The Influence of Social on Interpersonal Depression - Research Paper Example

Running Head: Psychology The Influence of Social Support and Attachment on Coping with Interpersonal Depression A Research Paper of Professor Date of Submission Introduction The shift to college is a crucial stage in the social development of late adolescents, especially because it usually involves living independently, far away from parents and other loved ones, for the first time. Studies show that two concepts central to this mechanism, social support and constant parental attachment, are associated with effective adjustment in college (Bernardon et al., 2011). Yet, the ramification of these findings for psychotherapy is indefinite because even though the theoretical perspectives of social support and attachment are clearly distinct, these concepts are usually applied in comparable ways. Additional studies are needed to determine whether the two concepts are distinctly associated with psychological condition during periods of interpersonal difficulty. This paper is hence aimed at exploring the comparative importance of views of social support and attachment to indicators of psychosocial condition among young adults or college pupils who had been to a relationship breakup recently. According to Moller and colleagues (2003), college students are selected because relationship failures are a usual stressor in this social group and important to social support and attachment theory. A Review of the Attachment and Social Support Literature Several studies report that social support and attachment are connected. Studies have demonstrated that respondents who admitted that their mothers showed more attachment patterns had greater rankings of existing social support than respondents whose mothers show lesser attachment patterns (Bernardon et al., 2011). Also, this finding has been repeated with rankings of existing social support and attachment pattern in adults. In investigations evaluating views of existing social support, adults with attachment security have revealed more current social support than adults with lower attachment security (Bernardon, 2011). Furthermore, according to Prior and Glaser (2006), respondents with attachment security have been discovered to be more prone to look for support in moments of distress and need and to be more contented with their social support system than respondents with weak attachment security. From the perspective of attachment theory, the systematically proven relationship between social support and attachment is definite. Mary Ainsworth and John Bowlby, founders of attachment, described attachment as the “emotional bond experienced with another who is sensed as a source of security and who provides a secure base anchoring exploration” (Moller et al., 2003, 354); attachment security has been defined as well in relation to ‘perceived security’ in connection with loved ones and significant others, with the suggestion being that individuals with high attachment security live their lives with the unconscious idea that there will always be somebody to help them in times of need (Moller et al., 2003). Simply put, attachment security is theoretically and pragmatically related to a view of existing social support. On the contrary, according to Perrier and colleagues (2010), insecure grown-ups may be more prone to worry about failure or absence of social support (i.e. rejection and neglect by significant others). Ainsworth and Bowlby’s attachment perspective states that there appears to be slight misunderstanding about the concept within the literature of attachment. One domain with much disagreement is the method of assessing attachment (Moller et al., 2003). Researchers making use of self-report instruments have evaluated existing interaction and relationship approaches or common attachment method, present attachment to family members and significant others, and adult romantic relationship. While researchers of attachment appear to have the same opinion regarding the nature of different attachment types, social support is described in generally differing ways in the literature (Moller et al., 2003). Social support, in a number of studies, is measured basically in relation to the number of individuals in a self-reported social set of connections or, essentially, in terms of whether the individual is single or married (Green, 2003). Nevertheless, according to Perrier and colleagues (2010), measuring social support in this way may not estimate the value or intricacy of support given by family and peers, especially with regard to minimizing traumatic life experiences. Another method employed to assess social support is to measure it as the entirety of the different types of support acquired from certain relationships, for instance by evaluating the accessibility of support from a distinct number of individuals in a person’s social network. But another method is to classify social support into a number of categories, likes the emotional support given by family or close peers, support received from group ‘belongingness’ or membership with a collective sense of identity, evaluation support given by others in discussing dilemmas and issues, and practical or concrete support (Prior & Glaser, 2006). On the other hand, social support’s dimensional definitions often do not differentiate whether social support is an individual’s or environment’s possession. This is especially difficult if the appraisal of social support is rooted in self-report instruments, because these techniques are apparently connected to personal views (Prior & Glaser, 2006). Nevertheless, according to Moller and colleagues (2003), the subjectivity of self-report is not essentially a risk to the validity of these instruments if social support is viewed as a mechanism of perception instead of an unbiased reality. Describing social support in relation to a person’s view of their social network resembles ‘felt security’ element of attachment security conceptualized by attachment scholars. Conceptualized in this manner, the ‘felt security’ that results in the ability to look for