Timmerman Irma G H, Emmelkamp Paul M G
Clinical psychologist at Forensic Psychiatric Center Veldzicht, PO Box 20, 7707 ZG Balkbrug, The Netherlands.
Int J Law Psychiatry. 2006 Jan-Feb;29(1):48-56. doi: 10.1016/j.ijlp.2005.04.005. Epub 2005 Nov 14.
The relationship between attachment styles and Cluster B personality disorders were examined among prisoners, forensic inpatients and controls from the general population. Forensic inpatients and prisoners reported significantly less frequently the secure attachment style (Relationship Questionnaire) and significantly more the fearful attachment style compared to the normal controls. Both forensic groups could not be distinguished from each other. Further, prisoners, forensic inpatients and controls could not be differentiated on the basis of the dismissing nor the preoccupied attachment style. With respect to personality pathology, almost all relationships between Cluster C pathology, on the one hand, and attachment styles, on the other, were significant. Cluster A pathology was clearly related to the secure and fearful attachment style. With respect to cluster B pathology, the results were more specific but also less clear. The results were strongly dependent on the way the personality pathology variables were treated, as either categorical or dimensional. None of the cluster B personality pathology variables were associated with the fearful attachment style and histrionic personality pathology was negatively associated with the dismissing attachment style. Antisocial personality features were associated with a dismissing attachment style. Borderline personality pathology, when treated as a categorical variable, was significantly related to the preoccupied attachment style. These results show that (1) cluster A and cluster C pathology are more strongly associated with attachment than cluster B, (2) treating personality data as either dimensional or categorical is of major importance to the conclusions that can be drawn, (3) it is important to control for the influence of co-morbid personality pathology when examining the relationship between (Cluster B) personality pathology and attachment.
在囚犯、法医住院患者和普通人群对照组中,研究了依恋风格与B类人格障碍之间的关系。与正常对照组相比,法医住院患者和囚犯报告安全依恋风格(关系问卷)的频率显著更低,而恐惧依恋风格的频率显著更高。两个法医组之间无法区分。此外,囚犯、法医住院患者和对照组在忽视型或痴迷型依恋风格方面也无法区分。关于人格病理学,一方面,C类病理学与依恋风格之间几乎所有的关系都是显著的。A类病理学明显与安全和恐惧依恋风格相关。关于B类病理学,结果更具特异性,但也不太清晰。结果在很大程度上取决于人格病理学变量是作为分类变量还是维度变量来处理。B类人格病理学变量均与恐惧依恋风格无关,表演型人格病理学与忽视型依恋风格呈负相关。反社会人格特征与忽视型依恋风格相关。边缘型人格病理学作为分类变量处理时,与痴迷型依恋风格显著相关。这些结果表明:(1)A类和C类病理学与依恋的关联比B类更强;(2)将人格数据作为维度变量或分类变量处理对得出的结论至关重要;(3)在研究(B类)人格病理学与依恋之间的关系时,控制共病性人格病理学的影响很重要。