxiety	3.89	1.21	−.25**	1
3. ECR-S-avoidance	2.62	1.19	−.11*	.11*	1
4. FFMQ-observe	3.38	0.67	.07	.03	−.04	1
5. FFMQ-describe	3.42	0.89	.23**	−.09*	−.29**	.25**	1
6. FFMQ-awareness	2.95	0.76	.19**	−.25**	−.14**	.14**	.31**	1
7. FFMQ-nonjudging	3.12	0.95	.28**	−.40**	−.22**	.09	.29**	.40**	1
8. FFMQ-nonreacting	2.90	0.72	.15**	−.30**	−.03	.19**	.19**	.25**	.40**	1
9. ERP-R-savouring	10.80	5.95	.03	−.05	−.28**	.19**	.30**	.20**	.29**	.14**	1
10. ERP-R-dampening	5.29	4.07	−.25**	.22**	.27**	−.10*	−.31**	−.33**	−.42**	−.27**	−.20**	1
11. ITAS-love	18.89	5.93	.23**	−.16**	−.45**	.15**	.28**	.13**	.15**	.10*	.28**	−.22**	1
12. ITAS-joy	15.81	5.31	.20**	−.19**	−.21**	.09*	.22**	.27**	.37**	.33**	.25**	−.41**	.57**	1

*p < 0.05 level; **p < 0.01 level.

Table 4.

Demographic Differences on FFMQ, ERP-R, and ITAS (N = 513)

Measures	Gender		Nationality		Ethnicity		Education		Meditation experiences
Measures	F (4,508)	p	F (2, 510)	p	F (5, 507)	p	F (4, 508)	p	F (3,491)	p
ECR-S
Anxiety	0.96	.430	0.84	.432	1.09	.365	3.82*	.005	3.99*	.003
Avoidance	1.48	.206	1.67	.190	3.34*	.006	3.06*	.017	1.03	.390
FFMQ
Observe	3.26*	.012	2.13	.119	1.66	.142	0.51	.730	11.11**	<.001
Describe	1.72	.144	0.25	.776	0.74	.592	6.51**	<.001	5.95**	<.001
Awareness	0.26	.907	1.95	.143	2.11	.063	2.78*	.026	2.97*	.019
Nonjudging	0.48	.748	0.23	.795	0.68	.637	6.98**	<.001	6.39**	<.001
Nonreacting	6.21**	<.001	0.26	.773	0.76	.580	1.79	.129	16.21**	<.001
ITAS
Love	4.91**	<.001	3.06*	.048	0.97	.437	7.33**	<.001	3.69*	.006
Joy	1.67	.155	2.33	.098	1.38	.230	6.15**	<.001	5.74**	<.001
ERP-R
Savouring	2.09	.080	2.80	.062	1.10	.361	2.89*	.022	2.65*	.033
Dampening	4.51**	.001	0.24	.788	1.32	.254	5.04**	<.001	4.70**	<.001

*p < .05 level; **p < .001 level.

Table 5 summarises the results of PMMAs examining the relationships between attachment dimensions and discrete positive emotions. In PMMA model 1, the total and direct effect of attachment anxiety on love was significant and mindfulness facets did not exert an indirect effect. In PMMA model 2 (anxiety-joy), the total effect was significant while the direct effect was not. The relationship between attachment anxiety and joy was mediated by awareness, b = −0.10, 95% CI [−0.20, −0.01]; nonjudging, b = −0.29, 95% CI [−0.48, −0.12]; and nonreacting, b = −0.18, 95% CI [−0.32, −0.07]. PMMA models 3 and 4 examined the direct and indirect effects of attachment avoidance on love and joy. In PMMA model 3. The association between attachment avoidance and love was mediated by Describe, b = −0.17, 95% CI [−0.33, −0.05]. In PMMA model 4 the relationship between attachment avoidance and joy was mediated via awareness, b = −0.07, 95% CI [−0.14, −0.01]; and nonjudging, b = −0.20, 95% CI [−0.34, −0.09].

Table 5.

