Attachment theory and intergroup bias: evidence that priming the secure base schema attenuates negative reactions to out-groups.

By Mario Mikulincer, Phillip R. Shaver. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2001

643 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Social Psychology, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/1428520bf04a727f4885b2e5b41d766d82403dca

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Social Psychology

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Avoidant Attachment: Exploration of an Oxymoron. (2004, background): “…that avoidant individuals respond positively to security-inducing primes: Like secure individuals, they become less hostile toward out-groups (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2001), more open to new ideas (Mikulincer, 1998), more empathic (Mikulincer et al., 2001), and more attracted to secure…”
Fear as a Disposition and an Emotional State: A Genetic and Environmental Approach to Out‐Group Political Preferences (2013, methodology): “Based on the loess and regression analyses above, we note the relationship between phobic-fear and conservatism-liberalism is tenuous.”
A lifespan perspective on attachment and care for others: Empathy, altruism, and prosocial behavior (2016, positive): “…to suggest that security priming attenuates hostile attitudes toward outgroup members, even among groups engaged in years of intractable conflict (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2001, 2007c), one pilot study found that more secure Palestinians living in the territories occupied by Israeli soldiers were…”
Attachment-related psychodynamics (2002, methodology): “For example, Mikulincer and Shaver (2001) used three different experimental priming techniques – subliminal presentation of security-related words such as love, proximity, and support; guided imagery concerning the components of the secure base script; and visualization of the faces of actual…”
Leadership Across Cultures: Attachment Style Influences (2003, background): “&dquo;The sense of having a secure base provides an individual with a framework for maintaining well-being, formulating effective emotional-regulation devices, developing positive models of the self and others, and engaging in exploration and risk-taking&dquo; (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2001).”
An attachment-theoretical approach to compassion and altruism. (2005, background): “…a number of investigators, including ourselves, have adopted an alternative research strategy that is more appropriate for testing causal predictions about the effects of attachment security on compassion and altruism (e.g. Mikulincer & Arad, 1999; Mikulincer & Shaver, 2001; Pierce & Lydon, 2001).”
RESEARCH: "Religious Fundamentalism and Attachment: Prediction of Homophobia" (2005, methodology): “Finally, Mikulincer and Shaver (2001) found that securely attached individuals are more accepting of people who do not belong to their in-group.”
Why do people need self-esteem? A theoretical and empirical review. (2004, background): “Interestingly, sociometer theory seems related to Bowlby’s (1969/1982) attachment theory, but it explicitly divorces itself from the functional analysis of attachment upon which Bowlby and other attachment theorists base their analysis (e.g., Mikulincer & Shaver, 2001).”
Worldview transformation and the development of social consciousness (2010, background): “destiny, for example) can be manipulated with subtle unconscious priming (Vohs and Schooler, 2008; Mikulincer and Shaver, 2001).”
Triune ethics: The neurobiological roots of our multiple moralities (2008, background): “Most important, moral psychology ought to finally embrace a ‘‘merging of psychobiological and ethological perspectives into common, cross-species, human inclusive models’’ (Bradshaw & Schore, 2007, p. 426).”
Boosting Attachment Security to Promote Mental Health, Prosocial Values, and Inter-Group Tolerance (2007, background): “…research techniques to experimentally activate mental representations of supportive attachment figures and measure their emotional effects (e.g., Mikulincer, Hirschberger, Nachmias, & Gillath, 2001; Mikulincer, Gillath, et al., 2001; Mikulincer, Gillath, et al., 2003; Mikulincer & Shaver, 2001).”
Empathy from infancy to adolescence: An attachment perspective on the development of individual differences (2017, background): “…suggests that attachment security may enhance individuals’ empathy for out-group members by reducing perceptions of threat from the outgroup (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2001); however, the authors note that attachment security alone may be insufficient to counteract systemic cultural factors…”