Adult Attachment, Shame, Depression, and Loneliness: The Mediation Role of Basic Psychological Needs Satisfaction.

Statistics is a subject of many uses and surprisingly few effective practitioners. The traditional road to statistical knowledge is blocked, for most, by a formidable wall of mathematics. The approach in An Introduction to the Bootstrap avoids that wall. It arms scientists and engineers, as well as statisticians, with the computational techniques they need to analyze and understand complicated data sets.

Three studies compared 10 candidate psychological needs in an attempt to determine which are truly most fundamental for humans. Participants described "most satisfying events" within their lives and then rated the salience of each of the 10 candidate needs within these events. Supporting self-determination theory postulates (Ryan & Deci, 2000)--autonomy, competence, and relatedness, were consistently among the top 4 needs, in terms of both their salience and their association with event-related affect. Self-esteem was also important, whereas self-actualization or meaning, physical thriving, popularity or influence, and money-luxury were less important. This basic pattern emerged within three different time frames and within both U.S. and South Korean samples and also within a final study that asked, "What's unsatisfying about unsatisfying events?" Implications for hierarchical theories of needs are discussed.

Two studies examined attachment style differences in social perception. In Study 1, participants wrote open-ended explanations for hypothetical relationship events and described how they would feel and behave in response to each event. Compared with secure participants, preoccupied participants explained events in more negative ways; they also reported more emotional distress and behaviors that were likely to lead to conflict. Avoidant participants also provided negative explanations, but did not report emotional distress. Path analysis indicated that attachment style differences in behavior were mediated by explanation patterns and emotional distress. Study 2 was designed to replicate Study 1 and test the relative importance of attachment style and relationship quality to predicting each outcome. Results indicated that both variables were significant predictors of explanations, but only attachment style predicted emotional responses. These findings are consistent with the idea that adults with different working models of attachment are predisposed to think, feel, and behave differently in their relationships.