PMM Analysis With Dispositional Mindfulness (FFMQ) Subscales as Mediators Between Attachment and Discrete Positive Emotion (N = 513)

IV	DV	Path	Effect	SE	95% CI
Attachment anxiety	Love	Total effect (c)	−0.65*	0.22	[−1.07, −0.24]
		Direct effect (c’)	−0.63*	0.23	[−1.07, −0.18]
		Total indirect effect	−0.03	0.11	[−0.25, 0.19]
		Indirect effect via
		Describe	−0.06	0.05	[−0.16, 0.05]
		Awareness	0.00	0.05	[−0.11, 0.10]
		Nonjudging	0.06	0.10	[−0.13, 0.24]
		Nonreacting	−0.03	0.07	[−0.16, 0.11]
Attachment anxiety	Joy	Total effect (c)	−0.64**	0.19	[−1.02, −0.27]
		Direct effect (c’)	−0.06	0.20	[−0.44, 0.33]
		Total indirect effect	−0.59*	0.10	[−0.81, −0.39]
		Indirect effect via
		Describe	−0.02	0.02	[−0.07, 0.02]
		Awareness	−0.10*	0.05	[−0.20, −0.01]
		Nonjudging	−0.29**	0.09	[−0.48, −0.12]
		Nonreacting	−0.18*	0.06	[−0.32, −0.07]
Attachment avoidance	Love	Total effect (c)	−2.03**	0.20	[−2.42, −1.65]
		Direct effect (c’)	−1.89**	0.20	[−2.29, −1.49]
		Total indirect effect	−0.15*	0.08	[−0.31, −0.01]
		Indirect effect via
		Describe	−0.17*	0.07	[−0.33, −0.05]
		Awareness	−0.01	0.03	[−0.07, 0.05]
		Nonjudging	0.04	0.05	[−0.06, 0.13]
Attachment avoidance	Joy	Total effect (c)	−0.83**	0.19	[−1.20, −0.45]
		Direct effect (c’)	−0.50*	0.19	[−0.87, −0.12]
		Total indirect effect	−0.33*	0.09	[−0.52, −0.15]
		Indirect effect via
		Describe	−0.07	0.06	[0.20, 0.05]
		Awareness	−0.07*	0.04	[−0.14, −0.01]
		Nonjudging	−0.20**	0.07	[−0.34, −0.09]

Bold indicates significant paths.

Table 6 provides details of PMMAs investigating the relationships between attachment dimensions and the regulation of positive emotions, as mediated by mindfulness facets. In PPMA model 5 (anxiety-savouring), there was no total or direct effect of attachment anxiety on savouring but there was a significant indirect via nonjudging, b = −0.37, 95% CI [−0.58, −0.19]. PMMA model 6 demonstrated a significant total effect of attachment anxiety on dampening of positive emotion and no direct effect. There were significant indirect effects via Awareness, b = 0.10, 95% CI [0.04, 0.18]; and Nonjudging, b = 0.31, 95% CI [0.19, 0.45]. There were significant total and direct effects of attachment avoidance on savouring in PMMA 7 and indirect effects via Describe, b = −0.22, 95% CI [−0.38, −0.08]; and Nonjudging, b = −0.17, 95%CI [−0.31, −0.06]. Finally, in PMMA model 8, there were significant total and direct effects of attachment avoidance on dampening and significant indirect effects via Describe, b = 0.12, 95% CI [0.03, 0.21]; Awareness, b = 0.06, 95% CI [0.01, 0.12]; and Nonjudging, b = 0.18, 95% CI [0.09, 0.28].

Table 6.

PMM Analysis With Dispositional Mindfulness (FFMQ) Subscales as Mediators Between Attachment and Regulation of Positive Emotion (N = 513)

IV	DV	Path	Effect	SE	95% CI
Attachment anxiety	Savouring	Total effect (c)	−0.11	0.22	[−0.54, 0.32]
		Direct effect (c’)	0.43	0.23	[−0.01, 0.88]
		Total indirect effect	−0.54	0.13	[−0.80, −0.29]
		Indirect effect via
		Describe	−0.05	0.05	[−0.15, 0.04]
		Awareness	−0.06	0.05	[−0.17, 0.03]
		Nonjudging	−0.37**	0.10	[−0.58, −0.19]
		Nonreacting	−0.06	0.06	[−0.18, 0.07]
Attachment anxiety	Dampening	Total effect (c)	0.56**	0.15	[0.28, 0.85]
		Direct effect (c’)	0.08	0.15	[−0.21, 0.36]
		Total indirect effect	0.48**	0.08	[0.33, 0.64]
		Indirect effect via
		Describe	0.03	0.03	[−0.02, 0.08]
		Awareness	0.10*	0.04	[0.04, 0.18]
		Nonjudging	0.31**	0.07	[0.19, 0.45]
		Nonreacting	0.04	0.04	[−0.03, 0.12]
Attachment avoidance	Savouring	Total effect (c)	−1.25**	0.22	[−1.68, −0.83]
		Direct effect (c’)	−0.83**	0.22	[−1.26, −0.41]
		Total indirect effect	−0.42*	0.10	[−0.63, −0.24]
		Indirect effect via
		Describe	−0.22*	0.08	[−0.38, −0.08]
		Awareness	−0.03	0.03	[−0.11, 0.02]
		Nonjudging	−0.17*	0.06	[−0.31, −0.06]
Attachment avoidance	Dampening	Total effect (c)	0.83**	0.14	[0.54, 1.11]
		Direct effect (c’)	0.47**	0.14	[0.20, 0.75]
		Total indirect effect	0.35*	0.07	[0.22, 0.50]
		Indirect effect via
		Describe	0.12*	0.05	[0.03, 0.21]
		Awareness	0.06*	0.03	[0.01, 0.12]
		Nonjudging	0.18**	0.05	[0.09, 0.28]

