Negative Coping Strategies 1 Running Head: NEGATIVE COPING STRATEGIES MEDIATING Negative Coping Strategies Mediating the Relationship of Adolescent Attachment Classifications and Future Externalizing Behaviors

Negative coping strategies were examined as a possible mediator of the predictive relationship between adolescent insecure attachment organization and young adult externalizing behavior. Constructs examined included insecure attachment organizations (assessed using the AAI), selfreported negative coping strategies, and overall externalizing behaviors. Data were obtained from a socioeconomically diverse community sample of 175 participants in mid-adolescence (age 14) and 141 of the same participants at young adulthood (age 22). As hypothesized, negative coping strategies mediated the relationship between insecure attachment organizations in mid-adolescence and self-reported externalizing behavior in young adulthood. Results suggest that adolescents with a dismissing attachment classification may depend on their internal regulative processes more than those with a preoccupied attachment who may exhibit externalizing behavior mainly for peer attention. Negative Coping Strategies 3 Negative Coping Strategies Mediating the Relationship of Adolescent Attachment Classifications and Future Externalizing Behaviors Adolescence is a period in which youth pick new friends, change the way they think philosophically, morally, and politically; and in some ways set the path they will follow as they transition to adulthood (Arnett, 2000). These transitions are interpersonal, cognitive, emotional, and biological. In this period of development, attachment theory has become prominent in demonstrating its capability of predicting adolescents’ negative coping strategies and externalizing behaviors. However, it is important to examine how enduring the relationship between attachment insecurity is with future maladaptive outcomes beyond adolescence (e.g., externalizing behaviors). Moreover, it is important to examine whether insecure attachment classifications influence mechanisms (i.e., negative coping strategies) that might further account for negative outcomes. Attachment Bowlby (1988) explains attachment as an internalized model that is established with one’s earliest caregivers, most commonly, parents. Attachment behavior is exhibited when a person seeks proximity with someone who is conceived as better able to cope with the world (Bowlby, 1988). Another way to think of attachment is in terms of environmental homeostasis: a system activated because of stress or a similar factor that seeks to return to baseline (Bowlby, 1988). The way parents provide support in times of stress shapes the attachment classification that an individual acquires. Attachment behavior is guided by a perpetuating framework of internalized models that are relatively constant and resistant to change, and they influence how one understands and responds to interpersonal situations (Bowlby, 1988). As such, different attachment classifications are reflected in internal working models of how one organizes and Negative Coping Strategies 4 acquires relational knowledge of their surroundings in coherent or incoherent manners that can be accordingly adaptive or maladaptive in outcome (Bowlby, 1988; Main, 1993). When studying attachment, researchers have defined three overarching classifications of attachment organization: secure, preoccupied, and dismissing, where preoccupied and dismissing are considered insecure. Secure attachment describes a state of mind where someone feels comfortable in exploring their relationships and surroundings (Bowlby, 1988). Secure individuals are thought to value attachment relationships while remaining objective, consistent, autonomous, and coherent in their descriptions of their attachment relationship whether their relationship with their parent is generally positive or negative. As a result, it is hypothesized that these individuals will be more successful and comfortable forming future relationships (Hesse, 1999). In contrast, attachment theory also describes two types of insecure attachment: preoccupied and dismissive. A preoccupied attachment classification describes a state of mind in which an individual is overwhelmed with uncertainty and is ambivalent about exploring the world and relationships (Bowlby, 1988). When speaking about a relationship with an attachment figure, a preoccupied person might have trouble maintaining focus and may give superfluous, incoherent, grammatically entangled, and emotive descriptions of the relationship (Hesse, 1999). A dismissing attachment classification describes a state of mind in which an individual attempts to become emotionally self-sufficient because of an acceptance of repeated rejection (Bowlby, 1988). In an attempt to try to avoid discussion of attachment relationships, a dismissingly attached individual may give highly inconsistent, normalizing, or idealized descriptions of an attachment figure that are not supported by history (Hesse, 1999). While individuals with either a preoccupied or a dismissing attachment both commonly struggle in relationships, the Negative Coping Strategies 5 manifestations of their relationship troubles are comparatively different. It is hypothesized that those with preoccupied attachment become excessively enmeshed and anxious in their attachment relationships; meanwhile, those with dismissing attachment are regularly distant in thought and feeling about relationships (Hesse, 1999). Attachment and Behavioral Outcomes Attachment organization has become an essential component for researchers trying to better understand adolescent behavioral and emotional development. Secure attachment has been linked to generally positive outcomes, including: higher levels of social