Beyond the borders of reality: Attachment orientations and ... - CiteSeerX

Personal Relationships, 14 (2007), 321–342. Printed in the United States of America. Copyright Ó 2007 IARR. 1350-4126=07

Beyond the borders of reality: Attachment orientations and sexual fantasies

GURIT E. BIRNBAUM Bar-Ilan University

Abstract Two studies examined the associations between attachment orientations and sexual fantasies. In Study 1, 176 participants completed a sexual fantasy checklist. The findings indicated that attachment anxiety was associated with frequent sexual fantasizing (e.g., submission themes). More anxiously attached women were particularly likely to report extrapair fantasies, whereas more anxiously attached men were especially likely to report romantic fantasies. Attachment avoidance was negatively associated with romantic themes, primarily among men. In Study 2, 115 participants described a sexual fantasy in narrative form. Findings paralleled those of Study 1, with the exception that the avoidant effects were more pronounced in women’s sexual fantasies than in men’s. Implications for understanding the interplay of the attachment and sexual behavior systems are discussed.

The attachment and sexual systems are distinctive systems that serve different evolutionary goals (protection from danger by maintaining proximity to a caregiver vs. gene reproduction by sexual intercourse, respectively; Bowlby, 1969/1982). Their behavioral manifestations may therefore occur in isolation (e.g., sexual relations may occur without affectional bonding; Diamond, 2003; Fisher, 1998; Fisher, Aron, Mashek, Li, & Brown, 2002). Nevertheless, because the attachment system is the earliest developing social-behavioral system (Cassidy, 1999), it may influence the later developing sexual system (Shaver, Hazan, & Bradshaw, 1988). Indeed, empirical evidence has indicated that attachment processes are involved in shaping sexual motives, attitudes, and behaviors (see reviews by Mikulincer & Shaver, 2007; Shaver & Mikulincer, 2006). The current research was intended to add to our understanding of the attachment-sexuality link by examining the associations between attachment orientations and sexual fantasies,

Correspondence should be addressed to Gurit E. Birnbaum, Bar-Ilan University, Department of Psychology, RamatGan, 52900, Israel, e-mail: [email protected].

a unique and potentially revealing aspect of the sexual system. Attachment orientations and the construal of sexual interactions According to Bowlby’s (1969/1982, 1973) attachment theory, human infants have evolved to maintain proximity to their caregivers (attachment figures) because it increases their survival chances (and hence reproductive potential). The quality of repeated interactions with the attachment figures in times of distress gradually shapes chronic patterns of relational cognitions and interaction goals and may thus guide interpersonal interactions over the entire life span. When attachment figures are consistently available and responsive to the individual’s bids for proximity, a sense of attachment security is attained, goals of intimacy and nurturance become primary interaction goals, and positive relational cognitions are formed. When the attachment figures are not reliably available, a sense of attachment security is not attained and serious doubts about selfworth and others’ goodwill prevail. In such cases, the individual may adopt one of two alternative strategies for dealing with the