Bold indicates significant paths.

Discussion

The aim of the current study was to examine the mediating effects of mindfulness facets between attachment insecurity dimensions and the experiencing of, and regulation of positive emotions.

For discrete positive emotion, none of mindfulness facets mediated the link between attachment anxiety and love but describe mediated the relationship between attachment avoidance and love; while act with awareness and non-judging mediated the association between both attachment dimensions and joy, while non-reacting additionally mediated the relationship between attachment anxiety and joy. Consistent with prior work, people high in either attachment anxiety and attachment avoidance reported decreased love and joy (Park et al., 2023; Shiota et al., 2006). The present findings further highlight that love and joy differ in their social relevance: love is more socially relevant and promotes developing long-term social bonds; while joy is arguably less socially relevant and more intrapersonal (Stanton et al., 2021). From a mindfulness-multifacet perspective, trait facets are treated as intrapersonal skills (Baer et al., 2006; Zeng et al., 2025) and therefore more effective at enhancing self-focused emotional states such as joy. In contrast, interpersonal mindfulness practice such as loving-kindness meditation (LKM), have been showned to increases other-oriented positive emotions like love (Stell & Farsides, 2016). This could explain why these facets analysed in this study mediated the association between attachment insecurity and joy more consistently than love. From an attachment perspetive, insecurely attached individuals may experience less self-focused joy because hyperactivation (attachment anxiety) or deactivation (attachment avoidance) hinders their ability to bring undivded attention and full awareness to positive feelings or maintain an unjudgmental stance towards positive emotional experiences (Stevenson et al., 2017; Zhang et al., 2022). Though the mediating effects of mindfulness facets were generally weak for other-oriented emotions like love, describe uniquely served as a mediator for attachment avoidance. This may occur because they are reluctant to label such feelings, which is aligned with their attachment goals to avoid intimacy or emotional bonds (Fearon & Roisman, 2017).

In relation to regulating positive emotion, current findings reported that attachment anxiety dimension was related to both decreased savouring and increased dampening of positive emotion via non-judging, with act with awareness additionally acted as a mediator on dampening. These results partially support the hypothesis and align with previous research (Parada-Fernández et al., 2021; Stevenson et al., 2017). According to attachment theory, the IWM of attachment anxiety tends to hyperactivate emotional experiences while presenting a devalued self-image (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2016). Positive emotions may be judged as threatening or meaningless, possibly resulting in “fear of happiness” – a term proposed by Gilbert et al. (2012) suggesting that individuals with attachment anxiety may view positive emotions as undeserved or even as something that should be avoided (Gilbert et al., 2012). Such fear or the inability to be mindfully non-judgmental towards positive emotional experiences may make them more likely to suppress or be unable to enjoy, share and express these emotions (Lee et al., 2025). Furthermore, act with awareness, as a driving force of mindfulness (Heeren et al., 2021), mediated the link between attachment anxiety and dampening. Though this was not aligned with the hypothesis or previous work (Stevenson et al., 2022), it should not come as a surprise. Previous studies have provided evidence that the hyperactivating strategy commonly observed in anxiously attached individuals hinder the development of the core constructs of mindfulness, e.g., acting with consciousness awareness rather than on autopilot (Macaulay et al., 2015; Stevenson et al., 2017). Findings in this study might suggest that the default mode for anxiously attached individuals involves focusing on negative elements of positive events or distract oneself from these from such events to unrelated worries.

