This article was downloaded by: [Tata Institute of Social Sciences], [Dr Narendra Saple]

On: 21 November 2014, At: 08:48

Publisher: Routledge
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer
House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Aging & Mental Health

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/camh20

How avoidant attachment influences subjective

well-being: An investigation about theageandgender
differences
ab c
Tianyuan Li & Helene H. Fung
a
Department of Psychological Studies, The Hong Kong Institute of Education, Hong Kong
b
Center for Psychosocial Health and Aging, The Hong Kong Institute of Education, Hong
Kong
c
Department of Psychology, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong
Published online: 01 Mar 2013.

To cite this article: Tianyuan Li & Helene H. Fung (2014) How avoidant attachment influences subjective well-being: An
investigation about theageandgender differences, Aging & Mental Health, 18:1, 4-10, DOI: 10.1080/13607863.2013.775639

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13607863.2013.775639

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained
in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of
the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied
upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall
not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other
liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or
arising out of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://
www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
 Aging & Mental Health, 2014
Vol. 18, No. 1, 4–10, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13607863.2013.775639

How avoidant attachment influences subjective well-being: An investigation about

the age and gender differences
Tianyuan Lia,b*, and Helene H. Fungc
a
Department of Psychological Studies, The Hong Kong Institute of Education, Hong Kong; bCenter for Psychosocial Health and Aging,
The Hong Kong Institute of Education, Hong Kong; cDepartment of Psychology, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong
(Received 1 November 2012; final version received 28 January 2013)
Downloaded by [Tata Institute of Social Sciences], [Dr Narendra Saple] at 08:48 21 November 2014

Intimate relationship is a significant factor that influences older adults’ subjective well-being. Avoidant attachment reflects
a basic working model regarding interpersonal relationships. The current study aims to test how age and gender moderate
the effect of avoidant attachment to spouse on subjective well-being. Fifty-six married couples aged from 20 to 79 years in
Hong Kong were recruited for the study. Their avoidant attachment to spouse and subjective well-being were measured by
questionnaires. In general, avoidant attachment to spouse was found to undermine subjective well-being. More
importantly, age significantly moderated the negative association between avoidant attachment and subjective well-being,
but the direction of the moderating effect was opposite for husbands and wives. Compared with their younger counterparts,
the detrimental effect of avoidant attachment on subjective well-being was weaker for older wives but stronger for older
husbands. The results suggest that marital relationship may play different roles in different life stages for the two genders.
In later adulthood, males may become more dependent on the marital relationship to maintain subjective well-being,
whereas females can be relatively independent.
Keywords: avoidant attachment; subjective well-being; age differences; gender differences

Close and supporting personal relationships are an impor-
tant resource that buffers against the negative impacts of
physical and cognitive declines in later adulthood, and
protects older adults’ well-being (Li, Fok, & Fung, 2011;
Perissinotto, Stijacic, & Covinsky, 2012; Pinquart &
S€orensen, 2000). As adult attachment style reflects
people’s fundamental understanding about interpersonal
relationships (Fraley & Shaver, 2000; Fraley, Waller, &
Brennan, 2000; Griffin & Bartholomew, 1994; Hazan &
Shaver, 1987), it can be a significant factor that affects
older adults’ well-being. The current study specifically
investigated how avoidant attachment style influenced
married couples’ subjective well-being. More importantly,
we examined how the effect of avoidant attachment on sub-
jective well-being varied across different ages and genders.
Avoidant attachment style
Avoidant attachment style in children is characterized by a
distant relationship between children and their primary
caregiver (Bowlby, 1969). During the Strange Situation
procedure, avoidant children demonstrated little anxiety
when their mother left them alone and did not show signifi-
cant behavioral differences in response to their mother rela-
tive to a stranger (Ainsworth, Blehar, Waters, & Wall,
1978). Hazan and Shaver (1987) first introduced the avoi-
dant attachment concept to describe adult romantic rela-
tionships. They argued that the working model developed
during childhood based on interactions with caregivers was
still guiding attitudes and behaviors in close relationships
in adulthood. Adults with the avoidant attachment style of-
ten keep a psychological distance with others and try their
best to avoid depending on others. Later, research about
adult attachment gradually moved from a topological view
to a dimensional view (Bartholomew, 1990; Brennan,
Clark, & Shaver, 1998; Fraley & Shaver, 2000; Fraley
et al., 2000). People are no longer considered to differ cate-
gorically in attachment styles (e.g., secure, anxious, and
avoidant attachment). Instead, adult attachment is believed
to vary along two continuous dimensions, namely, avoidant
attachment and anxious attachment (Brennan et al., 1998).
The avoidant attachment dimension corresponds to the
‘model of other’ proposed by Bartholomew and Horowitz
(1991). Individuals high on the avoidance dimension pos-
sess a negative model of other, so they avoid emotional
connections with others and have a deactivated reaction
system in close relationships (Shaver & Mikulincer, 2002).
Avoidant attachment to spouse and subjective
well-being
Subjective well-being is characterized by the subjective
experience of positive affect and absence of negative
affect. For married couples, spouse is their major attach-
ment figure (Hazan & Shaver, 1987) and marital relation-
ship is a stable source of social support. Thus, the
functioning of marital relationship can significantly
contribute to individuals’ subjective well-being. In fact,
married people reported higher subjective well-being
compared with cohabited or divorced individuals, and this