321

322

resultant insecurities, hyperactivation, or deactivation of the attachment system (Cassidy & Kobak, 1988; Mikulincer & Shaver, 2003). The main goal of hyperactivation strategies, characterizing anxious attachment, is to get an attachment figure, perceived as insufficiently available, to pay attention and provide relief from stress. In contrast, the main goal of deactivation strategies, characterizing avoidant attachment, is the pursuit of distance, selfreliance, and control in close relationships (Main, 1990; Mikulincer & Shaver). Past research has shown that whereas attachment security facilitates mutually intimate and satisfying engagement in sexual interactions, attachment insecurity interferes with the functioning of the sexual system in close relationships (see review by Mikulincer & Shaver, 2007). Importantly though, the nature of this interference differs between avoidant and anxious attachment. Highly avoidant people, who habitually seek physical and emotional distance from their partners, may feel uncomfortable because of the heightened closeness imposed by intimate sexual interactions. This discomfort appears to be manifested in a relative dislike for affectionate presexual activities (e.g., cuddling, kissing) and intimate copulatory positions (Brennan, Wu, & Loev, 1998; Hazan, Zeifman, & Middleton, 1994) as well as in aversive sexual affect and cognitions (e.g., Birnbaum & Gillath, 2006; Birnbaum, Reis, Mikulincer, Gillath, & Orpaz, 2006). Similarly, they tend to engage in sexual intercourse for relatively relationship-irrelevant reasons, such as self-enhancement, impressing peers, and stress reduction (Cooper et al., 2006; Schachner & Shaver, 2004). Thus, it is hardly surprising that highly avoidant people are more likely to engage in relatively emotion-free sex in the context of casual, short-term relationships (e.g., Brennan & Shaver, 1995; Gentzler & Kerns, 2004; Schachner & Shaver, 2002). Overall, highly avoidant individuals tend to detach sex from intimacy and, ironically, have a sex life relatively devoid of relationships, even within the context of ongoing close relationships. Highly anxious people, on the other hand, tend to use sex, a prominent route for seeking proximity, to serve their unmet attachment needs (e.g., security, love; Cooper et al., 2006;

G. E. Birnbaum

Davis, Shaver, & Vernon, 2004; Schachner & Shaver, 2004). Their tendency to have sex to avoid a partner’s rejection and to induce a partner to love them more (Schachner & Shaver) may lead them to engage in unwanted (but consensual) sexual behaviors (e.g., Feeney, Peterson, Gallois, & Terry, 2000; Gentzler & Kerns, 2004; Tracy, Shaver, Albino, & Cooper, 2003). Highly anxious persons’ erotophilic tendencies (Bogaert & Sadava, 2002), coupled with seemingly endless attachment-related needs and worries, may fuel an ambivalent approach to sex (e.g., the coexistence of wishes for sexual intimacy and aversive feelings). These negative sex-related feelings may be translated into sexual difficulties, thereby creating a self-exacerbating dyadic cycle of sexual and relational worries (Birnbaum, 2007; Birnbaum et al., 2006). The current research As reviewed above, in recent years, researchers have focused their attention on the interplay between attachment processes and affective, cognitive, motivational, and behavioral components of sexuality. Surprisingly, these researchers have paid little attention to the fantasmatic expressions of attachment-related goals that may provide a unique insight into the most intimate desires that motivate sexual behavior. In one of the few studies that did address this issue, the researchers have found that relative to people with secure love schemas, fickle (corresponding to discomfort with both independence and closeness) and casual or uninterested people reported more sexual fantasies involving individuals other than their current romantic partner (Stephan & Bachman, 1999). These researchers focused on the identity of the sexual partners in the fantasies (e.g., current partners, strangers), a rather narrow aspect of the multifaceted world of sexual fantasies, and did not consider the content of the fantasies. Sexual fantasies are experienced privately in a virtual and unconstrained world; thus, they may provide a window through which to view desires, goals, and preferences that may not always be acted on. The obscure nature of sexual fantasies has generated debate about two related questions: What are the underlying

Attachment orientations and sexual fantasies

functions of sexual fantasies? And what guides their content? Freud (1908/1962) argued that the typical motivation for sexual fantasies is unsatisfied wishes. Others, on the other hand, claimed that sexual fantasies are an integral part of healthy sexuality. As such, they reflect sexual activities and concerns in the current life of an individual (Klinger, 1971) and are habitually used to promote sexual enjoyment (e.g., Singer, 1966). A partial answer to this debate comes from studies on the variables associated with frequency of sexual fantasies. These studies have shown that, contrary to Freud’s assertion, people who suffer from sexual difficulties are those who fantasize less often during general daydreaming, masturbation, and sexual intercourse (e.g., Arndt, Foehl, & Good, 1985; Lentz & Zeiss, 1983). Similarly, people with more active and satisfying sex lives report more frequent sexual fantasies that reflect the type of sexual experience they have (see Leitenberg & Henning, 1995, for a broad review of empirical work on sexual fantasy). Thus, the results of existing research suggest that sexual fantasies are not experienced in compensation for a lack of enjoyable sexual stimulation. The compensatory function of sexual fantasies may not, however, necessarily be manifested in the form of having more frequent sexual fantasies, but rather in the content of these fantasies. For example, younger unmarried women are more likely to fantasize about their current partner, whereas married women are more likely to report extradyadic fantasies (e.g., Pelletier & Herold, 1988). In addition, as the length of the relationship increases, both men and women tend to report a larger proportion of extradyadic fantasies (Hicks & Leitenberg, 2001). These fantasies may compensate for relationship burnout or sexual boredom. This explanation accords with a previous study that found that extradyadic fantasies are negatively associated with both sexual satisfaction and global marital functioning (Trudel, 2002). At the same time, extradyadic fantasies may reflect past or current sexual experiences (i.e., actual extradyadic sexual behavior; Hicks & Leitenberg). While much attention has been focused on the variables associated with frequency of sexual fantasy, relatively less is known about the factors that contribute to the content of sexual