The present findings also showed that attachment avoidance was linked to both decreased savouring and increased dampening of PE through describe and non-judging, with act with awareness additionally acting as a mediator on dampening, partially aligning with previous work (Stevenson et al., 2022). According to attachment theory, avoiding building emotional bonds with others or being fearful of closeness serves as the avoidant attachment goal (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2019). Positive emotions may be viewed as threatening because they could disclose the willingness of building emotional bonds with others or presenting the needy self. Such resistance stops them developing non-judgmental stances towards inner or external experiences, or the ability to describe thoughts or feelings (Yang & Oka, 2022). This may further explain why avoidantly attached individuals tend not to share, display the positive experiences with others or engaging in positive events. Moreover, the avoidant attachment system’s focus on maintaining an independent self-image and psychological distance makes it difficult for individuals to engage with their emotions in an open, present-focused way (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2020). This resistance often consumes emotional resources (Caldwell & Shaver, 2013), making it harder for avoidantly attached individuals to be open to, and aware of their habitual avoiding strategies towards emotional experiences. As a result, they may rely on automatic dampening strategies, such as suppressing emotional expression, distracting from positive experiences to unrelated thoughts, and attributing positive emotions to negative external factors (Nelis et al., 2011).

Interestingly, non-reacting did not show any mediating effects between both attachment dimensions and positive emotion (both discrete PE and regulation). Though research on negative emotions has shown that non-reacting mediated relationships between both attachment dimensions and cognitive reappraisal and expressive suppression (Stevenson et al., 2022), there are mixed discussions in the literature regarding how non-reacting applies to positive emotions. Non-reacting encourages neither the simple suppression nor amplification of emotional experiences (Van Gordon et al., 2023), but savouring or dampening involves actively responding to positive emotions in ways that enhance and suppress (Kiken et al., 2017). Notably, the non-reacting subscale of FFMQ primarily measures responses to distressing or difficult situations (e.g., “When I have distressing thoughts or images I am able just to notice them without reacting”). Further elaboration of the meaning of non-reacting in relation to positive emotions is therefore warranted. Future research could explore more in-depth whether non-reacting toward positive emotions works similarly to its role in negative emotions.

Limitations

First, the sample predominantly consisted of participants from western countries, which limits the generalisability of the results. Indeed, the structure and facets of trait mindfulness may vary across cultures, particularly between western and eastern societies (Karl et al., 2020). Future research should explore how mindfulness interacts with positive emotions across different cultural backgrounds.

In addition, this study relied on trait measurement of mindfulness and self-reported frequency of positive emotions over the past week. Many previous studies have also used cross-sectional, single-time-point measurements to examine the relationship between attachment styles, mindfulness and positive emotions (e.g., McDonald et al., 2016; Stevenson et al., 2022). However, the changes in positive emotions or state mindfulness over time remains an area of interest (Kiken et al., 2017). Future research could benefit from using momentary assessment to measure real-time positive emotions over an extended period.

Another limitation concerns the measurement of mindfulness and positive emotions. Specifically, one subscale of FFMQ, non-reacting, primarily addresses responses to distress emotions. Hence, future studies could explore a more positive emotion-focused tool to measure mindfulness facets, providing more accurate insights into how individuals respond to positive emotions. Moreover, the ITAS measure used in this study measured frequency of positive emotion but not arousal levels. Research has shown that mindfulness training can increase low-arousal positive emotions such as calm and quiet (Jones et al., 2018). Further research could explore positive emotion at a multi-facet level, considering both discrete types of positive emotions and their arousal levels.

Altogether, future studies could utilise: (i) longitudinal designs (e.g., ecological momentary assessment) to assess both temporary and long-term changes in these relationships and how they interact over time, and (ii) experimental designs incorporating mindfulness inductions, security priming and positive mood inductions to investigate causal relationships.

Conclusion

The results highlighted that mindfulness facets, such as holding a non-judging stance toward emotional experiences and acting with awareness instead of running ‘on autopilot’, played key mediating roles in how individuals respond to and engage in positive emotions. Moreover, the findings also suggested that different positive emotions show different mechanisms in how attachment insecurity impacts them. This study gives insights into which mindfulness traits may hinder individuals from engaging in positive emotions, offering valuable information for adapting mindfulness-based programmes to accommodate individual differences.

Supplemental Material

Supplemental Material - Adult Attachment Insecurity and Positive Emotions: The Mediating Role of Dispositional Mindfulness Facets

Supplemental Material for Adult Attachment Insecurity and Positive Emotions: The Mediating Role of Dispositional Mindfulness Facets by Yanming He, Zsofia K. Takacs, Zara P. Brodie, and Karen Goodall in Psychological Reports

Footnotes

Acknowledgments

The authors thank all the participants who joined our online survey. This study was pre-registered on Open Science Framwork (OSF: ). I confirm that I am submitting this manuscript as one of the authors and not in the capacity of a submission service, university administrator, or other third-party agent.

