



Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Prepare for your exams
Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points to download
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Community
Ask the community for help and clear up your study doubts
Discover the best universities in your country according to Docsity users
Free resources
Download our free guides on studying techniques, anxiety management strategies, and thesis advice from Docsity tutors
Information on various types of love as measured by the Love Attitudes Scale and related research. instructions for administering the questionnaire, which assesses attitudes towards one's current or recent partner and love in general. The scale consists of 6 subscales: Eros (passionate love), Ludus (game-playing love), Storge (friendship love), Pragma (practical love), Mania (possessive, dependent love), and Agape (altruistic love). Related articles discuss the development and validation of the Compassionate Love scale and its correlation with prosocial behavior and religious or spiritual beliefs.
Typology: Exams
1 / 6
This page cannot be seen from the preview
Don't miss anything!
Reference: Hendrick, C. & Hendrick, S. (1986). A theory and method of love. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50 , 392-402. Description of Measure: A 42-item questionnaire designed to measure attitudes toward love. The questionnaire combines attitudes toward one’s current/recent/hypothetical** partner with attitudes about love in general. The scale is broken into 6 subscales (7 items each) that each represent a different love style: EROS (passionate love) LUDUS (game-playing love) STORGE (friendship love) PRAGMA (practical love) MANIA (possessive, dependent love) AGAPE (altruistic love). Participants respond to each item using a 5-point scale, ranging from 1 (strongly agree), 2 (moderately agree), 3 (neutral), 4 (moderately disagree), 5 (strongly disagree). **Participants are instructed to answer questions with their current partner in mind. However, the instructions state that if the respondent does not currently have a partner, he or she should answer with their most recent partner in mind. If, however, the respondents have never been in love, the instructions state that they should provide whatever answer they believe would be true.
Abstracts of Selected Related Articles: Sprecher, S. & Fehr, B. (2005). Compassionate love for close others and humanity. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 22 , 629-651. A compassionate love scale was developed that can be used, in alternative forms, to assess compassionate or altruistic love for different targets (e.g., close others and all of humankind). Using three samples (total N = 529), the Compassionate Love scale was developed and piloted. Three studies (total N = 700) were then conducted to provide validation of the scale and to examine correlates of compassionate love. In support of our predictions, compassionate love was found to be associated positively with prosocial behavior, as directed both to close others and to all of humanity. Those who were more religious or spiritual experienced more compassionate love than those who were less religious or spiritual. Evidence was found that compassionate love is distinct from empathy. In the final study, we introduced a relationship-specific version of the Compassionate Love scale, and found that compassionate love for a specific close other was associated with the provision of social support for that person. Feeney, J. A. & Noller, P. (1990). Attachment style as a predictor of adult romantic relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58 , 281-291. Questionnaire measures of attachment style, attachment history, beliefs about relationships, self-esteem, limerence, loving, love addiction, and love styles were administered to 374 undergraduates. Attachment style was related in theoretically expected ways to attachment history and to beliefs about relationships. Securely attached Ss reported relatively positive
perceptions of their early family relationships. Avoidant Ss were most likely to report childhood separation from their mother and to express mistrust of others. Anxious- ambivalent subjects were less likely than avoidant Ss to see their father as supportive, and they reported a lack of independence and a desire for deep commitment in relationships. The self-esteem measure and each of the scales measuring forms of love were factor analyzed separately. Analyses based on scale scores derived from the resulting factors indicated that attachment style was also strongly related to self-esteem and to the various forms of love discussed in other theoretical frameworks. The results suggest that attachment theory offers a useful perspective on adult love relationships Hazan, C. & Shaver, P. (1987). Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52 , 511-524. This article explores the possibility that romantic love is an attachment process--a biosocial process by which affectional bonds are formed between adult lovers, just as affectional bonds are formed earlier in life between human infants and their parents. Key components of attachment theory, developed by Bowlby, Ainsworth, and others to explain the develoment of affectional bonds in infancy, were translated into terms appropriate to adult romantic love. The translation centered on the three major styles of attachment in infancy--secure, avoidant, and anxious/ambivalent--and on the notion that continuity of relationship style is due in part to mental models (Bowlby's "inner working models") of self and social life. These models, and hence a person's attachment style, are seen as determined in part by childhood relationships with parents. Two questionnaire studies indicated that (a) relative prevalence of the three attachment styles is roughly the same in adulthood as in infancy, (b) the three kinds of adults differ predictably in the way they experience romantic love, and (c) attachment style is related in theoretically meaningful ways to mental models of self and social relationships and to relationship experiences with parents. Scale Instructions: Some of the items refer to a specific love relationship, while others refer to general attitudes and beliefs about love. Whenever possible, answer the questions with your current partner in mind. If you are not currently dating anyone, answer the questions with your most recent partner in mind. If you have never been in love, answer in terms of what you think your responses would most likely be.