323

fantasies. For example, beyond the documented association of prior sexual experience and the content of sexual fantasy (e.g., Pelletier & Herold, 1988; Person, Terestman, Myers, Goldberg, & Borenstein, 1992), it is not clear whether and how past relational interactions, personality development, and contextual factors (e.g., relationship quality, daily life events) determine certain sexual fantasy preferences. Additionally, questions remain as to how personal and interpersonal goals (e.g., self-enhancement, intimacy) are reflected in sexual fantasies and the extent to which people act out their fantasies. An understanding of how sex-related goals and behavioral intentions are manifested in the content of sexual fantasies may not only contribute to the conceptualization of this phenomenon but may also elucidate psychological mechanisms regulating the expressions of sexuality as well as associated motives, emotions, and cognitions. These unanswered key questions highlight the lack of a compelling theoretical framework for understanding the functional meaning of sexual fantasies within romantic relationships. As described below, attachment theory can provide such a framework. The present studies adopted an attachmenttheoretic perspective and examined whether and how attachment-related strategies and goals were reflected in the content of sexual fantasies. Because more avoidant persons tend to engage in sexual intercourse for nonromantic reasons (Cooper et al., 2006; Davis et al., 2004; Schachner & Shaver, 2004), it was hypothesized that they would be more likely than those low in avoidance to report fantasies involving unrestrictive themes (e.g., emotionless, extrapair sex) and less likely to report romantic themes. Conversely, highly anxious persons’ tendency to rely heavily on the sexual route to satisfy diverse attachment needs (e.g., intimacy, affirmation, reassurance; Davis et al.), combined with habitual preoccupation with relational worries (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2003), may take the form of preoccupation with conflicting sexual themes. In particular, more anxiously attached persons would be more likely than those low in anxiety to report romantic and affectionate themes in their sexual fantasies. Paradoxically, they would

324

also be more likely to report fantasies involving extrapair sex that might reassure themselves of their worth. Furthermore, more anxiously attached persons would be more likely to report submission themes, given that they might fulfill the need to experience the power of their partners and elicit caregiving. In examining the associations between attachment orientations and sexual fantasies, one should also take into account empirical evidence indicating that men and women tend to experience sexual fantasies somewhat differently (e.g., Hicks & Leitenberg, 2001; Knafo & Jaffe, 1984; Wilson, 1997). These differences are congruent with both evolutionary models (e.g., Buss & Schmitt, 1993; Ellis & Symons, 1990) and more social approaches (DeLamater, 1987; Gagnon & Simon, 1973) to gender differences in human sexuality. Although these approaches explain the distal determinants of gender differences in sexuality differently, they generally agree that women tend to adopt a more emotional-interpersonal orientation to sexuality and focus on sexrelated interpersonal factors. Men, in contrast, tend to adopt a more recreational orientation toward sexuality and emphasize the expression of sexual needs. Men are therefore more likely to have sexual fantasies than women (e.g., Ellis & Symons; Laumann, Gagnon, Michael, & Michaels, 1994). Men are also more likely to be active and dominant in their fantasies, desire variety, and focus on explicit sexual acts and physical gratification, whereas women are more likely to play a passive role in their sexual fantasies and to focus on emotional context and romance (see review by Leitenberg & Henning, 1995). Thus, although the attachment literature generally shows few gender differences, attachment insecurities do display sex-differentiated effects when it comes to sexuality. Previous research has indicted that both more avoidant men and women tend to restrict expressions of intimacy in sexual interactions, but consistent with both evolutionary and social perspectives, the effects were stronger for men (e.g., Cooper et al., 2006). Gender differences in the manifestations of attachment anxiety in the sexual arena are more striking. Among women, attachment anxiety is associ-