support and rely on other people becomes a distinguishing feature of adequate social support levels and attachment security (Moller et al., 2003). With the mutual basis of felt security, a person with increased social support hence becomes theoretically similar to a securely attached person. The similarity between the two concepts of social support and attachment has encouraged a number of researchers to view social support as rooted in attachment operational perspectives of self and others. In this perspective, social support use and perception are based on the social point of view that grows from childhood experiences and relationships with caregivers (Bernardon et al., 2011). A number of social support instruments express this perspective. For instance, the Social Support Questionnaire and the Perceived Support Scale determine the level of perceived support from a person’s friends and family (Moller et al., 2003). Yet, because of the theoretical similarities between attachment security and perceived social support, the prominence of this perspective does not resolve the issue whether the two concepts influence distinctly psychological condition after a relationship failure. Since interpersonal grief usually stems from a common discontentment with social relationship in general, rather than with particular relationships, the concept of social relatedness may within this perspective more helpfully explain continuing views of the social environment. Described as the ‘non-relationship-specific perception of support from the social environment’ (Moller et al., 2003, 355), the notion of social relatedness may enable scholars to sort out common beliefs that support is available in the environment from views of support rooted in particular intimate emotional relations with others. Social relatedness, according to the Social Connectedness Scale (SCS), has been related to emotional health and isolation (Moller et al., 2003). Yet, thus far, according to Prior and Glaser (2006), there has been no study exploring the SCS alongside instruments of social support and attachment. The social support and attachment literature presents substantiations of independent, deep-rooted connections with emotional health and relationship mechanism. For instance, attachment has been named a theory of affect regulation (Bernardon et al., 2011). According to Bowlby (1969), childhood experiences of attachment keep on influencing adulthood for a person’s history of dealing with grief with attachment models results in the creation of inner cognitive patterns, labeled as ‘working models’ (Bowlby, 1969, 51), which steer emotional processes in adulthood by controlling assessment of existing interpersonal circumstances and establishing techniques and rules for dealing with emotions and coping mechanisms. More particularly, while attachment security is described by an “open engagement with difficult attachment-related emotions, avoidant (child)/dismissing (adult) attachment status is associated with a tendency to ignore or minimize the affect and anxious-ambivalent (child)/preoccupied (adult) attachment status with a tendency to ruminate on and amplify the distress” (Moller et al., 2003, 355). Empirical proofs of the correlation between emotional adjustment and attachment is shown by several studies from the parent-child attachment literature. Attachment security, for instance, has been associated with an eager and determined problem solving at an early age and to increased curiosity and ego resiliency levels in school contexts (Moller et al., 2003). Moreover, attachment security has been linked to less resentful, more attentive discussion by adolescents during analytical activities and improved emotional processes and less recognized anxiety in adolescents (Perrier et al., 2010). Simply put, studies have discovered connections between emotional processes and attachment from childhood to adulthood, and these proofs have been substantiated employing a variety of methods, such as self-report accounts. Social support, according to Perrier and colleagues (2010), similar to attachment security, is also connected to emotional processes. As shown by Green (2003), high social support levels have been linked to improved adjustment for individuals confronting traumatic life crises. In contrast, low social support levels have been associated with despair, anxiety, and isolation. Conclusions Scholars and researchers have been mainly interested in the influence of social support and attachment on dealing with interpersonal grief, but, as mentioned earlier, each concept is still studied independently in the field of social psychology. One form of interpersonal strain that has been thoroughly examined by researchers and practitioners is that of relationship failure, with a great deal of research explaining the depression linked to the disintegration of a romantic attachment. Attachment security has been reported to be a defensive mechanism in the depression after a relationship failure, and, likewise, the accessibility of social support has been associated with reduced depression after the termination of a marital bond. References Bernardon, S. et al. (2011). Loneliness, Attachment and the Perception and Use of Social Support in University Students. Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science, 43(1), 40+ Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and loss. New York: Basic Books. Green, V. (2003). Emotional Development in Psychoanalysis, Attachment Theory, and Neuroscience: Creating Connections. Hove, England: Brunner-Routledge. Moller, N. et al. (2003). Relationship of Attachment and Social Support to College Students’ Adjustment Following a Relationship Breakup. Journal of Counseling and Development, 81(3), 354+ Perrier, C. et al. (2010). The Overlapping Contributions of Attachment Orientation and Social Support in Predicting Life-events Distress. Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science, 42(2), 71+ Prior, V. & Glaser, D. (2006). Understanding Attachment and Attachment Disorders: Theory, Evidence, and Practice. London: Jessica Kingsley. Read More