ORCID iDs

Yanming He

Zsofia K. Takacs

Zara P. Brodie

Karen Goodall

Ethical Considerations

The research study was approved by the University of Edinburgh clinical & health psychology ethics committee (reference number: 22-23CLPS025).

Consent to Participate

Informed consent to participate was recorded by Qualtrics before participants joined the online survey.

Consent for Publication

Informed consent for publication was provided by the participants.

Author Contributions

Study conception and design were performed by Yanming He, Dr Karen Goodall and Dr Zara P. Brodie. Material preparation, data collection and analysis were performed by Yanming He. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Yanming He and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscripts. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Data Availability Statement

The data file, measurements and supplementary materials were available at .

Supplemental Material

Supplemental material for this article is available online.

Author Biographies

Yanming He is a PhD candidate in Clinical Psychology at the University of Edinburgh. Her research focuses on positive psychology, with particular interests in mindfulness, positive emotion, and the role of attachment in shaping this relationship.

Dr Zsofia K. Takacs is a lecturer in Applied Psychology at the University of Edinburgh. Her research focuses on well-being and development during childhood including language, vocabulary and comprehension skills in addition to self-regulatory and executive function skills and interventions to foster those.

Dr Zara P. Brodie is a lecturer in Applied Psychology at the University of Edinburgh. Her research focus lies widely on the impact of adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) on development and later functioning, with a specific focus on links between poor early relationships and attachments, and maladaptive behaviours in adulthood (e.g. aggression, risky behaviour).

Dr Karen Goodall is a Senior Lecturer in Applied Psychology in the department of Clinical and Health Psychology, University of Edinburgh. Her research has been focused mainly on attachment-based approaches to emotion regulation and mental health in adults, the impact of trauma and adverse experiences on functioning in adulthood and trauma-informed approaches in services.

References

Baer

R. A.

Smith

G. T.

Hopkins

Krietemeyer

Toney

(2006). Using self-report assessment methods to explore facets of mindfulness. Assessment, 13(1), 27–45. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191105283504

Bosmans

Bakermans-Kranenburg

M. J.

Vervliet

Verhees

M. W. F. T.

van Ijzendoorn

M. H.

(2020). A learning theory of attachment: Unraveling the black box of attachment development. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 113, 287–298. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2020.03.014

Brown

K. W.

Ryan

R. M.

(2003). The benefits of being present: Mindfulness and its role in psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84(4), 822–848. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.84.4.822

Caldwell

J. G.

Shaver

P. R.

(2013). Mediators of the link between adult attachment and mindfulness. Interpersona: An International Journal on Personal Relationships, 7(2), 299–310. https://doi.org/10.5964/ijpr.v7i2.133

Calvo

D’Aquila

Rocco

Carraro

(2022). Attachment and well-being: Mediatory roles of mindfulness, psychological inflexibility, and resilience. Current Psychology: A Journal for Diverse Perspectives on Diverse Psychological Issues, 41(5), 2966–2979. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-020-00820-2

Chang

E. C.

(2025). A prospective test of the broaden-and-build model of positive emotions: Examining the role of will and ways as temporal mediators of hedonic and eudaimonic well-being in adults. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 20(4), 559–568. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2024.2365261

Chen

Fan

Cai

(2021). Attachments, dispositional mindfulness, and psychological distress: A mediation analysis. Current Psychology, 40(4), 1651–1659. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-018-0088-0

Christopher

M. S.

Neuser

N. J.

Michael

P. G.

Baitmangalkar

(2012). Exploring the psychometric properties of the five facet mindfulness questionnaire. Mindfulness, 3(2), 124–131. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-011-0086-x

Diener

Smith

Fujita

(1995). The personality structure of affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(1), 130–141. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.69.1.130

10.

Domic-Siede

Guzmán-González

Sánchez-Corzo

Álvarez

Araya

Espinoza

Zenis

Marín-Medina

(2024). Emotion regulation unveiled through the categorical lens of attachment. BMC Psychology, 12(1), 240. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-024-01748-z

11.

Fearon

R. M. P.

Roisman

G. I.

(2017). Attachment theory: Progress and future directions. Current Opinion in Psychology, 15, 131–136. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2017.03.002

12.

Feldman

G. C.

Joormann

Johnson

S. L.

(2008). Responses to positive affect: A self-report measure of rumination and dampening. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 32(4), 507–525. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10608-006-9083-0

13.

Fredrickson

B. L.

(2001). The role of positive emotions in positive psychology—The broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions. American Psychologist, 56(3), 218–226. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.56.3.218

14.

Fredrickson

B. L.

Joiner

(2018). Reflections on positive emotions and upward spirals. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 13(2), 194–199. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691617692106

15.