G. E. Birnbaum

ated with abundant sexual activity, including unrestricted (e.g., Bogaert & Sadava, 2002) and risky sexual behaviors (see review by Feeney & Noller, 2004). Among men, in contrast, attachment anxiety is associated with relatively restricted sexual expression (e.g., Cooper et al., 2006). That is, whereas relational worries seem to inhibit initiating sex with new partners among men, they create difficulty in negotiating sexual encounters among women. These sex-differentiated effects are likely to be paralleled in the fantasy realm. Both more avoidant men and women were expected to exhibit limited expressions of intimacy in their sexual fantasies, with men showing stronger effects than women. More anxiously attached women were expected to report unrestricted sexual themes, whereas more anxiously attached men were expected to report more affectionate themes than their less anxious counterparts that reflected their investment in their partners. Two studies examined the associations between attachment orientations and the content of sexual fantasies. In Study 1, participants completed a sexual fantasy checklist and a selfreport scale of attachment orientations. To address the methodological limitations of the checklist method, an open-ended methodology was employed in Study 2. In this study, participants described in narrative form a sexual fantasy and reported their attachment orientations. Their open-ended accounts of sexual fantasies were content analyzed according to a coding system that allowed the mapping of different components of relational themes (wishes, self, and others representations). The main and interactive effects of gender and relationship status were examined in both studies. Study 1 The main goal of Study 1 was to examine the hypothesized associations between attachment orientations and the content of sexual fantasies. A sample of adult participants completed a sexual fantasy checklist, consisting of commonly reported themes (unrestricted sex, romance, dominance, submission), and a self-report scale of attachment orientations (anxiety, avoidance). Consistent with the above theorizing,

Attachment orientations and sexual fantasies

one of the main predictions of Study 1 was that more anxiously attached persons would be more likely than those low in anxiety to fantasize on sexual themes. Specifically, I predicted that they would be more likely to report sexual fantasies involving submission themes. In addition, I expected to find gender differences in how attachment anxiety was expressed in the content of sexual fantasies, such that more anxiously attached women should report more unrestricted sexual themes and more anxiously attached men should report more romantic themes. The second main prediction of Study 1 was that more avoidant persons would be less likely than those low in avoidance to report romantic fantasies and more likely to report unrestrictive sexual fantasies. These avoidant effects were expected to be more pronounced in men’s sexual fantasies than in women’s. Method Participants One hundred seventy-six Israeli participants (107 women, 69 men) ranging from 19 to 40 years of age (M ¼ 25.5, SD ¼ 4.14) volunteered for the study without compensation. A research assistant recruited participants from universities and community centers in central Israel. All participants had experienced heterosexual intercourse, either in a current or past relationship; 64.8% of the participants were currently involved in a romantic relationship and 25.0% were married. Length of current relationship ranged from 1 to 228 months (M ¼ 36.98, SD ¼ 43.23). Years of education ranged from 10 to 22 years (M ¼ 13.67, SD ¼ 2.30). Measures and procedure A research assistant approached potential participants and asked whether they would like to take a part in a study on sexuality and close relationships. All participants who agreed completed the following scales on an individual basis. Most participants completed the questionnaires in about 10 min. Sexual fantasy checklist This checklist consists of 20 sexual fantasy items reflecting commonly reported sexual