adaptivity and preference-based popularity; higher capacity for intimacy in friendship and romantic relationships; more adaptive ways of coping; and a greater sense of self-efficacy (Allen, Porter, McFarland, Marsh, & McElhaney, 2005; Cooper, Shaver, & Collins, 1998; Scharf, Mayseless, & Kivenson-Baron, 2004). In contrast, a preoccupied attachment organization has been linked to more relational challenges in the transition from adolescence to emerging adulthood. In a large cross-sectional study of 13 to 19 year olds where attachment was assessed with self-report measures, Cooper et al. (1998) found that preoccupied adolescents were the most poorly adjusted. Overall, preoccupied teens reported the poorest self-concepts, lowest levels of intellectual competence, as well as the highest levels of negative affect, problematic risky behavior, hostility, and depression (Cooper et al., 1998). Similarly, in longitudinal studies of emerging adults, studies indicated that preoccupied attachment was linked to higher levels of general stress, loneliness and delinquency (Allen et al., 2002; Larose & Bernier, 2002). Larose and Bernier (2002) hypothesized that preoccupied individuals are reported as experiencing more general negative outcomes than the Negative Coping Strategies 6 other attachment classifications (specifically, higher levels of stress) because of a hyper-activated attachment system that leads them to continually seek support in an unsatisfactory manner. Meanwhile, as individuals with a dismissing attachment organization progress from adolescence to early adulthood, their seeming disinterest in relationships presents challenges. In cross-sectional studies of self-report attachment, dismissing attachment has been linked to low levels of social competence in emerging adulthood (Cooper et al., 1998), and alcohol abuse and drug dependence in adulthood (Mickelson, Kessler, & Shaver, 1997). In longitudinal studies utilizing the Adult Attachment Interview, dismissing attachment has also been linked to difficulty seeking support, withdrawal, mistrust of others, excessive self-reliance, and a decrease in social skills during the transition to adulthood (Allen et al., 2002; Larose & Bernier, 2001). While previous research has indicated that both preoccupied and dismissing individuals tend to show delinquent development, there are important behavioral differences that may reflect their unique attachment classifications. Those with a preoccupied attachment classification tend to show more socially observable attention-seeking displays of externalizing behaviors, while those with dismissing attachment are reported to exhibit more inwardly focused maladaptive behaviors (Allen et al., 2002; Larose & Bernier, 2002). This disparity in outcomes may be due to the respective insecure attachment classifications’ unique frameworks creating distinctive developmental trajectories shaping how one experiences, expresses, and regulates negative emotions (Cooper et al., 1998). Larose and Bernier (1998) suggested that dismissing young adults are less likely to ask for help (than secure of preoccupied individuals) because they are more likely to be introverted and self-reliant; accordingly, they exhibit fewer outwardly noticeable behaviors by caretakers. Meanwhile, preoccupied adolescents, perhaps as a means to attract attention, exhibit more public Negative Coping Strategies 7 externalizing behaviors (Zegers, Schengel, van IJzendoorn, & Janssens, 2008). Preoccupied adolescents are also found to have more social skills than dismissing adolescents (Cooper et al., 1998). These differences may explain why preoccupied attachment is linked to attention-seeking and authority-indicated behavioral problems while dismissing attachment is linked to more antisocial problem behaviors. Preoccupied adolescence may exhibit externalizing behaviors predominantly as a means of getting attention from peers and authority figures, whereas there may be a fundamentally different underlying explanation of why dismissing adolescents exhibit externalizing behaviors. As dismissing adolescents lack the social skills and apparent need for attention, they may develop stronger internal strategies to cope with the problems they face as they feel cut off from societal interactions. These patterns are most clearly demonstrated in samples of institutionalized adolescents where it is possible to see how insecure attachment organization relates to behavioral outcomes in extreme cases. Zegers et al. (2008), using the AAI and caretaker reports, found that individuals with preoccupied attachment classifications were reported as exhibiting the most attention-seeking negative behaviors, including the highest level of rebellion, rule-breaking, truancy, and general externalizing problems (Zegers et al., 2008). Further, institutionalized preoccupied adolescents were commonly diagnosed with personality disorders largely characterized as excessively emotive and attention-seeking (e.g., affective disorders, obsessivecompulsive, histrionic, and borderline disorders: Rosenstein & Horowitz, 1996). Meanwhile, dismissing adolescents exhibited the greatest degrees of violence towards staff, conduct disorders, substance abuse disorders, and antisocial and criminal behavior (Allen, Hauser, & Bormans-Spurrell, 1996; Rosenstein & Horowitz, 1996; Zegers et al., 2008). Additionally, dismissing adolescents were more likely to be diagnosed with personality disorders commonly Negative Coping Strategies 8 characterized by a lack of empathy and disregard for others and society (e.g. narcissistic and antisocial personality disorders: Rosenstein & Horowitz, 1996; Zegers et al., 2008). Few longitudinal studies have examined attachment organizations’ ability to predict change in externalizing behaviors from early adolescence