Based on Bowlby’s conceptualization of the attachment behavioral system, the Important People Interview (IPI) was developed to provide a measurement standard for assessing attachment preference in adolescents. This study utilized a sample of 1374 Chinese adolescents (Mage = 13.64, SD = 1.49, age range: 11–18 years; females = 48%) to validate the IPI for Chinese adolescents. The confirmatory factor analyses indicated that the IPI fit Chinese adolescents well. Higher preferences for the mother and father as attachment figures were positively associated with self-esteem, whereas lower preferences were negatively associated with depressive symptoms, and loneliness. In addition, higher preferences for same-gender friends and opposite-gender friends were positively associated with depressive symptoms, and loneliness. Conversely, the lower preferences for same-gender friends and opposite-gender friends were negatively associated with self-esteem. These findings suggest that higher preferences for parents and lower preferences for peers as attachment figures promote adjustment in both Western and East Asian adolescents.
AinsworthM. D. S. (1967). Infancy in Uganda: Infant care and the growth of love. Johns Hopkins Press.
2.
AinsworthM. D. S. (1982). Attachment: Retrospect and prospect. In Stevenson-HindeJ.ParksC. M. (Eds.), The place of attachment in human behavior (pp. 3–30). Basic Books.
AinsworthM. D. S. (1995). On the shaping of attachment theory and research: An interview with Mary D. S. Ainsworth (Fall 1994). In WatersE.VaughnB. E.PosadaG.Kondo-IkemuraK. (Eds.), Caregiving, cultural, and cognitive perspectives on secure-base behavior and working models (pp. 3–24). Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development.
5.
AndresenE. M.MalmgrenJ. A.CarterW. B.PatrickD. L. (1994). Screening for depression in well older adults: Evaluation of. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 10(2), 77–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0749-3797(18)30622-6
6.
BowlbyJ. (1969/1982). Attachment and loss (Attachment, Vol. 1). Basic Books.
7.
ColinV. (1985). Hierarchies and patterns of infants’ attachments to parents and day caregivers: An exploration. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Virginia.
FeldmanS. S.GowenL. K.FisherL. (1998). Family relationships and gender as predictors of romantic intimacy in young adults: A longitudinal study. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 8(2), 263–286. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327795jra0802_5
KobakR.RosenthalN. L.ZajacK.MadsenS. D. (2007). Adolescent attachment hierarchies and the search for an adult pair-bond. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 2007(117), 57–72. https://doi.org/10.1002/cd.194
12.
LambM. E. (1976). Effects of stress and cohort on mother- and father-infant interaction. Developmental Psychology, 12(5), 435–443. https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.12.5.435
13.
LapsleyD. K.RiceK. G.FitzGeraldD. P. (1990). Adolescent attachment, identity, and adjustment to college: Implications for the continuity of adaptation hypothesis. Journal of Counseling and Development, 68(5), 561–565. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1556-6676.1990.tb01411.x
14.
MesmanJ.van IJzendoornM. H.Sagi-SchwartzA. (2016). Cross-cultural patterns of attachment: Universal and contextual dimensions. In CassidyJ.ShaverP. R. (Eds.), Handbook of attachment: Theory, research, and clinical applications (3nd ed., pp. 852–877). The Guilford Press.
15.
NickersonA. B.NagleR. J. (2005). Parent and peer attachment in late childhood and early adolescence. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 25(2), 223–249. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272431604274174
16.
PatersonJ. E.FieldJ.PryorJ. (1994). Adolescents’ perceptions of their attachment relationships with their mothers, fathers, and friends. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 23(5), 579–600. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf01537737
17.
RosenbergM. (1965). Society and adolescent self-image. Princeton University Press.
18.
RosenthalN. L.KobakR. (2010). Assessing adolescents’ attachment hierarchies: Differences across developmental periods and associations with individual adaptation. Journal of Research on Adolescence: The Official Journal of the Society for Research on Adolescence, 20(3), 678–706. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-7795.2010.00655.x
19.
SchmittD. P.AllikJ. (2005). Simultaneous administration of the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale in 53 nations: Exploring the universal and culture-specific features of global self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89(4), 623–642. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.89.4.623
20.
TianL. M. (2006). Shortcoming and merits of Chinese version of Rosenberg (1965) self-esteem scale. Psychological Exploration, 26(2), 88–91.
21.
UmemuraT.FusamuneS.SugimuraK. (2022). Attachment hierarchy in Japan: Examining the validity of important people interview in Japanese young adults. Attachment & Human Development, 24(2), 133–146. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616734.2021.1881134
22.
UmemuraT.LacinováL.JuhováD.PivodováL.CheungH. S. (2021). Transfer of early to late adolescents’ attachment figures in a multicohort six-wave study: Person-and variable-oriented approaches. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 41(7), 1072–1098. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272431620978531
23.
UmemuraT.LacinováL.KrausJ.HorskáE.PivodováL. (2018). Adolescents’ multiple versus single primary attachment figures, reorganization of attachment hierarchy, and adjustments: The important people interview approach. Attachment & Human Development, 20(5), 532–552. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616734.2018.1464040
24.
ViejoC.MonksC. P.Sánchez-RosaM.Ortega-RuizR. (2019). Attachment hierarchies for Spanish adolescents: Family, peers and romantic partner figures. Attachment & Human Development, 21(6), 551–570. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616734.2018.1466182
25.
WangM. C.CaiB. G.WuY.DaiX. Y. (2010). The factor structure of Chinese Rosenberg’ self-esteem scale affected by item statement method. Psychological Exploration, 30(3), 63–68. https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1003-5184.2010.03.013
26.
WatersE.CummingsE. M. (2000). A secure base from which to explore close relationships. Child development, 71(1), 164–172. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.00130
27.
XuS.QiuD.HahneJ.ZhaoM.HuM. (2018). Psychometric properties of the short-form UCLA Loneliness Scale (ULS-8) among Chinese adolescents. Medicine, 97(38), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000012373
28.
YangW.XiongG.GarridoL. E.ZhangJ. X.WangM. C.WangC. (2018). Factor structure and criterion validity across the full scale and ten short forms of the CES-D among Chinese adolescents. Psychological Assessment, 30(9), 1186–1198. https://doi.org/10.1037/pas0000559