The study was partially supported by a direct grant from the Faculty of Social Sciences, Chinese University of Hong Kong.
*Corresponding author. Email: tianyuanli@ied.edu.hk

Ó 2013 Taylor & Francis

 Aging & Mental Health
finding was consistent across different cultures (Diener,
Gohm, Suh, & Oishi, 2000). The difference between mar-
ried and cohabited couples suggests that it is not the mere
existence of intimate relationship, but the dynamics within
the relationship, that affects subjective well-being.
As a fundamental characteristic of intimate relation-
ships, avoidant attachment influences people’s cognitions
and behaviors in intimate relationships (Shaver & Miku-
lincer, 2002). People with avoidant attachment to spouse
remain psychologically distant from their spouse. Such dis-
tant relationship with a major support provider may keep
people away from necessary emotional and instrumental
support, which can impair their subjective well-being.
Downloaded by [Tata Institute of Social Sciences], [Dr Narendra Saple] at 08:48 21 November 2014
In particular, many previous studies have found that
avoidant attachment significantly influences dynamics in
intimate relationships (e.g., Bookwala & Zdaniuk, 1998;
Butzer & Campbell, 2008; Campbell, Simpson, Boldry, &
Kashy, 2005; Collins, Ford, Guichard, & Allard, 2006;
Collins & Read, 1990; Feeney, 1999; Kane et al., 2007).
Recently, Li and Chan (2012) conducted a meta-analysis
that examined the association between adult attachment
and different indicators of romantic relationship quality.
They concluded that avoidant attachment was detrimental
to romantic relationship quality. Moreover, they found
that avoidant attachment was particularly strongly associ-
ated with absence of positive feelings and interactions in
romantic relationships, such as lower general satisfaction,
lower commitment, and less social support.
The effect of avoidant attachment can also reach
outside intimate relationships and impact subjective well-
being in general. Limited social support can be a possible
pathway through which avoidant attachment undermines
subjective well-being. Florian, Mikulincer, and Bucholtz
(1995) found that avoidant individuals perceived that there
was less support available from close social partners, in-
cluding parents, friends, and the romantic partner.
Furthermore, avoidant individuals were less likely to seek
support from close social partners. Such findings were also
replicated in more recent studies (e.g., Vogel & Wei,
2005). Moreover, Collins and Feeney (2004) experimental-
ly manipulated support provided to participants and con-
firmed that individuals with avoidant attachment tended to
negatively interpret others’ support. Integrating the above
results, we propose that these tendencies of avoidant indi-
viduals can form a vicious cycle. As avoidant individuals
seek less support, their social partners would provide less
support to them. Even when enough support is provided,
avoidant individuals also tend to underestimate the support
available. Both tendencies, in turn, confirm avoidant indi-
viduals’ belief that support is unavailable. The belief of
limited support may then further decrease avoidant individ-
uals’ support seeking behaviors. As a result, very limited
social support would actually be available to them, lower-
ing their subjective well-being. The negative association
between avoidant attachment and subjective well-being has
in fact been found among patients suffering from chronic
pain. Chronic pain patients with high avoidant attachment
were reported to have a greater level of depression in mul-
tiple studies (Ciechanowski, Sullivan, Jensen, Romano, &
Summers, 2003; Meredith, Strong, & Feeney, 2007).
5
However, no previous studies, as far as we know, have
examined the relationship between avoidant attachment to
intimate partners and subjective well-being in the general
population from a life span developmental perspective. Per-
sonal goals and marital goals both change dynamically
across different stages of adulthood (Carstensen, 2006; Li
& Fung, 2011). Couples’ interaction pattern and perception
about the partner also develop across the life span (Carsten-
sen, Gottman, & Levenson, 1995; Levenson, Carstensen, &
Gottman, 1993; Li & Fung, 2012; Seider, Hirschberger,
Nelson, & Levenson, 2009). The effect of avoidant attach-
ment to intimate partners may be different for people of
varying ages. Moreover, gender differences have been
identified regarding both the effect of avoidant attachment
(e.g., Kirkpatrick & Davis, 1994; Schmitt, 2003) and the
pattern of life span development (e.g., Antonucci, 1994;
Moen, 1996). Hence, gender differences may also be sig-
nificant in terms of how avoidant attachment to intimate
partners develops to affect subjective well-being with age.
The current study aims to address these important yet
understudied questions in married couples, as their intimate
partner (i.e., spouse) is relatively stable.
Life span development and gender differences
There are significant gender differences regarding inter-
personal relationships and the aging process. From the
evolutionary psychological perspective, females may
have a genetic tendency to focus more on the emotional
bonds in intimate relationships, compared with males
(Buss, Larsen, Westen, & Semmelroth, 1992). Females
are also socialized to care more about interpersonal rela-
tionships during childhood. As a result, females’ self-
concept is construed more in terms of their relationships
with others (Cross & Madson, 1997). Thus, females’ sub-
jective well-being may be more strongly influenced by
their intimate relationship compared with males’. This dif-
ference is expected to be especially significant during
young adulthood, during which females are trying to find
a stable romantic relationship.
However, such gender differences may change after
people enter late adulthood. It has long been believed that
people’s social roles are changing across adulthood, espe-
cially after retirement (Lipman, 1961; Moen, 1996; Moen,
Robison, & Fields, 1994). Lipman (1961) proposed that
after retirement, husbands’ and wives’ roles became more
similar to each other within the household. Husbands
spent less time on job-related responsibilities and more
time on family related responsibilities, but they were less
experienced in family-related tasks compared with their
wife. Meanwhile, outside the household, older women
have more social ties, including relationships with chil-