325

themes. Participants rated how often they had experienced each sexual theme on a 5-point scale ranging from (1) never to (5) very often. Fourteen items were adapted from Knafo and Jaffe (1984) and Renaud and Byers (1999). These items were selected according to their attachment relevance, while maintaining the central sexual themes (see review by Leitenberg & Henning, 1995). Items with apparently attachment-irrelevant content (e.g., ‘‘Engaging in sexual act which violates my religious principles,’’ ‘‘Wearing clothes of the opposite sex’’) were not included. Additionally, six exploratory items were created to assess frequency of sexual themes that might apply particularly to highly anxious and highly avoidant individuals. The items ‘‘Having emotionless sex,’’ ‘‘Having sex without making eye contact,’’ and ‘‘Having anal intercourse’’ were added to assess whether more avoidant persons’ tendency to limit intimacy in sexual activity (e.g., Brennan & Shaver, 1995; Gentzler & Kerns, 2004) would be also manifested in sexual fantasies. The items ‘‘Experiencing romantic feelings while having sex’’ and ‘‘Feeling affection and emotional connection while having sex’’ were created because the findings that more anxiously attached people report doubts about being loved, along with desire for emotional involvement during sexual intercourse (Birnbaum et al., 2006), suggest that sexual fantasies might either compensate for frustrated emotional needs or reflect them. Finally, the item ‘‘Exerting dominance and control over my partner’’ was created to assess whether highly anxious and highly avoidant people’s tendency to engage in sex to serve the goal of exertion of one’s own power (Davis et al., 2004) would be reflected in the content of sexual fantasies as well. A common factor analysis with varimax rotation (assuming independence of factors) performed on the 20 items yielded five main factors (eigenvalue . 1) that explained 62.2% of the total variance (see item wording and factor loadings in Table 1). Items did not cross load (at .40 or higher) on multiple factors. The first factor, Unrestricted and Emotionless Sex, included scenes involving a variety of sexual partners, along with less intimate copulatory positions, and emotion-free sex. Factor 2,

Unrestricted and Emotionless Sex Having sex with someone I know but who is not my current partner Having sex with an anonymous stranger Having sex with more than one sexual partner at the same time Having anal intercourse Participating in an orgy Having emotionless sex Romance Experiencing romantic feelings while having sex Kissing passionately Feeling affection and emotional connection while having sex Having sex with my current partner Submission Being overpowered Being forced to surrender Being hurt and sexually victimized Being passive and submissive while having sex Dissociation Having sex with a ‘‘vague,’’ faceless person Having sex with an imaginary lover Having sex without making eye contact Dominance Exerting dominance and control over my partner Taking the initiative and dominant role while having sex Raping or humiliating a woman or a man % of explained variance Cronbach’s alpha

Item

Table 1. Factor structure of the sexual fantasy checklist

23.10 .78

.76 .74 .71 .60 .58 .49

Unrestricted

15.30 .80

.84 .83 .82 .56

Romance

11.80 .79

.88 .82 .75 .62

Submission

6.30 .63

.83 .61 .51

Dissociation

.75 .69 .52 5.70 .57

Dominance

326 G. E. Birnbaum

.05 2.04 2.22** 2.04 .29*** .32*** .21** 2.09 .11 .29*** .06 .01 2.14 .22** .46*** 2.18* .42*** .37*** 2.10 .10 2.17* .13 .27*** 2.01 .17* 2.05 .23** 2.09 .09 2.17*

a A dichotomous variable contrasting women, 1, to men, 21. *p , .05. **p , .01. ***p , .001.

.22** .10 2.28*** 2.07 Anxiety Avoidance Gendera Relationship length Frequency of fantasies Unrestricted Sex Romance Submission Dissociation

.09

.09 2.10

2.08 .17* .04

.17* .10 2.43*** 2.01 .53***

Dissociation Submission Romance

Sexual fantasies scores

Unrestricted Frequency Length Gender Avoid

A Hebrew version of the Experience in Close Relationships Scale (ECR) (Brennan, Clark, & Shaver, 1998) translated into Hebrew by Mikulincer and Florian (2000) assessed global attachment orientations. This 36-item scale taps dimensions of attachment anxiety and avoidance. Participants indicated the extent to which each item was descriptive of their feelings in close relationships on a 7-point scale ranging from (1) strongly disagree to (7) strongly agree. Eighteen items tapped attachment anxiety (e.g., ‘‘I worry about being abandoned’’),

