An attachment classification of desperate love

The assessment utility of attachment theory constructs for research and diagnostic purposes is being increasingly explored and demonstrated. This study focuses on the association between desperate love and a modification of Ainsworth, Blehar, Waters, and Wall's (1978) taxonomy of attachment styles, hypothesizing that the experience of desperate love will be positively associated with the dependent and resistant/ambivalent attachment styles with no gender differences. The findings based on multivariate regression analyses generally corroborate the attachment style hypotheses, although with significant gender differences. Discussion focuses on the possible contrasts in the intrapsychic experience of desperate love for men and women as well as indications of causal trends for future research.     

Winners love winning and losers love money

Salience and satisfaction are important factors in determining the comparisons that people make. We hypothesized that people make salient comparisons first, and then make satisfying comparisons only if salient comparisons leave them unsatisfied. This hypothesis suggests an asymmetry between winning and losing. For winners, comparison with a salient alternative (i.e., losing) brings satisfaction. Therefore, winners should be sensitive only to the relative value of their outcomes. For losers, comparison with a salient alternative (i.e., winning) brings little satisfaction. Therefore, losers should be drawn to compare outcomes with additional standards, which should make them sensitive to both relative and absolute values of their outcomes. In Experiment 1, participants won one of two cash prizes on a scratch-off ticket. Winners were sensitive to the relative value of their prizes, whereas losers were sensitive to both the relative and the absolute values of their prizes. In Experiment 2, losers were sensitive to the absolute value of their prize only when they had sufficient cognitive resources to engage in effortful comparison.     

An analogy between Hegel's theory of recognition and Ficino's theory of love

A widely debated question in current research centres on determining the precursors to G. W. F. Hegel's theory of recognition. Until now Fichte, Rousseau and Aristotle have been discussed. However, the present paper analyses a further surprising correspondence between Marsilio Ficino's theory of love and Hegel's theory of recognition. Here it is shown that Hegel studied Ficino in 1793 and that we can discover syntactical, semantical, and structural vestiges of Ficino's De amore II 8 in Hegel's early fragments on religion (1793) and love (1797), which are closely related to the general theory of recognition found in the Phenomenology of Spirit. Not only may this thesis be relevant for Hegel or Ficino scholarship, but it could also be a further indication that social theories with normative content are an integral characteristic of (early) modern self-consciousness.     

Feminism and the wish for a child

The present study investigated the relationship between feminism and the intensity of the wish for a child, as well as the costs and benefits of having children in a sample of 184 female undergraduates. Feminism was negatively related to motivation for motherhood, and the perceived costs of child raising rather than perceived benefits accounted for this finding. Perceptions of mother's—not father's—level of nurturance and happiness of childhood seemed to influence eagerness to assume the role of mother in profeminist women.This article was presented as a paper to the annual meeting of the Eastern Psychological Association, New York City, April 1981. The author wishes to thank Susan Bram for her comments on an earlier draft.     

Some thoughts on happy and unhappy love

The subjective nature of love and happiness makes it difficult to examine them objectively. Outlining the purpose of human life as the search for happiness and the avoidance of suffering, Freud began the systematic study of the psychology of love. His most enduring contribution was the discovery of the link between adult and infantile love. Oedipal love gives us the feeling of certainty about what true love is. Mutuality and positive reciprocity are the secret of happy love. Love is a strong motivational drive in life, a force for psychosocial development and a central interest for humanity. It has a remarkable power for the enhancement of integration. Love is a simultaneous attempt to find something new and re-find something old. The author examines which psychological factors lead to a happy result and what factors lead to failure.     

Cultural perspectives on romantic love

Culture-related dimensions contribute to a more complete understanding of romantic love. In particular, we suggest that the dimensions of individualism and collectivism, at both societal and psychological levels, offer insights into the nature of romantic love and its perceived importance for marriage. Changes In values pertaining to romantic love and its role In choosing a spouse are evident In several traditionally collectivistic societies and among persons from these societies emigrating to countries such as Canada, Australia, and the United States. Given these trends, we discuss the need to study individualism and collectivism at the psychological level and present findings from our own program of research.     

Adolescent sexuality and love

Adolescent love in its approach to human sexuality emphasizes freedom, to the exclusion of responsibility. Less than twenty percent of the adolescent couples who engage in sexual relations use any type of contraception, and three-quarters of all pregnancies occur prior to marriage. Further, children born out of wedlock from such unions suffer frequently from social, economic, health, and educational handicaps. In addition, there are the problems of increasing abortions and venereal disease for the young parents, along with child abuse and a suicide rate among teenage mothers ten times that of the general population. Four possible ways to aid in the solution of these problems are suggested.The Rev. John A. Clippinger, Ph.D., Professor and Chairman of the Psychology Department of Baker University, is a minister of the United Church of Christ, a member of the American Association of Pastoral Counselors, and a certified clinical psychologist. He is the author of eighteen articles in books and periodicals in the fields of psychology, psychiatry, religion, and sexual research. He is also listed in theInternational Directory of Sex Research and Related Fields and is associate editor ofCorrective Psychiatry and Journal of Social Therapy.This paper was originally presented at the Fall Conference, 1977, of the Central Region of the American Association of Pastoral Counselors and the 1978 national meeting in Chicago of the A.A.P.C.     

Galton and sex differences: An historical note

The psychological study of sex differences is a special area of interest within differential psychology. Differential psychology was launched as a scientific field of research in the latter half of the nineteenth century by Sir Francis Galton. Galton's early research on sex differences in psychological traits gives him the distinction of being the “father” of the modern study of sex differences. Galton's empirical findings and his interpretation of sex differences were heavily influenced by his Victorian sexist attitudes. The early history of the modern study of sex differences exemplifies the intimate relation between facts and values.     

Cultural and ethnic influences on love and attachment

Recently, theorists have begun to speculate about the nature of passionate and companionate love. Evolutionary psychologists have tended to emphasize the pan-cultural nature of passionate love. Historians have stressed the fact that, in different historical eras, people's attitudes toward love, sex, and intimacy have varied widely. Cross-cultural researchers contend that, even today, societies differ greatly in their attitudes toward love. In this study, 124 men and 184 women from four ethnic backgrounds were asked if they were currently in love and how passionately and companionately in love they were. The four groups differed, as predicted, in their general orientations toward life. European-Americans were the most individualistic, Japanese-Americans and Pacific Islanders were intermediate in individualism/collectivism, and Chinese-Americans were the most collectivist. Nonetheless, in the specific area of love, the various American ethnic groups did not differ significantly in the likelihood of being in love, nor in the intensity of the passionate love (PL) or companionate love (CL) they felt. In all ethnic groups, men's and women's adult attachment styles predicted romantic feelings and experiences. The anxious were the most likely to be in a love relationship, and they scored the highest on the PL scale; avoidants scored lowest. The secure scored the highest on the CL scale; avoidants scored the lowest.