Fritz

M. S.

MacKinnon

D. P.

(2007). Required Sample Size to Detect the Mediated Effect. Psychological Science, 18(3), 233–239. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01882.x‌

16.

Garland

E. L.

Fredrickson

Kring

A. M.

Johnson

D. P.

Meyer

P. S.

Penn

D. L.

(2010). Upward spirals of positive emotions counter downward spirals of negativity: Insights from the broaden-and-build theory and affective neuroscience on the treatment of emotion dysfunctions and deficits in psychopathology. Clinical Psychology Review, Positive Clinical Psychology, 30(7), 849–864. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2010.03.002

17.

Gilbert

McEwan

Gibbons

Chotai

Duarte

Matos

(2012). Fears of compassion and happiness in relation to alexithymia, mindfulness, and self-criticism. Psychology and Psychotherapy: Theory, Research and Practice, 85(4), 374–390. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8341.2011.02046.x

18.

Gillath

Karantzas

G. C.

Fraley

R. C.

(2016). Adult attachment: A concise introduction to theory and research. Academic Press is an imprint of Elsevier.

19.

Gillath

Karantzas

G. C.

Romano

Karantzas

K. M.

(2022). Attachment security priming: A meta-analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 26(3), 183–241. https://doi.org/10.1177/10888683211054592

20.

Goodall

(2015). Individual differences in the regulation of positive emotion: The role of attachment and self esteem. Personality and Individual Differences, 74, 208–213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.10.033

21.

Gross

J. J.

(2014). Handbook of emotion regulation (Second). The Guilford Press.

22.

Gross

J. J.

(2015). Emotion regulation: Current status and future prospects. Psychological Inquiry, 26(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/1047840x.2014.940781

23.

Hayes

A. F.

(2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach (pp. xvii, 507). The Guilford Press.

24.

Heeren

Lannoy

Coussement

Hoebeke

Verschuren

Blanchard

M. A.

Chakroun-Baggioni

Philippot

Gierski

(2021). A network approach to the five-facet model of mindfulness. Scientific Reports, 11(1), Article 15094. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-94151-2

25.

Johnson

L. K.

Nadler

Carswell

Minda

J. P.

(2021). Using the broaden-and-build theory to test a model of mindfulness, affect, and stress. Mindfulness, 12(7), 1696–1707. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-021-01633-5

26.

Jones

D. R.

Graham-Engeland

J. E.

Smyth

J. M.

Lehman

B. J.

(2018). Clarifying the associations between mindfulness meditation and emotion: Daily High- and low-arousal emotions and emotional variability. Applied Psychology-Health and Well Being, 10(3), 504–523. https://doi.org/10.1111/aphw.12135

27.

Kabat-Zinn

(1990). Full catastrophe living: Using the wisdom of your body and mind to face stress, pain, and illness. Delta Trade Paperback/Bantam Dell.

28.

Karl

J. A.

Prado

S. M. M.

Gračanin

Verhaeghen

Ramos

Mandal

S. P.

Michalak

Zhang

C.-Q.

Schmidt

Tran

U. S.

Druica

Solem

Astani

Liu

Luciano

J. V.

Tkalčić

Lilja

J. L.

Dundas

Wong

S. Y. S.

Fischer

(2020). The cross-cultural validity of the five-facet mindfulness questionnaire across 16 countries. Mindfulness, 11(5), 1226–1237. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-020-01333-6

29.

Kiken

L. G.

Lundberg

K. B.

Fredrickson

B. L.

(2017). Being present and enjoying it: Dispositional mindfulness and savoring the moment are distinct, interactive predictors of positive emotions and psychological health. Mindfulness, 8(5), 1280–1290. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-017-0704-3

30.

Latif

Hughes

A. T. L.

Bendall

R. C. A.

(2019). Positive and negative affect mediate the influences of a maladaptive emotion regulation strategy on sleep quality. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 10, 287–298. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2019.00628

31.

Lee

H. A.

Wan

Yang

(2025). Fear of happiness and emotion regulation: Implications for personal and relational well-being. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 28(1), Article e12672. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajsp.12672

32.

Lucas

R. E.

Diener

Larsen

R. J.

(2009). Measuring positive emotions. In Diener

(Ed.), Assessing well-being: The collected works of Ed diener (pp. 139–155). Springer.

33.

Macaulay

C. B.

Watt

M. C.

MacLean

Weaver

(2015). Mindfulness mediates associations between attachment and anxiety sensitivity. Mindfulness, 6(6), 1263–1270. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-015-0390-y

34.

