Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 2001, Vol. 81, No. 1, 97-115 Copyright 2001 by the American Psychological Association, Inc. 0022-3514/01/$5.00 DOT: 10.1037//0022-3514.81.1.97 Attachment Theory and Intergroup Bias: Evidence That Priming the Secure Base Schema Attenuates Negative Reactions to Out-Groups Mario Mikulincer Bar-Ilan University Phillip R. Shaver University of California, Davis Five studies examined the effects of priming the secure base schema on intergroup bias. In addition, Studies 1-2 examined the effects of dispositional attachment style, Studies 2-5 examined a mood interpretation, Study 3 examined the mediating role of threat appraisal, and Studies 4-5 examined the effects of secure base priming while inducing a threat to self-esteem or cultural worldview. Secure base priming led to less negative evaluative reactions toward out-groups than positive affect and neutral control conditions. In addition, whereas the effects of secure base priming did not depend on attachment style and were not explained by mood induction, they were mediated by threat appraisal and occurred even when self-esteem or cultural worldview was threatened. The discussion emphasizes the relevance of attachment theory for understanding intergroup attitudes. In recent years, researchers and theorists have attempted to conceptually integrate the literatures on interpersonal relations and intergroup relations (e.g., Devine, Evett, & Vasquez-Suson, 1996; Mackie & Smith, 1998; Smith, Murphy, & Coats, 1999). For example, Smith et al. (1999) delineated parallels between Bowl- by's (1969, 1973) attachment theory, which deals with the sense of security in close relationships, and a person's feelings toward groups to which he or she belongs. In the series of studies reported here, we follow this integrative approach and examine the rele- vance of attachment theory for explaining intergroup attitudes. Specifically, we focus on some of Bowlby's (1973) important ideas about the connection between the attachment system and reactions to unknown and dissimilar people, and we examine the effects of activation of the sense of attachment security on a pervasive and morally troubling intergroup response—the ten- dency to derogate and reject people who are different from oneself (out-group members). Theory and Research on the Sense of a Secure Base One of the basic tenets of Bowlby's (1973) theory is that interactions with significant others who are available and support- ive in times of stress facilitate the formation of a sense of a "secure base," or what Sroufe and Waters (1977) called felt security. This sense can be viewed as the cognitive-affective aspect of an inter- personal prototype or script (Waters, Rodrigues, & Ridgeway, 1998). Theoretically, the script includes something like the fol- lowing if-then propositions: If I encounter an obstacle or become distressed, I can approach a significant other for help; he or she is Mario Mikulincer, Department of Psychology, Bar-Ilan University, Ra- mat Gan, Israel; Phillip R. Shaver, Department of Psychology, University of California, Davis. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Mario Mikulincer, Department of Psychology, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan 52900, Israel. Electronic mail may be sent to mikulm@mail.biu.ac.il. likely to be available and supportive; I will experience relief and comfort as a result of proximity to this person; I can then return to other activities. In Bowlby's (1973) terms, the sense of having a secure base provides an individual with a framework for maintain- ing well-being, formulating effective emotion-regulation devices, developing positive models of the self and others, and engaging in exploration and risk-taking activities. Although the sense of having a secure base may be formed during early interactions with primary caregivers, Bowlby (1988) contended that every meaningful interaction with significant others throughout life may affect a person's beliefs about others' avail- ability and supportiveness. Moreover, although the sense of having a secure base may be quite general, it is also common for people to develop relationship-specific beliefs organized around actual experiences with a specific partner. These beliefs do not necessar- ily fit with the more general, chronic sense of having (or not having) a secure base (Collins & Read, 1994). In fact, like every cognitive-affective representation, the sense of having a secure base can be contextually activated by actual or imagined encoun- ters with available and responsive others, even among persons who have chronic doubts about their secure base (Baldwin, 1992, 1997). In the last 2 decades, a large number of studies have examined the sense of a secure base in adulthood. The most frequently used strategy is to examine associations between the chronic and global sense of a secure base and theoretically relevant constructs. Spe- cifically, this line of research has focused on a person's attachment style and has compared persons who report a secure style with those who report more insecure styles (see J. A. Feeney, 1999; Shaver & Clark, 1994; Shaver & Hazan, 1993, for reviews). This relational construct seems to be organized around two underlying dimensions (Brennan, Clark, & Shaver, 1998). The first dimen- sion, typically called avoidance, reflects the extent to which people distrust others' goodwill and strive to maintain emotional distance and remain independent from a relationship partner. The second dimension, typically called anxiety, reflects the degree to which 97