Predictors of love attitudes: The contribution of cultural orientation, gender attachment style, relationship length and age in participants from the UK and Hong Kong

Abstract

The aim of this research was to explore whether a model including psychological predictors at the individual, interpersonal and cultural level could predict romantic attitudes. Attachment style, cultural orientation, gender, and relationship length were tested as predictors for each of the six love styles conceptualized by Lee (1977). Adults from Britain (N = 56) and Hong Kong (N = 52) who were in a romantic relationship completed four self-report measures; a demographic questionnaire, The Individualism and Collectivism Scale (IC-S), The Experiences in Close Relationship Scale-Short Form (ECR-S) and The Love Attitude Scale short form (LAS). The model successfully predicted each love style and in one case (Mania) accounted for 52% of the variance in this love style. Each love attitude had a different profile, and no one predictor dominated any one style which supports Lee’s original idea that the styles are qualitatively different.

The Relationship between Attachment Styles, Love Types, Emotional Expression, and Life Satisfaction

“…Recent studies showed that there is a significant correlation between insecure attachment types and Mania love type (Noh, Park, & Kim, 2006), and anxious attachment and Mania love type (Smith & Klases, 2016). Thus, under these findings, we hypothesized that there would be a difference between secure and insecure attachment style in terms of preference toward Mania love type.…”

Love Styles in Couple Relationships: A Literature Review

“…Partners adopting a manic love style tend to express an excessive need to be reassured by the partner [44], emotional highs and lows in the ability to be close to him/her [42], an anx- [37], and preoccupation for the relation and its termination [39]. On the other hand, Smith and Klases [26] recorded an inverse proportionality with the anxious component of attachment. Manic people tend to exercise negative relational behaviour to keep the relationship alive, such as destructive conflict, infidelity, allowing control and spying [32].…”

“…Agape is recorded to not be correlated to attachment security [27], but rather to an anxious dimension of attachment [26] and pathological love [34].…”

“…It also appears to be a common style in long-term relationships, and when the relationships end, jealousy seems to be the main motivation [39]. On the other hand, Smith and Klases [26] observed how the longer the relationship, the more unlikely it is that partners show such friendly attitude in love.…”

“…In conflict situations, pragmatic people generally utilize strategies such as compromise and avoidance [25], and when they suffer emotional infidelity by their partner, they do not have strong reactions [36]. Partners with this style do not appear to build an "anxious", fearful at- people that tend to commit to the relationship [20], such people do not appear to be able to build long-term relationships [26] or satisfying relationships [7], with a few exceptions. In fact, Neto & Pinto [41] recorded a correlation between love life satisfaction in manic male adults, but not females.…”