dren, grandchildren, friends, neighbors, and relatives, than
do older men (Antonucci, 1994). Older women are more
involved in these social ties as well. As age increases,
women are also more likely to become caregivers in the
extended family (Moen et al., 1994). Thus, in later adult-
hood, husbands may become more dependent on their
wife and the marital relationship, whereas wives may be
relatively more involved in other relationships and
 6 T. Li and H.H. Fung
become less dependent on their marital relationship. Sup-
porting this argument, Hagedoorn et al. (2001) found that
older husbands’ psychological distress only impaired their
own physical health, but older wives’ psychological dis-
tress undermined both their own and their spouse’s health.
Following the above rationale, it is hypothesized that
compared with their younger counterparts, the detrimental
effect of avoidant attachment to spouse on subjective well-
being would be weaker for older wives, because females
have enough social ties and are less dependent on their mar-
ital relationship in later adulthood. In contrast, males be-
come more dependent on their marital relationship for
necessary social support in later adulthood, so their subjec-
Downloaded by [Tata Institute of Social Sciences], [Dr Narendra Saple] at 08:48 21 November 2014
tive well-being will suffer more from avoidant attachment
to the spouse. Thus, we hypothesize that the detrimental ef-
fect of avoidant attachment on subjective well-being would
be stronger for older than for younger husbands.
The current study
To summarize, the current study aims to examine how an at-
tribute specific to a relationship (i.e., avoidant attachment to
spouse) influences an outcome outside the relationship (i.e.,
subjective well-being). More importantly, the study takes a
dynamic and developmental view about relationships. The
same relationship (i.e., marital relationship) may play differ-
ent roles in people’s lives at different developmental stages
and for people of different genders. So, the current study
investigates how age and gender interact to moderate the ef-
fect of avoidant attachment to spouse on subjective well-be-
ing. For wives, older age is expected to be associated with a
weaker effect of avoidant attachment to spouse on subjec-
tive well-being. For husbands, the opposite pattern is
expected. To test these hypotheses, 56 married couples with
a wide age range were recruited for the current study. Their
avoidant attachment to spouse, subjective well-being, and
other background information were assessed. Multilevel
modeling was used to analyze the dyadic data.
Method
Participants
Married couples were recruited by trained research assis-
tants from local communities in Hong Kong. In total, 56
couples agreed to participate in the study. All the partici-
pants were in their first marriage. The husbands’ age
ranged from 21 to 79 years old (M ¼ 52.06 years, SD ¼
14.88 years), and the wives’ age ranged from 20 to
74 years old (M ¼ 48.38 years, SD ¼ 14.12 years). The
age difference between the couple ranged from –5 to
10 years (M ¼ 3.71 years, SD ¼ 3.36 years), with a posi-
tive value indicating that the husband was older than the
wife. The duration of the marriage ranged from 6 months
to 51 years (M ¼ 22.37 years, SD ¼ 14.75 years).
Measures and procedure
After providing informed consent, participants were inter-
viewed in their homes by the research assistants with a
standardized questionnaire. Participants could also choose
to finish the questionnaire by themselves if they prefer. In
such a case, the research assistants were still around and
ready to answer any questions the participants raised. To
avoid interference between spouses, each couple finished
the questionnaires either simultaneously in separate
rooms, or sequentially but without communicating in-
between. All the English scales were translated into
Traditional Chinese through the back-translation proce-
dure. The following measures were included:
Avoidant attachment to spouse
The avoidant attachment subscale of the Experiences in
Close Relationships-Revised (ECR-R) questionnaire (Fra-
ley et al., 2000) was adopted to assess participants’ avoi-
dant attachment to spouse in the current study. The
subscale includes 18 seven-point Likert items (Cronbach’s
a ¼ .93 for husbands, .90 for wives). Sample items were
‘I prefer not to show my partner how I feel deep down’
and ‘I feel comfortable sharing my private thoughts and
feelings with my partner (reverse coded).’ The partici-
pants were asked to consider their marital relationship and
rate each item from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly
agree). The average rating of the 18 items was calculated
for each participant. A higher rating indicated a higher
level of avoidant attachment style.
Subjective well-being
Subjective well-being was measured in terms of happi-
ness, depression, and loneliness. First, participants’ sub-
jective happiness level was measured by the four-item
Subjective Happiness Scale (Lyubomirsky & Lepper,
1999). A sample item was ‘In general, I consider myself:
1 (not a very happy person) to 7 (a very happy person).’
A higher score on the scale indicated a higher level of sub-
jective happiness. The reliability of the scale was ade-
quate in the current sample (Cronbach’s a ¼ .65 for
husbands, .75 for wives).
Then, the Center for Epidemiologic Studies-Depres-
sion (CES-D) Scale (Radloff, 1977) was administered to
assess participants’ depression level. The CES-D scale in-
cluded 20 items regarding depressive feelings or behav-
iors, such as ‘I was bothered by things that usually don’t
bother me’ and ‘I felt that I was just as good as other peo-
ple (reverse coded)’. Participants rated how often they
had these feelings in the past week from 0 (rarely or none
of the time) to 3 (most or all of the time). The reliability of
the scale was high in the current sample (Cronbach’s a ¼
.90 for husbands, .91 for wives). A higher score on the
scale indicated a higher level of depression.
Last, the Revised UCLA Loneliness Scale (Russell,
Peplau, & Cutrona, 1980) was adopted to assess partic-
ipants’ loneliness level (Cronbach’s a ¼ .79 for husbands,
.80 for wives). The scale included 20 items about lonely
feelings, such as ‘I feel in tune with the people around me
(reverse coded)’ and ‘I lack companionship’. Participants
rated how often they felt the way described in each item
from 1 (never) to 4 (often). The average rating of the 20
 Aging & Mental Health 7