Mahlo

Windsor

T. D.

(2021). State mindfulness and affective well-being in the daily lives of middle-aged and older adults. Psychology and Aging, 36(5), 642–659. https://doi.org/10.1037/pag0000596

35.

McDonald

H. M.

Sherman

K. A.

Petocz

Kangas

Grant

K.-A.

Kasparian

N. A.

(2016). Mindfulness and the experience of psychological distress: The mediating effects of emotion regulation and attachment anxiety. Mindfulness, 7(4), 799–808. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-016-0517-9

36.

McMahan

E. A.

Estes

(2012). Age-related differences in lay conceptions of well-being and experienced well-being. Journal of Happiness Studies, 13(1), 79–101. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-011-9251-0

37.

Medvedev

O. N.

Cervin

Barcaccia

Siegert

R. J.

Roemer

Krägeloh

C. U.

(2021). Network analysis of mindfulness facets, affect, compassion, and distress. Mindfulness, 12(4), 911–922. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-020-01555-8

38.

Melen

Pepping

C. A.

O’Donovan

(2017). Social foundations of mindfulness: Priming attachment anxiety reduces emotion regulation and mindful attention. Mindfulness, 8(1), 136–143. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-016-0587-8

39.

Mikulincer

Shaver

David

S. A.

Boniwell

Ayers

(2013). Adult attachment and happiness: Individual differences in the experience and consequences of positive emotions. In The Oxford handbook of happiness (pp. 834–846). Oxford University Press.

40.

Mikulincer

Shaver

P. R.

(2007). Attachment in adulthood: Structure, dynamics, and change. The Guilford Press.

41.

Mikulincer

Shaver

P. R.

(2015). Boosting attachment security in adulthood: The ‘broaden-and-build’ effects of security-enhancing mental representations and interpersonal contexts. In Attachment theory and research: New directions and emerging themes (pp. 124–144). The Guilford Press.

42.

Mikulincer

Shaver

P. R.

(2016). Attachment in adulthood: Structure, dynamics, and change (chapter 7) (2nd ed.). Guilford Publications.

43.

Mikulincer

Shaver

P. R.

(2019). Attachment orientations and emotion regulation. Current Opinion in Psychology, 25, 6–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2018.02.006

44.

Mikulincer Shaver (2020). Broaden-and-build effects of contextually boosting the sense of attachment security in adulthood. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 29(1), 22–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721419885997

45.

Millgram

Joormann

Huppert

J. D.

Lampert

Tamir

(2019). Motivations to experience happiness or sadness in depression: Temporal stability and implications for coping with stress. Clinical Psychological Science, 7(1), 143–161. https://doi.org/10.1177/2167702618797937

46.

Nelis

Quoidbach

Hansenne

Mikolajczak

(2011). Measuring individual differences in emotion regulation: The emotion Regulation Profile-Revised (ERP-R). Psychologica Belgica, 51(1), 49–91. https://doi.org/10.5334/pb-51-1-49

47.

Parada-Fernández

Herrero-Fernández

Oliva-Macías

Rohwer

(2021). Analysis of the mediating effect of mentalization on the relationship between attachment styles and emotion dysregulation. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 62(3), 312–320. https://doi.org/10.1111/sjop.12717

48.

Park

Sanscartier

Impett

E. A.

Algoe

S. B.

Leonhardt

N. D.

Schrage

Carmichael

Collins

Conte

De Rosa

Ficca

Fredrickson

B. L.

Harris

Keltner

West

T. N.

MacDonald

(2023). Meta-analytic evidence that attachment insecurity is associated with less frequent experiences of discrete positive emotions. Journal of Personality, 91(5), 1223–1238. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12796

49.

Peng

Gillath

Jiang

Wang

Zhang

(2024). Attachment style and attention bias to emotional information: The moderating effect of stress, stimulus characteristics, and attention stage. Journal of Personality, 92(5), 1315–1340. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12891

50.

Pepping

C. A.

Davis

P. J.

O’Donovan

(2015). The association between state attachment security and state mindfulness. PLoS One, 10(3), Article e0116779. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0116779

51.

Polizzi

C. P.

Lynn

S. J.

(2021). Regulating emotionality to manage adversity: A systematic review of the relation between emotion regulation and psychological resilience. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 45(4), 577–597. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10608-020-10186-1

52.

Quickert

R. E.

(2022). Exploring the impact of two types of meditation for individuals high in attachment anxiety experiencing conflict in romantic relationships [Ph.D., Queen’s University (Canada)]. https://www.proquest.com/docview/2734702840/abstract/A0EEB1F657A74DE7PQ/1

53.

