نویسندگان:
نگار لطفی1 ، نرگس جمالی نظری2 ، عباس جواهری3 .1کارشناسی ارشد مشاوره خانواده، گروه مشاوره، دانشکده روانشناسی و علوم تربیتی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران.
2کارشناسی ارشد مشاوره خانواده، گروه مشاوره، دانشکده روانشناسی و علوم تربیتی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران.
3استادیار مشاوره، گروه مشاوره، دانشکده روانشناسی و علوم تربیتی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران.
چکیده فارسی:
چکیده
تحقیقات دلبستگی فقط به حوزه نوزادی و کودکی ختم نمیشود و در سالهای اخیر، پژوهشگران دلبستگی را در بزرگسالان به روشهای مختلف بررسیکردهاند. دلبستگی، افراد را مستعد ایجاد و حفظ مشکلات شخصی، اجتماعی و سلامت روانی میکند. بنابراین، ارزیابی دلبستگی بزرگسالان هم برای روانشناسان، کاربردی و هم برای محققان مهم است. ابزارهای مختلفی برای سنجش دلبستگی در بزرگسالان وجود دارد، بررسی نظاممند اینابزارها میتواند برای محققان در پژوهشهای مرتبط با دلبستگی راهگشا باشد. دادههای پژوهش از طریق جستجو در پایگاههای داده SCOPUS، Science direct، PsycArticles، SID، مگایران و نورمگز به دستآمد. مقالات با استفاده از روش نظاممند کاکرین و چکلیستهای CASP و PRISMA ارزیابی شدند. در نهایت ابزارهایی که معیارهای مدنظر پژوهش را داشتند، در قالب جدول به صورت نظاممند مرور شدند. جستجوی پایگاههای داده 2281 نتیجه را ارائه کرد که باتوجه به معیارهای موردنیاز پژوهش، 33 مطالعه واجد شرایط شناسایی شدند و بهطور انتقادی مورد ارزیابی قرار گرفتند. هرابزار براساس نوع آن، نویسندگان، تاریخ انتشار، کشور سازنده، دستهبندی ابزار، تعداد گویهها، توصیفی از ابزار، تعداد نمونه، تمرکز دلبستگی در روابط مختلف، ویژگیهای روان-سنجی و استفاده ابزار در ایران مورد بررسی قرارگرفت. ابزارهای مختلف دلبستگی از لحاظ ویژگیهای مختلف مورد بررسی قرارگرفتند. بهترین شواهد پژوهشی برای ابزار مصاحبهای مربوط به AAI (1985)George et al و برای ابزار خودگزارشدهی مربوط به ابزار AAS(1987 ) Hazan and Shaver بود. پژوهشگران باتوجه به اهداف پژوهش خود میتوانند از ابزار موردنظر خود استفادهکنند.
A systematic review of adult attachment measurement tools and their application in Iran
English Abstract: Introduction This study investigated the psychometric properties of adult attachment assessment tools and provided a resource for selecting appropriate tools in this field. According to Attachment Theory (Bowlby, 1982), an individual’s early experiences with caregivers form mental representations called Internal Working Models (IWM) that influence future relationships (Main et al., 1985). These models create individual differences in attachment styles, which were divided by Ainsworth et al. (1978) into the three styles of secure, avoidant, and anxious. Later, Main and Solomon (1986) introduced a fourth style called Disorganized Attachment, which is observed in children with contradictory reactions. In adulthood, there are two main approaches to assessing attachment: developmental psychology and social psychology. In the developmental approach, the Adult Attachment Interview (AAI) is used as the gold standard, which assesses attachment style based on the coherence of individuals’ speech (George et al., 1985). In the social approach, self-report measures, such as questionnaires that measure an individual’s emotions and behaviors in relationships, are used (Shaver & Mikulincer, 2004). However, there are concerns about the validity and reliability of these tools (Kurdek, 2002). In Iran, the tendency towards research in the field of attachment has increased and some scales have been standardized (Asgarizadeh et al., 2023; Besharat, 2011), but many tools have not been standardized in this context yet (Nunes et al., 2020; Pace & Bufford, 2018). Therefore, this study was conducted to fill this gap and provide a reference for selecting appropriate attachment tools. This study can be useful for researchers active in this field and those who intend to standardize new tools. Methods This study was conducted using a systematic review method and based on the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) protocol. Data were collected from international databases such as SCOPUS, ScienceDirect, and PsycArticles and national databases such as SID, Mag-Iran, and Normags. The search was conducted using keywords such as measure, tool, questionnaire, interview, assess, self-report, inventory, scale, surveys, self-assessment, attachment, attachment behavior, adult attachment, psychometric, validity, reliability, Iran, Iranian, Persian, and Farsi. Studies published up to February 13, 2023 in English or Persian and their full text was available were reviewed. Of the 2281 studies identified, 33 studies that met the inclusion criteria of relevance to the research area, focus on adults, and availability of full text were selected. The screening process was conducted independently by two authors. The quality of the studies was assessed using the CASP (Critical Appraisal Skills Programme) tool, which included examining the validity, accuracy, and quality of the results (Zeng et al., 2015). This systematic review was conducted to provide a reference for selecting adult attachment assessment tools and examining their psychometric properties. Results Thirty-three studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the final review. Table 1 represents the name of the tool, its type, tool dimensions, and the validity, and reliability in Iran. Conclusion This study investigated the psychometric properties of adult attachment assessment tools and provided a reference for selecting the appropriate tool in this field. In total, 33 articles introducing different attachment assessment tools were reviewed. Tools such as AAI (Main et al., 1985) and FMAQ (Nunes et al., 2020) measured attachment to parents; BARE (Sandberg et al., 2012) and IAS (Langeslag et al., 2013) measured attachment to romantic partner; and AAI (Besharat, 2011) and MAQ (Carver, 1997) measured attachment in general. Tools such as ACIQ (Lindberg & Thomas, 2011) also measured more than one relationship. Most tools have divided attachment into the four dimensions of secure, avoidant insecure, anxious insecure, and disturbed insecure. However, some tools such as the VASQ (Bifulco et al., 2003) provided different dimensions. Short tools such as ARQ (Pace & Bufford, 2018) are more appropriate when attachment is a secondary area of research. Some tools such as AAS (Ghotbaldinianyazd et al., 2011) and ECR (Poravari et al., 2014) were standardized in Iran. Among the widely used tools that are being used in the world, but have not been validated and reliable in Iran, we can mention AAI (Main et al., 1985) and AAQ (Simpson et al., 1996). Researchers can evaluate these tools in Iran. The limitations of this study included limited access to some databases and the lack of examination of attachment tools for children and adolescents. It is suggested that future researchers standardize tools that have not been examined in Iran and also examine attachment tools on specific variables. This study can be used as a reference for selecting appropriate tools in the field of adult attachment. Conflict of Interest This study did not have any conflict of interest for the authors. Acknowledgements We would like to express our sincere gratitude and appreciation to the researchers whose studies were used in this study.