items was calculated and a higher score indicated a higher
level of loneliness.
To obtain a composite index of subjective well-being,
the standardized scores for happiness (Zhappiness), depres-
sion (Zdepression), and loneliness (Zloneliness) were first cal-
culated. Then, the subjective well-being (SWB) index for
each participant was calculated using the formula: SWB
¼ Zhappiness þ (Zdepression) þ (Zloneliness). The same pat-
tern of results was obtained no matter whether the analy-
ses described below were conducted using the composite
SWB index as the dependent variable, or using the three
indicators of subjective well-being (i.e., happiness, de-
pression, and loneliness) as three separate dependent vari-
Downloaded by [Tata Institute of Social Sciences], [Dr Narendra Saple] at 08:48 21 November 2014
software (Raudenbush, Bryk, & Congdon, 2004). The
information about each individual was considered to be
the level-1 data, and each couple was considered to be a
level-2 unit.
To test whether gender and age interacted with
avoidant attachment to spouse in predicting subjective
well-being, the following HLM model was tested. The
level-1 equation was:
SWB ¼ b0 þ b1 ðgenderÞ þ b2 ðageÞ þ b3 ðavoidÞ
þ b4 ðgender  ageÞ þ b5 ðgender  avoidÞ
þ b6 ðage  avoidÞ þ b7 ðgender  age  avoidÞ þ r:

ables. To be parsimonious, we only reported the former

set of results next. Participants’ gender, age, avoidant attachment to spouse
(i.e., avoid), and all the two-way and three-way interac-
tions between the three variables were entered as predic-
Demographical information tors of subjective well-being. Standardized age and
Participants reported their age, gender (0 ¼ male, 1 ¼ fe- avoidant attachment scores were used in the analysis. All
male), the duration of their marriage, number of children, the two-way and three-way interaction terms were also
education level (1 ¼ below primary school, 2 ¼ primary calculated based on the standardized scores. The level-2
school, 3 ¼ high school, 4 ¼ bachelor degree, 5 ¼ post- equations were specified as:
graduate degree), and monthly household income (0 ¼
lower than HK$10,000, 1 ¼ HK$10,000 to HK$20,000, 2 b0 ¼ g 00 þ u0 ; b1 ¼ g 10 ; b2 ¼ g 20 ; b3 ¼ g 30 ; b4 ¼ g 40 ;
¼ HK$20,000 to HK$30,000, 3 ¼ HK$30,000 to
b5 ¼ g 50 ; b6 ¼ g 60 ; and b7 ¼ g 70 :
HK$40,000, 4 ¼ HK$40,000 to HK$50,000, 5 ¼ higher
than HK$50,000). Participants also rated their current
health status (1 ¼ bad, 2 ¼ average, 3 ¼ good, 4 ¼ very Consistent with the hypothesis, the results indicated a sig-
good, 5 ¼ excellent). nificant three-way interaction between gender, age, and
To disguise the purpose of the study, participants also avoidant attachment to spouse in predicting subjective
completed some filler scales that were not related to the well-being, g70 ¼ 1.29, SE ¼ 0.38, p ¼ .001. The two-
current study. After the whole questionnaire was complet- way gender  age interaction, g40 ¼ 1.28, SE ¼ 0.35, p ¼
ed, participants were orally debriefed about the purpose of .001, and the gender  avoidant attachment interaction,
the study. g50 ¼ 0.76, SE ¼ 0.34, p ¼ .029, were also significant, as
well as the main effects of gender, g10 ¼ 0.76, SE ¼ 0.33,
p ¼ .022, and avoidant attachment, g30 ¼ 1.70, SE ¼
Results 0.25, p < .001. All the other coefficients were not
significant.
The descriptive information of the sample is presented in
To further illustrate the three-way interaction between
Table 1. To address the dyadic data structure of the
gender, age, and avoidant attachment to spouse, multiple
sample, multilevel modeling was conducted to analyze
regression analyses were conducted to test how age and
the data (Kenny, Cook, & Kashy, 2006) using the HLM
avoidant attachment to spouse interacted in predicting sub-
jective well-being for husbands and wives, respectively.
Table 1. Descriptive information of the sample. The subjective well-being index was regressed on standard-
Wives Husbands
ized age, standardized avoidant attachment to spouse score,
and the age  avoidant attachment interaction. For wives,
Variables Mean SD Mean SD the regression model was significant, F(3, 52) ¼ 14.97,
p < .001. Specifically, the age  avoidant attachment inter-
Age (years) 48.38 14.12 52.06 14.88
Marriage duration (years)1 22.33 14.72 21.76 14.67 action was significant, b ¼ 0.78, SE ¼ 0.28, p ¼ .007. The
Number of children1 2.00 1.06 1.92 1.04 main effect of avoidant attachment to spouse was signifi-
Education 2.70 0.96 3.09 0.85 cant, b ¼ 0.95, SE ¼ 0.27, p ¼ .001, indicating a nega-
Monthly household income1 1.40 1.37 1.55 1.40 tive association between avoidant attachment to spouse and
Subjective health 2.69 0.72 2.80 0.82 subjective well-being in wives. The main effect of age was
Avoidant attachment 3.23 0.86 3.19 0.92
Happiness 4.88 0.94 4.66 0.83 also significant, b ¼ 1.52, SE ¼ 0.28, p < .001, indicating
Depression 0.63 0.50 0.73 0.46 a positive association between age and subjective well-
Loneliness 2.14 0.33 2.22 0.32 being in wives. For husbands, the regression model was
Composite SWB index 0.36 2.64 0.36 2.38 also significant, F(3, 52) ¼ 23.40, p < .001. However, the
Note. SD ¼ standard deviation, SWB ¼ subjective well-being. age  avoidant attachment interaction was only marginally
1
As husbands and wives completed the questionnaire independently, significant, and the direction of the interaction was opposite
their responses to these items were not exactly the same. to that for wives, b ¼ 0.48, SE ¼ 0.26, p ¼ .073. The
 8 T. Li and H.H. Fung
Downloaded by [Tata Institute of Social Sciences], [Dr Narendra Saple] at 08:48 21 November 2014
Figure 1. The different effects of age in moderating the associ-
ation between avoidant attachment and subjective well-being for
wives (upper chart) and husbands (lower chart). M ¼ mean, SD
¼ standard deviation.
main effect of avoidant attachment to spouse was signifi-
cant, b ¼ 1.73, SE ¼ 0.22, p < .001, indicating a signifi-
cant negative association between avoidant attachment to
spouse and subjective well-being in husbands as well. The
main effect of age was not significant for husbands,
b ¼ 0.24, SE ¼ 0.24, ns.
Lastly, simple slope analyses were conducted to illus-
trate the opposite age  avoidant attachment interactions
in wives and husbands, respectively. The results were
plotted in Figure 1. For wives of younger age (20.14 years
old, Mage  2SD), higher avoidant attachment to spouse
was significantly associated with lower subjective well-
being, b ¼ 2.52, SE ¼ 0.61, p < .001. For wives of
middle age (48.38 years old, Mage), higher avoidant
attachment to spouse was still significantly associated
with lower subjective well-being, but with a smaller mag-
nitude, b ¼ 0.95, SE ¼ 0.27, p ¼ .001. Then, for wives
of old age (76.62 years old, Mage þ 2SD), the association
between avoidant attachment to spouse and subjective
well-being became positive, but the association was not
significant, b ¼ 0.62, SE ¼ 0.64, ns. In contrast, for hus-
bands of younger age (22.30 years old, Mage  2SD),
avoidant attachment to spouse was not significantly associ-
ated with subjective well-being, b ¼ 0.77, SE ¼ 0.52, ns.
For husbands of middle age (52.06 years old, Mage),
higher avoidant attachment to spouse became significantly
associated with lower subjective well-being, b ¼ 1.73, SE