Raynes

Dobkins

(2025). Daily mindfulness components and state affect: A day reconstruction study. Mindfulness, 16(4), 1028–1045. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-025-02543-6

54.

Roth

L. H. O.

Bencker

Lorenz

Laireiter

A.-R.

(2024). Testing the validity of the broaden-and build theory of positive emotions: a network analytic approach. Frontiers in Psychology, 15. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1405272‌

55.

Salinas

M. R.

(2023). Are your participants real? Dealing with fraud in recruiting older adults online. Western Journal of Nursing Research, 45(1), 93–99. https://doi.org/10.1177/01939459221098468

56.

Shiota

M. N.

Keltner

John

O. P.

(2006). Positive emotion dispositions differentially associated with big five personality and attachment style. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 1(2), 61–71. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760500510833

57.

Silton

R. L.

Kahrilas

I. J.

Skymba

H. V.

Smith

Bryant

F. B.

Heller

(2020). Regulating positive emotions: Implications for promoting well-being in individuals with depression. Emotion (Washington, D.C.), 20(1), 93–97. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000675

58.

Stanton

Brown

M. F. D.

McDanal

Carlton

C. N.

Emery

N. N.

(2021). Informing the classification and assessment of positive emotional experiences: A multisample examination of hierarchical positive emotionality models. Psychological Assessment, 33(11), 1038–1049. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0001052

59.

Stell

A. J.

Farsides

(2016). Brief loving-kindness meditation reduces racial bias, mediated by positive other-regarding emotions. Motivation and Emotion, 40(1), 140–147. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11031-015-9514-x

60.

Stevenson

(2019). The relationship between adult attachment orientation and mindfulness and their role in student psychological well-being. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.

61.

Stevenson

J. C.

Emerson

L. M.

McKinnon

Millings

(2022). Facets of mindfulness mediate the relationship between attachment orientation and emotion regulation in university students. Psychological Reports, 127(1), 332941221119409. https://doi.org/10.1177/00332941221119409

62.

Stevenson

J. C.

Emerson

L. M.

Millings

(2017). The relationship between adult attachment orientation and mindfulness: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Mindfulness, 8(6), 1438–1455. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-017-0733-y

63.

Sugawara

Sugie

(2021). The effect of positive emotions with different arousal levels onThought-ActionRepertoires. Japanese Psychological Research, 63(3), 211–218. https://doi.org/10.1111/jpr.12300

64.

Szkody

Mckinney

(2019). Social support versus emotion regulation: Mediators of attachment and psychological problems after social exclusion. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 38(10), 882–905. https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.2019.38.10.882

65.

Van Gordon

Shonin

Gilbert

Garcia-Campayo

Gallardo

(2023). Mindfulness of happiness. Mindfulness, 14(3), 757–760. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12671-023-02090-y

66.

Vanderlind

W. M.

Everaert

Joormann

(2022). Positive emotion in daily life: Emotion regulation and depression. Emotion, 22(7), 1614–1624. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000944

67.

Verhees

Finet

Vandesande

Bastin

Bijttebier

Bodner

Van Aswegen

Van de Walle

Bosmans

(2021). Attachment and the development of depressive symptoms in adolescence: The role of regulating positive and negative affect. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 50(8), 1649–1662. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-021-01426-y

68.

Wang

Verschooren

Vermeylen

Grahek

Pourtois

(2024). Hypervigilance strikes a balance between external and internal attention: Behavioral and modeling evidence from the switching attention task. Psychological Research, 89(1), 3. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-024-02028-6

69.

Waters

H. S.

Waters

T. E. A.

Waters

(2021). From internal working models to script-like attachment representations. In Attachment: The fundamental questions (pp. 111–119). The Guilford Press.

70.

Wei

Russell

D. W.

Mallinckrodt

Vogel

D. L.

(2007). The experiences in close relationship Scale (ECR)-short form: Reliability, validity, and factor structure. Journal of Personality Assessment, 88(2), 187–204. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223890701268041

71.

Yang

Oka

(2022). The role of mindfulness and attachment security in facilitating resilience. BMC Psychology, 10(1), 69. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-022-00772-1

72.

Zeng

P.-Y.

S.-H.

T. V.

Yeh

S.-L.

(2025). Fostering intergenerational understanding: Roles of intrapersonal and interpersonal mindfulness in communication. Current Psychology, 44(11), 11076–11089. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-025-07849-1

73.

Zhang

Xie

Chen

Hudson

N. W.

(2022). The relationship between adult attachment and mental health: A meta-analysis. J Pers Soc Psychol, 123(5), 1089–1137. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000437

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.49 MB