to emerging adulthood. Those studies that have examined these constructs were confined to restricted age ranges in these developmental periods (Allen et al., 2002; Larose & Bernier, 2001; Zegers et al., 2008). Further, few studies, if any, have examined close peer-reports of a target adolescents’ externalizing behaviors, as it may follow that peers notice externalizing behaviors more often from their more attention-seeking preoccupied peers than their more self-reliant dismissing peers. These distinctions in insecure attachment outcomes must be further analyzed in terms of how attachment’s internal working models can help determine and describe distinct maladaptive developmental pathways. Coping Strategies It is important to investigate why insecure attachment classifications have been found to predict externalizing behaviors during the vital transition period to adulthood. One likely explanation is how one copes with and manages stress, which may lead to adaptive or maladaptive outcomes. The self-regulatory processes that an individual activates under conditions of stress are coping strategies (Compas, Connor-Smith, Saltzman, Thomsen, & Wadsworth, 2001; Skinner, Edge, Altman, & Sherwood, 2003). Coping strategies are viewed as methods of adaptation and social evolution used for emotional, behavioral, and/or environmental regulation (Compas et al., 2001; Skinner et al., 2003). The use of particular coping strategies is found to be relatively stable throughout childhood and early adolescence (Compas, Malcarne, & Fondarco, 1988; Steele, Forehand, Armistand, Morse, Simon, & Clark, 1999). Different forms Negative Coping Strategies 9 of coping allow for the containment of stress as well as for supplying information that may enable one to escape from dangerous situations (Skinner et al., 2003). Additionally, some researchers believe that coping is not always conscious and deliberate (Eisenberg, Fabes, & Guthrie, 1997, as cited in Compas et al., 2001), which suggests that coping may act as an expression of an individual’s attachment system. Coping as a Manifestation of Attachment While attachment research in adolescence has been essential for better understanding cognitive, behavioral, and emotional outcomes, few researchers have delved into more tangible manifestations of the internal working models. Just as Allen, Moore, Kuperminc, and Bell (1998) made the important suggestion that attachment organization may be a mediator of the connections found between poor parent-child relationships and problematic child outcomes, it is now essential to examine the possible mediators of the connections found between internal working models of attachment and problematic outcomes. One possible area that has been proposed as an expression for the distinctiveness found between the internal working models of attachment is affect, or emotional regulation (Allen & Manning, 2007; Cassidy, 1994). Cassidy (1994) proposes that the individual differences seen in emotional regulative strategies may be the consequence of the individual’s particular attachment classification. Accordingly, it can be conceptualized that one’s attachment classification can develop into regulatory strategies that perpetuate the adaptive or maladaptive ways of achieving one’s attachment goals. Allen and Manning (2007) suggest that adults’ propensity to use social relationships to regulate emotions as a hardwired, direct expression of attachment systems, this helps to explain attachment behavior as a framework for developing emotional regulation strategies. Coping strategies implemented by individuals may help to explain the emotional regulative expression of Negative Coping Strategies 10 attachment as well as the distinct developmental pathways linked to the attachment classifications. Coping Strategies’ Links to Attachment Classifications Since both attachment and coping research have demonstrated links with emotional regulation and stress, it may seem intuitive that attachment organizations and coping strategies are associated. In a longitudinal study of coping, adolescents who were coded as secure in emerging adulthood implemented active, social-support seeking coping strategies (SeiffgeKrenke, 2006). Additionally, in a longitudinal study of Israeli males from adolescence into emerging adulthood using both self and peer-reports, securely attached individuals used instrumental, social functioning, and problem-focused coping (Scharf et al., 2004). Meanwhile, dismissing individuals mainly used cognitive, internal coping that was indicated as a possible risk-factor for problem behavior (Seiffge-Krenke, 2006). Further, Diamond, Hicks, and OtterHenderson (2006) showed that those with a dismissing classification utilize emotion-minimizing and repressive strategies that effectively suppress the awareness of negative emotions, even when exhibiting a physiological distress response to negative thoughts. Overall, dismissing attachment has been linked with difficulty seeking social support as well as withdrawal and avoidant coping in various developmental transitions (Larose & Bernier, 2001). On the other hand, Seiffge-Krenke (2006) found that preoccupied adolescents showed the highest levels of continual stress throughout their longitudinal study. The preoccupied adolescents exhibited ambivalent coping strategies, using support seeking coping strategies in tandem with withdrawal coping, and as a result, the preoccupied adolescents made no gains in relieving stress levels (Seiffge-Krenke, 2006). Similar to previous research, in a cross-sectional study of adults, secure individuals were found to be most likely to seek social support Negative Coping Strategies 11 effectively, while preoccupied individuals sought social support while using negative and ineffective emotional