¼ 0.22, p < .001. For husbands of old age (81.82 years old,
Mage þ 2SD), the magnitude of the negative association be-
tween avoidant attachment to spouse and subjective well-
being was even stronger, b ¼ 2.68, SE ¼ 0.61, p < .001.
Though cross-sectional, these results suggest that the effect
of avoidant attachment to spouse on subjective well-being
may change with age, following two different trajectories
for the two genders. For older females, avoidant attachment
to spouse is less influential to their subjective well-being
compared with their younger counterparts. However, for
older males, avoidant attachment to spouse is more detri-
mental to their subjective well-being compared with their
younger counterparts. The above pattern of results remained
the same even after we had statistically controlled for the
duration of marriage, number of children, education level,
monthly household income, and subjective rating of own
health.
Discussion
The results are consistent with our hypothesis that gender
and age interact to influence the association between avoi-
dant attachment and subjective well-being. On average,
avoidant attachment to spouse was negatively associated
with subjective well-being. However, the strength of this
negative association varied with age differently for the
two genders. For females, the detrimental effect of avoi-
dant attachment to spouse was less severe in later adult-
hood compared with early adulthood. The effect even
turned positive in later adulthood. In contrast, for males,
avoidant attachment to spouse was not significantly relat-
ed to subjective well-being in early adulthood, but it is
more harmful to subjective well-being in later adulthood.
The major contribution of the current study is twofold.
First, it reveals that the impact of a relationship attribute
(in this case, avoidant attachment style) can spill over to
subjective well-being in general. Avoidant attachment to
spouse not only influences the quality of the marital rela-
tionship, as suggested by previous studies (e.g., Butzer &
Campbell, 2008; Li & Chan, 2012; Shaver & Mikulincer,
2002), but it also significantly impairs subjective well-
being for both males and females. Second, the current
study suggests that the role of a relationship in people’s
lives is not static. Avoidant attachment to spouse affects
subjective well-being differently in different stages of
adulthood, and the developmental trajectory of the effect
is different for the two genders. In early adulthood, main-
taining close connection with the spouse seems to be
more critical for women than for men, so a higher level of
avoidant attachment to spouse is especially detrimental to
women’s subjective well-being at this stage. This result is
consistent with previous findings about gender differences
in marital dynamics. For example, wives were more active
in maintaining the relationship and initiating discussions
about relationship problems than were men (Heaton &
Blake, 1999). Moreover, from the evolutionary psycho-
logical perspective, the primary life task in early
 Aging & Mental Health
adulthood is reproduction. Females with avoidant attach-
ment may be less adaptive because they may have diffi-
culty in securing a stable partner and thus may not have
enough resources and protection to raise their offspring.
On the contrary, males with avoidant attachment may be
more adaptive. They are less likely to be confined in a sin-
gle relationship, so they are more likely to have multiple
mates and have more offspring (Del Giudice, 2009). This
may be another reason why avoidant attachment is partic-
ularly detrimental to women’s subjective well-being in
early adulthood, but not to men’s.
The situation changes gradually from early adulthood
to middle adulthood, and to later adulthood. Reproduction
Downloaded by [Tata Institute of Social Sciences], [Dr Narendra Saple] at 08:48 21 November 2014
is no longer the key task in marital relationship in later
life stages. The association between avoidant attachment
to spouse and subjective well-being becomes less negative
for women with older age. It even turns positive for wom-
en in later adulthood. Older women are involved in vari-
ous types of social ties (Antonucci, 1994). They are more
likely to help with raising grandchildren, or to participate
in volunteer work (Herzog et al., 1989). Older women
may also be more skilled in maintaining the household
compared with older men. Thus, women in later adult-
hood are relatively independent from their marital rela-
tionship. Avoidant attachment to spouse no longer
significantly influences their subjective well-being. In
contrast, avoidant attachment to spouse becomes increas-
ingly detrimental to men with older age. Husbands’ role
in the family changes significantly after retirement
(Lipman, 1961). They may rely on their spouse to main-
tain the household and to manage their social network.
In a word, husbands become more dependent on their
marital relationship in later adulthood, so avoidant attach-
ment is more detrimental to their subjective well-being in
this stage.
One important implication for future studies is that we
should not assume that research findings about interper-
sonal relationships are the same for every life stage and
for both genders. People have different life tasks at differ-
ent developmental stages (Carstensen, 2006). The same
relationship can have different functions at different life
stages (Wrosch & Heckhausen, 1999). It is important to
take a dynamic developmental view when examining the
impacts of interpersonal relationships.
We acknowledge several limitations of this study.
First, the data in the current study were cross-sectional, so
it was not conclusive whether the age differences identi-
fied in the study were due to developmental changes and/
or cohort effects. Second, the current study did not distin-
guish between dismissing avoidant attachment and fearful
