Experiences in Close Relationships /C0Revised (ECR-R)
(Fraley et al., 2000 ).
Variable
Fraley et al. (2000) conducted an item response theory (IRT) analysis of four of the commonly used self-report
measures: (1) ECR ( Brennan et al., 1998 ); (2) AAS ( Collins & Read, 1990 ); (3) RSQ ( Griffin & Bartholomew, 1994 );
and (4) an early version of the AAQ ( Simpson, 1990 ). Three of the four attachment measures exhibited relatively
low precision in assessing degrees of attachment security (i.e., at the lower-score ends of the two insecurity sub-
scales, anxiety and avoidance; see Fraley et al., 2000 , for details). The ECR subscales exhibited the best psycho-
metric properties of the four original scales, but the authors found that the ECR could be improved by using IRT
methods to select items from the original Brennan et al. (1998) data set to ‘assess the secure end of each dimen-
sion with same degree of fidelity as the insecure end’ ( Fraley et al. (2000, p. 357) .
Description
For each of their two ECR-R scales, anxiety and avoidance, Fraley et al. (2000) chose the 18 items, from the
Brennan et al. (1998) item pool ( N5323), with the highest discrimination values in particular areas of the mea-
surement continuum. Thirteen of the 18 anxiety items (72%) were from the original ECR anxiety scale. Seven of
the 18 avoidance items (39%) were from the original ECR avoidance scale. Because there was so much overlap
between the new items and the original ECR items, Fraley et al. referred to the new measure as the Experiences
in Close Relationships Questionnaire-Revised (ECR-R).
Sample
The data originally collected by Brennan et al. (1998) was based on 1,085 undergraduate students (682 females;
404 males) ranging in age from 16 to 50 years (Mdn 518 years) who rated 323 items drawn from 14 self-report
scales (measuring attachment organization) using a 7-point Likert-type response scale.
Reliability
Internal Consistency
Fraley et al. (2000, p. 353) reported that, ‘An important feature of these scales is that they both have Cronbach
alpha reliabilities of .81 in the simulations.’
Test/C0Retest
Based on 500 simulations, Fraley et al. reported estimated mean test /C0retest reliability coefficients as high as
.82 (see Fraley et al., 2000 , Table 1, p. 355). In addition, simulation data based on differing item parameters pro-
vided estimated test /C0retest stability coefficients for the ECR Anxiety subscale (.91 and .94) and for the Avoidance
subscale (.90 and .91), respectively (see Table 4, p. 363).
Validity
Evidence for convergent and divergent validity was not reported by Fraley et al. (2000) in their IRT study.
Construct/Factor Analytic
Fraley et al. began their research using cluster analysis of the 323 items ( Brennan et al., 1998 ) and averaging
items scores within the 30 resulting clusters. They then performed a principal-axis factor analysis of the 30 cluster
scores, followed by varimax rotation. Two main factors emerged, which the authors rotated to represent the anxi-
ety and avoidance dimensions, respectively. The ECR-R items represented the two factors well, but Fraley et al.
mentioned that the resulting scales still did not discriminate precisely in their secure regions. Fraley et al. sug-
gested that future research be carried out to improve the scales’ secure regions.
Criterion/Predictive
Both Fraley et al. (2000) attachment subscales were predictive of measures of relationship satisfaction and
adaptation to losses. The anxiety subscale was positively predictive of bereavement-related anxiety, β5.31,
p,.05; depression, β5.52,p,.05; and symptoms of Post Traumatic Disorder (PTSD), β5.50,p,.05 (Fraley &431 MEASURES OF ATTACHMENT ORIENTATION OR ATTACHMENT STYLE
IV. INTERPERSONAL STYLES