Attachment Style Questionnaire (ASQ)
(Feeney et al., 1994 ).
Variable
Feeney et al. (1994) claimed that all of the extant adult attachment-style measures were limited in applicability
because they generally assumed that respondents were involved in a romantic relationship or had previous expe-
rience with such relationships. Moreover, the existing measures were generally designed for use with college stu-
dents or members of adult communities, making them inappropriate for younger adolescents. They were also
concerned that most of the extant measures were based on concepts and phrasing from Hazan and Shaver’s
(1987) three-category measure, which may not have adequately captured the richness of the conceptual domain
outlined by Bowlby (1982) and Ainsworth et al. (1978) . They therefore developed the ASQ to address these issues.
Description
The ASQ contains 40 items based on the major features included in both three- and four-category models of
adult attachment, together with the basic themes and issues identified in infant attachment research. Such con-
structs include self-esteem, comfort with closeness, trust, healthy independence, avoidance of intimacy, lack of
trust, valuing independence, compulsive self-reliance, emphasis on achievement, overdependence, interpersonal
anxiety, aloneness, desire for approval, lack of confidence, preoccupation with relationships, low self-esteem, lack
of trust, interpersonal anxiety, desire for contact and intimacy, need for approval, anger/hostility. Items are rated
on a 6-point scale. The five ASQ scales were derived from factor analyses, as described below.
Sample
In order to ensure the appropriateness of the ASQ for younger samples, Feeney et al. (1994) administered it to
a sample of ( N5248) students in Grade 8 (most aged between 12 and 13 years).
Reliability
Internal Consistency
In the initial study by Feeney et al. (1994) , Cronbach alpha coefficients for the five subscales (in the order
described above), were .80, .84, .79, .76, and .76, respectively.
Test/C0Retest
Stability coefficients based on a 10-week test /C0retest interval were found to be .74, .74, .78, .72, and .67, respec-
tively (for subscales: Confidence, Discomfort with Closeness, Need for Approval, Preoccupation with
Relationships, and Relationships as Secondary, respectively).
Validity
Convergent/Concurrent
Ratings of Hazan and Shaver’s secure category description correlated positively with confidence (.34). Ratings
of their avoidant category correlated positively with discomfort (.46), need for approval (.13), and relationships as
secondary (.27). Ratings of Hazan and Shaver’s anxious category correlated positively with discomfort with close-
ness (.18), need for approval (.40), preoccupation with relationships (.60), and relationships as secondary (.06).
Divergent/Discriminant
Ratings of Hazan and Shaver’s secure category description correlated negatively with discomfort ( 2.50), need
for approval ( 2.17), preoccupation with relationships ( 2.24), and relationships as secondary ( 2.24). Ratings of
Hazan and Shaver’s avoidant category correlated negatively with confidence ( 2.14) and preoccupation with rela-
tionships ( 2.06). Finally, ratings of Hazan and Shaver’s anxious category correlated negatively with confidence
(2.29).
Construct/Factor Analytic
The five scales were derived from a principal components analysis of the intercorrelations of 65 initial items
followed by orthogonal (varimax) rotation. Based on the analysis ( N5248), five components were extracted,
resulting in the removal of 25 items and retention of 40 items (see Feeney et al., 1994 ).425 MEASURES OF ATTACHMENT ORIENTATION OR ATTACHMENT STYLE
IV. INTERPERSONAL STYLES