Attachment insecurity as a moderator of cardiovascular arousal effects following dyadic support Hadil Kordahji a , Eran Bar-Kalifa b , Eshkol Rafaeli a,b,⇑ a Gonda Multidisciplinary Brain Research Center, Bar-Ilan University, Israel b Department of Psychology, Bar-Ilan University, Israel article info Article history: Available online 6 May 2015 Keywords: Emotional support Attachment anxiety Attachment avoidance Intimate relationships Psychophysiology Actor–partner-interdependence-model Multi-level modeling Dyadic interaction abstract We examine the cardiovascular arousal effects of emotional support receipt, and the moderation of these by the support recipient’s and provider’s attachment. Seventy couples engaged in a laboratory dyadic supportive interaction, while their ECG was monitored. With more emotional support, men with high attachment anxiety showed greater arousal reduction during the dyadic interaction, whereas men with low attachment anxiety showed less reduction; additionally, women coupled with partners with high attachment anxiety showed greater arousal reduction, whereas women coupled with partners with low attachment anxiety showed less reduction. Men and women with high attachment avoidance showed less arousal reduction, whereas those with low attachment avoidance showed greater reduction. These results highlight the differential ways in which support gets under the skin. Ó 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction 1.1. Support From cradle to grave, humans are social beings who rely on help and comfort from significant others at times of need and stress (cf., Bowlby, 1969). Indeed, the perceived availability of significant others’ support is strongly associated with health and well-being (e.g., Cohen & Wills, 1985; Gruenewald & Seeman, 2010; Hobfoll, 2009; Taylor, 2007). Once we enter adulthood, the most salient bonds for many people are their romantic relationships; perceiving these as supportive is associated with both individual well-being and relationship satisfaction and functioning (e.g., Brock & Lawrence, 2009; Collins, Dunkel Schetter, Lobel, & Scrimshaw, 1993; Cutrona, Russell, & Gardner, 2005; Gable, Gosnell, Maisel, & Strachman, 2012; Rafaeli & Gleason, 2009; Sullivan, Pasch, Johnson, & Bradbury, 2010). However, the last decade has uncovered a paradox with regards to social support. In contrast to perceived support availability which has consistent positive outcomes, enacted support has been unex- pectedly associated with mixed outcomes. It sometimes has posi- tive effects, but null or even negative effects are also common (c.f., Gable et al., 2012; McClure et al., 2014; Rafaeli & Gleason, 2009; Rini & Dunkel Schetter, 2010). The effectiveness of enacted support seems to hinge on several factors, including the nature of the stressful situations (e.g., Cohen & McKay, 1984; Cutrona & Russell, 1990), the timing of support provided (e.g., Bolger & Amarel, 2007; Pearlin & McCall, 1990), the need of the recipient (Bar-Kalifa & Rafaeli, 2013; Cutrona, Shaffer, Wesner, & Gardner, 2007), the skill of the support provider (e.g., Howland & Simpson, 2010; Rafaeli & Gleason, 2009; Rini & Dunkel Schetter, 2010), the type of relationship between provider and recipient (Thoits, 2011), and the recipient’s and provider’s personality traits (e.g., Collins, Ford, Guichard, Kane, & Feeney, 2010; Verhofstadt, Buysse, Ickes, Davis, & Devoldre, 2008). 1.2. Attachment One personality trait that has been widely found to determine the effectiveness of support is attachment style (e.g., Campbell, Simpson, Kashy, & Rholes, 2001; Collins, Ford, & Feeney, 2011; Rini & Dunkel Schetter, 2010). According to attachment theory (Bowlby, 1973, 1980, 1982; Mikulincer & Shaver, 2008), humans are born with an innate psychobiological attachment behavioral system. This system motivates people to seek proximity to signif- icant others (attachment figures) in times of need and stress, and to create emotional bonds with people they rely on for protection, comfort, and support (Bowlby, 1982; Mikulincer & Shaver, 2008; Waters & Cummings, 2003). Optimally, when an attachment figure serves as a safe haven (i.e., is available, sensitive, and responsive in http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2015.04.004 0092-6566/Ó 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. ⇑ Corresponding author at: Bar-Ilan University, Department of Psychology, Ramat-Gan 5290002, Israel. E-mail address: eshkol.rafaeli@gmail.com (E. Rafaeli). Journal of Research in Personality 57 (2015) 89–99 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Journal of Research in Personality journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jrp