coping(Schmidt, Nachtigall, Wuethrich-Martone, & Strauss, 2002). Dismissing individuals were found to use socially deactivating coping, avoidance, and diversion strategies (Schmidt et al., 2002). The accumulated past research has linked more positive, adaptive, and active coping with secure attachments. Meanwhile, passive, negative, and maladaptive coping strategies have been linked to insecure attachment classifications. Predictably, preoccupied attachment patterns were linked to ambivalent and incoherent patterns of coping, while dismissing attachment patterns were linked to avoidant, disengaging, and more self-reliant cognitive coping strategies. Research on coping strategies and attachment organization suggests that the utilization of particular coping strategies reflect what we might intuitively expect particular attachment organizations to exhibit. However, few studies have specifically studied coping strategies through the developmental transition from adolescence to emerging adulthood. Moreover, Compas et al. (2001) point out the lack of research concerning the development and emergence of coping strategies. Our study permits the conceptualization, though indirectly, that coping strategies emerge as outgrowths of an individual’s particular attachment classification. Coping and Behavioral Outcomes Although there is a seemingly intuitive link between one’s coping strategies and resultant behavioral problems, the majority of research has looked at the effects of coping on physical health rather than behavioral correlates. Research that has looked at mental health and behavior has focused more on internalizing problems (Compas et al, 2001). Indeed, research has consistently found a link between disengaged, emotion-focused coping and internalizing symptoms (i.e., depression, anxiety, or somatic symptoms: Compas et al., 2001). Negative Coping Strategies 12 However, research on the relationship between coping and externalizing problems is relatively limited in the literature (Compas et al., 2001). In a review of coping research, the most consistent findings showed engaged coping (e.g. problem-solving, emotional expression and support seeking) linked with less externalizing problems (Compas et al., 2001). Similarly, in both a concurrent study of high school adolescents and a longitudinal study of preadolescence to early adolescence, emotion-focused coping (considered a maladaptive strategy) was linked with consistent emotional and behavioral problems, including self-reports of depression and aggression and maternal reports of child externalizing problems (Compas et al., 1988; Steele et al., 1999). Additionally, in an epidemiological survey of Chinese adolescents, avoidant coping (e.g. keeping feelings to oneself, avoiding situations, and staying away from other people) was linked to an increased risk of behavioral problems (Liu, Tein, & Zhao, 2004). In contrast, active coping strategies (e.g. positive appraisals, problem solving, and social-support seeking) were linked with a reduction in behavioral problems (Liu et al., 2004). Taken together, the research on coping strategies and subsequent behavioral outcomes displays an international prevalence that seems to transcend cultural boundaries, thereby indicating the potential of researching and understanding coping and attachment. Given the persistent links found in behavioral outcomes in attachment and coping research, it may present the possibility that there are counterparts to the attachment system. It should now be determined if coping strategies mediate the relationship between attachment organizations and externalizing behaviors. Past research has suggested links between emotional regulation of stress and future behavioral problems, but few if any studies have focused on the relationship that insecure attachment and negative coping strategies have with externalizing behavior problems. SeiffgeKrenke (2006), in a longitudinal study of attachment, suggested that attachment classifications Negative Coping Strategies 13 were predispositions for particular coping strategies and that insecure attachment classifications may lead to maladaptive responses to stress. Negative coping and attachment insecurity should be examined together to better understand problem behaviors. Additionally, it is of unique interest of the current study to examine negative coping strategies as a mediator for the relationship between attachment classifications and subsequent displays of externalizing behaviors. Research points toward similarities between attachment’s internal working models and coping; it may therefore be that attachment classifications predispose one to a coping strategy that subsequently becomes individually prominent. In the present study we examine the long-term influence of preoccupied and dismissing insecure attachment classifications on externalizing behavior using a normative sample of individuals making the transition from early adolescence to emerging adulthood. Furthermore, we explore the possibility that negative coping strategies mediate the relationship between insecure attachment and externalizing behavior by asking several questions. First, do negative coping strategies mediate the relationship between early adolescent preoccupied attachment and self-reports of externalizing behavior in emerging adulthood? Second, do negative coping strategies mediate the relationship between preoccupied attachment and peer reports of the teens’ externalizing behavior? Third, do negative coping strategies mediate the relationship between dismissing attachment and self-reports of externalizing behavior? And finally, do negative coping strategies mediate the relationship between dismissing attachment classification and peer reports of the teens’ externalizing behavior. Negative Coping Strategies 14