avoidant attachment (Bartholomew, 1990). These two
types of avoidant attachment may have different effects
on subjective well-being across adulthood and for the two
genders. Third, participants in the current sample were all
Chinese. Whether the current findings can be generalized
to other cultures remains an empirical question. It is
possible that avoidant attachment to spouse may have less
detrimental effect to subjective well-being in more indi-
vidualistic cultures. Lastly, the current study only focused
on the effect of avoidant attachment to spouse on
9
subjective well-being. It remains to be tested whether the
other dimension of attachment (i.e., anxious attachment)
also has an effect on subjective well-being. Future studies
are encouraged to address these limitations.
To conclude, the current study found that there were
gender and age differences regarding the relationship be-
tween avoidant attachment in marital relationship and
subjective well-being. For women, the negative associa-
tion between avoidant attachment in marital relationship
and subjective well-being is very strong in early adult-
hood, but the association becomes weaker and even
reversed for women with older age. For men, the pattern
is the opposite. The association between avoidant attach-
ment in marital relationship and subjective well-being is
not significant in early adulthood, but the negative associ-
ation becomes stronger for men with older age. These
results suggest that marital relationship plays different
roles in different life stages for each gender. Future stud-
ies on adult development of interpersonal relationships
should take such dynamic changes into consideration.
References
Ainsworth, M.D.S., Blehar, M.C., Waters, E., & Wall, S. (1978).
Patterns of attachment: A psychological study of the Strange
Situation. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Antonucci, T.C. (1994). A life-span view of women’s social
relations. In B.F. Turner & L.E. Troll (Eds.), Women
growing older: Psychological perspectives (pp. 239–269).
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Bartholomew, K. (1990). Avoidance of intimacy: An attachment
perspective. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships,
7(2), 147–178. doi: 10.1177/0265407590072001
Bartholomew, K., & Horowitz, L.M. (1991). Attachment styles
among young adults: A test of a four-category model. Jour-
nal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61(2), 226–244.
doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.61.2.226
Bookwala, J., & Zdaniuk, B. (1998). Adult attachment styles and
aggressive behavior within dating relationships. Journal of
Social and Personal Relationships, 15(2), 175–190. doi:
10.1177/0265407598152003
Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and loss. New York, NY: Basic
Books.
Brennan, K.A., Clark, C.L., & Shaver, P.R. (1998). Self-report
measurement of adult attachment: An integrative overview.
In W.S. Rholes & J.A. Simpson (Eds.), Attachment theory
and close relationships (pp. 46–76). New York, NY:
Guilford Press.
Buss, D.M., Larsen, R.J., Westen, D., & Semmelroth, J. (1992).
Sex differences in jealousy: Evolution, physiology, and psy-
chology. Psychological Science, 3(4), 251–255. doi:
10.1111/j.1467-9280.1992.tb00038.x
Butzer, B., & Campbell, L. (2008). Adult attachment, sexual sat-
isfaction, and relationship satisfaction: A study of married
couples. Personal Relationships, 15(1), 141–154. doi:
10.1111/j.1475-6811.2007.00189.x
Campbell, L., Simpson, J.A., Boldry, J., & Kashy, D.A. (2005).
Perceptions of conflict and support in romantic relationships:
The role of attachment anxiety. Journal of Personality &
Social Psychology, 88(3), 510–531.
Carstensen, L.L. (2006). The influence of a sense of time on hu-
man development. Science, 312(5782), 1913–1915. doi:
10.1126/science.1127488
Carstensen, L.L., Gottman, J.M., & Levenson, R.W. (1995).
Emotional behavior in long-term marriage. Psychology &
Aging, 10(1), 140–149.
 10 T. Li and H.H. Fung
Ciechanowski, P., Sullivan, M., Jensen, M., Romano, J., &
Summers, H. (2003). The relationship of attachment style to
depression, catastrophizing and health care utilization in
patients with chronic pain. Pain, 104(3), 627–637. doi:
10.1016/s0304-3959(03)00120-9
Collins, N.L., & Feeney, B.C. (2004). Working models of attach-
ment shape perceptions of social support: Evidence from ex-
perimental and observational studies. Journal of Personality
& Social Psychology, 87(3), 363–383. doi: 10.1037/0022-
3514.87.3.363
Collins, N.L., Ford, M.B., Guichard, A.C., & Allard, L.M.
(2006). Working models of attachment and attribution
processes in intimate relationships. Personality and Social
Psychology Bulletin, 32(2), 201–219. doi: 10.1177/
0146167205280907
Downloaded by [Tata Institute of Social Sciences], [Dr Narendra Saple] at 08:48 21 November 2014
Collins, N.L., & Read, S.J. (1990). Adult attachment, working
models, and relationship quality in dating couples. Journal
of Personality & Social Psychology, 58(4), 644–663.
Cross, S.E., & Madson, L. (1997). Models of the self: Self-
construals and gender. Psychological Bulletin, 122(1), 5–37.
Del Giudice, M. (2009). Sex, attachment, and the development
of reproductive strategies. Behavioral and Brain Sciences,
32(1), 1–21.
Diener, E., Gohm, C.L., Suh, E., & Oishi, S. (2000). Similarity
of the relations between marital status and subjective well-
being across cultures. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology,
31(4), 419–436. doi: 10.1177/0022022100031004001
Feeney, J.A. (1999). Adult attachment, emotional control, and
marital satisfaction. Personal Relationships, 6(2), 169–185.
doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6811.1999.tb00185.x
Florian, V., Mikulincer, M., & Bucholtz, I. (1995). Effects of
adult attachment style on the perception and search for
social support. Journal of Psychology, 129(6), 665–676.
Fraley, R.C., & Shaver, P.R. (2000). Adult romantic attachment:
Theoretical developments, emerging controversies, and un-
answered questions. Review of General Psychology, 4(2),
132–154.
Fraley, R.C., Waller, N.G., & Brennan, K.A. (2000). An item re-
sponse theory analysis of self-report measures of adult at-
tachment. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 78
(2), 350–365.
Griffin, D., & Bartholomew, K. (1994). Models of the self and
other: Fundamental dimensions underlying measures of adult
attachment. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology,
67(3), 430–445.
Hagedoorn, M., Sanderman, R., Ranchor, A.V., Brilman, E.I.,
Kempen, G.I.J.M., & Ormel, J. (2001). Chronic disease in el-
derly couples: Are women more responsive to their spouses’
health condition than men? Journal of Psychosomatic Re-
search, 51(5), 693–696. doi: 10.1016/s0022-3999(01)00279-3
Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. (1987). Romantic love conceptualized
as an attachment process. Journal of Personality & Social
Psychology, 52(3), 511–524.
Heaton, T.B., & Blake, A.M. (1999). Gender differences in
determinants of marital disruption. Journal of Family Issues,
20(1), 25–45. doi: 10.1177/019251399020001002
Herzog, A.R., Kahn, R.L., Morgan, J.N., Jackson, J.S., & Anto-
nucci, T.C. (1989). Age differences in productive activities.
Journal of Gerontology, 44(4), S129–S138. doi: 10.1093/
geronj/44.4.S129
Kane, H.S., Jaremka, L.M., Guichard, A.C., Ford, M.B., Collins,
N.L., & Feeney, B.C. (2007). Feeling supported and feeling
satisfied: How one partner’s attachment style predicts the
other partner’s relationship experiences. Journal of Social
and Personal Relationships, 24(4), 535–555. doi: 10.1177/
0265407507079245
Kenny, D.A., Cook, W.L., & Kashy, D.A. (2006). Dyadic data
analysis. New York, NY: Guilford.
Kirkpatrick, L.A., & Davis, K.E. (1994). Attachment style,
gender, and relationship stability: A longitudinal analysis.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66(3), 502–
512. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.66.3.502
Levenson, R.W., Carstensen, L.L., & Gottman, J.M. (1993). Long-
term marriage: Age, gender, and satisfaction. Psychology and
Aging, 8(2), 301–313.
Li, T., & Chan, D.K.S. (2012). How anxious and avoidant
attachment affect romantic relationship quality differently:
A meta-analytic review. European Journal of Social
Psychology, 42(4), 406–419. doi: 10.1002/ejsp.1842
Li, T., Fok, H.K., & Fung, H.H. (2011). Is reciprocity always
beneficial? Age differences in the association between sup-
port balance and life satisfaction. Aging & Mental Health,
15(5), 541–547. doi: 10.1080/13607863.2010.551340
Li, T., & Fung, H.H. (2011). The dynamic goal theory of marital
satisfaction. Review of General Psychology, 15(3), 246–254.
doi: 10.1037/a0024694
Li, T., & Fung, H.H. (2012). Partner discrepancies and age
differences in marital quality: Distinguishing the ideal,
expected, and perceived partner. The Journals of Gerontolo-
gy Series B: Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences, 67
(4), 417–422. doi: 10.1093/geronb/gbr119
Lipman, A. (1961). Role conceptions and morale in couples in
retirement. Journal of Gerontology, 16, 267–271.
Lyubomirsky, S., & Lepper, H.S. (1999). A measure of subjec-
tive happiness: Preliminary reliability and construct valida-
tion. Social Indicators Research, 46(2), 137–155.
Meredith, P.J., Strong, J., & Feeney, J.A. (2007). Adult attach-
ment variables predict depression before and after treatment
for chronic pain. European Journal of Pain, 11(2), 164–170.
doi: 10.1016/j.ejpain.2006.01.004
Moen, P. (1996). A life course perspective on retirement, gender,
and well-being. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology,
1(2), 131–144. doi: 10.1037/1076-8998.1.2.131
Moen, P., Robison, J., & Fields, V. (1994). Women’s work and
caregiving roles: A life course approach. Journal of Geron-
tology, 49(4), S176–S186. doi: 10.1093/geronj/49.4.S176
Perissinotto, C.M., Stijacic, C.I., & Covinsky, K.E. (2012).
Loneliness in older persons: A predictor of functional
decline and death. Archives of Internal Medicine, 172(14),
1078–1084. doi: 10.1001/archinternmed.2012.1993
Pinquart, M., & S€ orensen, S. (2000). Influences of socioeconomic
status, social network, and competence on subjective well-
being in later life: A meta-analysis. Psychology and Aging,
15(2), 187–224. doi: 10.1037/0882-7974.15.2.187
Radloff, L.S. (1977). The CES-D Scale: A self-report depression
scale for research in the general population. Applied
Psychological Measurement, 1(3), 385–401. doi: 10.1177/
014662167700100306
Raudenbush, S.W., Bryk, A.S, & Congdon, R. (2004). HLM 6
for Windows [Computer software]. Skokie, IL: Scientific
Software International, Inc.
Russell, D., Peplau, L.A., & Cutrona, C.E. (1980). The revised
UCLA Loneliness Scale: Concurrent and discriminant valid-
ity evidence. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology,
39(3), 472–480.
Schmitt, D.P. (2003). Are men universally more dismissing than
women? Gender differences in romantic attachment across
62 cultural regions. Personal Relationships, 10(3), 307–331.
doi: 10.1111/1475-6811.00052
Seider, B.H., Hirschberger, G., Nelson, K.L., & Levenson, R.W.
(2009). We can work it out: Age differences in relational
pronouns, physiology, and behavior in marital conflict. Psy-
chology & Aging, 24(3), 604–613. doi: 10.1037/a0016950
Shaver, P.R., & Mikulincer, M. (2002). Attachment-related psy-
chodynamics. Attachment & Human Development, 4(2),
133–161. doi: 10.1080/14616730210154171
Vogel, D.L., & Wei, M. (2005). Adult attachment and help-
seeking intent: The mediating roles of psychological distress
and perceived social support. Journal of Counseling Psy-
chology, 52(3), 347–357. doi: 10.1037/0022-0167.52.3.347
Wrosch, C., & Heckhausen, J. (1999). Control processes before
and after passing a developmental deadline: Activation and
deactivation of intimate relationship goals. Journal of
Personality & Social Psychology, 77(2), 415–427.