Attachment Theory and Group Processes: The Association Between Attachment Style and Group-Related Representations, Goals, Memories, and Functioning Eldad Rom and Mario Mikulincer Bar-Ilan University Four studies examined attachment-style differences in group-related cognitions and behaviors. In Studies 1–2, participants completed scales on group-related cognitions and emotions. In Studies 3– 4, participants were divided into small groups, and their performance in group tasks as well as the cohesion of their group were assessed. Both attachment anxiety and avoidance in close relationships were associated with negative group-related cognitions and emotions. Anxiety was also related to the pursuit of closeness goals and impaired instrumental performance in group tasks. Avoidance was related to the pursuit of distance goals and deficits in socioemotional and instrumental performance. Group cohesion significantly mod- erated the effects of attachment anxiety. The discussion emphasizes the relevance of attachment theory within group contexts. In their germinal article, Smith, Murphy, and Coats (1999) argued that “adult attachment theory, which has been prominent in recent years as a theory of interpersonal relationships, may be able to shed light on the processes underlying people’s identification with social groups as well” (p. 94). Accordingly, their findings indicated that people developed specific attachment orientations toward social groups and that these orientations contributed to group identification and emotional reactions to group membership. In the current studies, we follow Smith et al.’s integrative approach and make a step forward in applying attachment theory as a relevant framework for understanding individual differences in group-related cognitions, affect, and behavior. Specifically, we examine whether and how attachment style in close relationships (relationship attachment style) is associated with group-related appraisals, emotions, goals, and memories; variations in instru- mental and socioemotional performance in actual group tasks; and the development of attachment orientations toward a specific group during these tasks. We also explore the possible role that group-level constructs, such as group cohesion, may play in mod- erating the psychological manifestations of relationship attachment style within group contexts. Attachment Theory and Research Attachment theory (Bowlby, 1973) attempts to explain individ- ual differences in the affective ties formed with significant others. Specifically, Bowlby (1973) proposed that interactions with sig- nificant others in times of need are internalized into mental rep- resentations of the self and others (attachment working models), which, in turn, organize relational cognitions, affect, and behavior. Originally, this theory was applied to explain individual differ- ences in the infant– caregiver relationship (e.g., Ainsworth, Blehar, Waters, & Wall, 1978). However, Bowlby (1988) claimed that attachment theory is a highly relevant framework for explaining relational cognitions and behaviors across the entire life span. In fact, following Bowlby’s (1969/1982) basic assumptions, scholars (Ainsworth, 1991; Hazan & Zeifman, 1994) argued that attach- ment theory can be applied to relationships that fulfill three crite- ria: (a) proximity maintenance—people tend to show preference for the relationship partner and seek proximity to him or her in times of need; (b) safe haven—the partner facilitates distress alleviation and is a source of support, comfort, and relief; and (c) secure base—the partner facilitates exploration, risk taking, and self-expansion. Research has shown that friendships and romantic relationships during adolescence and adulthood fulfill these crite- ria (e.g., Fraley & Davis, 1997; Hazan & Zeifman, 1994). In studying adult close relationships, attachment studies have focused on the construct of relationship attachment style—stable patterns of relational cognitions and behaviors—and have adopted Hazan and Shaver’s (1987) typology of secure, avoidant, and anxious style. Recently, Brennan, Clark, and Shaver (1998) con- cluded that this typology reflects two basic dimensions: avoidance and anxiety. Persons scoring low in these two dimensions corre- spond to the secure style and are characterized by a positive history of interactions with significant others, confidence in others’ availability in times of need, and comfort with closeness. Persons scoring high on attachment avoidance correspond to the avoidant style, which is characterized by negative representations of others, compulsive self-reliance, and preference for emotional distance. Persons scoring high on attachment anxiety correspond to the anxious style, which is characterized by doubts in others’ re- sponses, negative self-appraisals, compulsive need for closeness, and fear of rejection. Eldad Rom and Mario Mikulincer, Department of Psychology, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel. This article is based in part on the doctoral dissertation of Eldad Rom under the supervision of Mario Mikulincer at the Department of Psychol- ogy, Bar-Ilan University. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Mario Mikulincer, Department of Psychology, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan 52900, Israel. E-mail: mikulm@mail.biu.ac.il Journal of Personality and Social Psychology Copyright 2003 by the American Psychological Association, Inc. 2003, Vol. 84, No. 6, 1220 –1235 0022-3514/03/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/0022-3514.84.6.1220 1220 document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers. This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.