Measure

Attachment

Table 2. Intercorrelations among attachment, sexual fantasies scores, relationship length, and gender (Study 1, N ¼ 176)

Romance, incorporated emotional, passionate, and romantic sexual themes. Factor 3, Submission, included fantasies of being passive, overpowered, forced to submit sexually, and victimized. Factor 4, Dissociation, included fantasies of having sex with an imaginary or faceless person that reflected the disconnection from reality. Factor 5, Dominance, incorporated dominance sexual scenes involving exerting control over, and humiliation of, one’s sexual partner. These factors reflect common categorical sexual themes (see Leitenberg & Henning, 1995, for a review). Cronbach’s alpha coefficients for the five sexual fantasies factors ranged from .57 to .80 (see Table 1), implying adequate internal consistency. On this basis, scores were computed for each participant by averaging the items loading on each factor. The magnitude of the correlations among these five scores was small to moderate, ranging from .01 to .46 (see Table 2), indicating that these central sexual fantasies themes assess relatively unique information. In addition, participants were asked to rate the frequency of their sexual fantasies on a 5-point scale ranging from (1) never to (5) once a day or more. Participants also indicated the percentage of sexual fantasies of their overall conscious thoughts on a 5-point scale ranging from (1) 0% of overall conscious thoughts to (5) at least 50% of overall conscious thoughts. The correlation between these two items was high, r ¼ .62, p , .001. I therefore computed a single score of percentage and frequency of sexual fantasies by averaging these two items. This score was analyzed singly.

327

Dominance

Attachment orientations and sexual fantasies

328

G. E. Birnbaum

and 18 items tapped attachment avoidance (e.g., ‘‘I get uncomfortable when a romantic partner wants to be very close’’). Cronbach’s alphas were high for the anxiety (.91) and avoidance dimensions (.87). Higher scores indicated greater attachment-related avoidance or anxiety. At the end, participants completed a background questionnaire that asked about demographic and relationship information (e.g., age, current relationship status, and length of current relationship). Results and Discussion Initially, zero-order correlations were computed among all major variables: attachment scores, sexual fantasies factors, relationship length, and gender (a dichotomous variable contrasting women, 1, to men, 21). These intercorrelations are presented in Table 2. Consistent with the above literature review, women were more likely than men to have romantic and emotional fantasies, whereas men were more likely than women to have dominance and unrestricted sexual fantasies. In addition, as predicted, attachment anxiety was associated with greater percentage and frequency of sexual fantasies. Specifically, attachment anxiety was positively associated with sexual fantasies involving unrestricted and emotionless sex, submission, and dissociation from reality. At the same time, attachment anxiety was also

positively associated with romantic fantasies. Somewhat surprisingly, attachment avoidance was not associated with any of the sexual fantasies scores. After gender was taken into account, however, a significant interaction between attachment avoidance and gender was found for one of the sexual fantasies factors (Romance), as demonstrated by the following hierarchical regression analyses. The data were then analyzed by three-step hierarchical regressions examining the unique and interactive effects of attachment anxiety, attachment avoidance, and gender. In the first step, I examined main effects for gender—a dichotomous variable contrasting women (1) to men (21)—and the attachment scores of anxiety and avoidance (entered as standard scores). The two-way interactions were examined in the second step, and the three-way interaction was entered in the third step. Table 3 presents the standardized regression coefficients (bs) for each effect at the step in which it was entered into the regression. As shown in Table 3, gender made a significant unique contribution to the frequency and percentage of sexual fantasies, such that men reported higher frequency and percentage of sexual fantasies than women did. Gender also made a significant unique contribution to Unrestricted and Emotionless Sex, Dominance, and Romance, such that women were more likely than men to report romantic fantasies, whereas

Table 3. Predicting the sexual fantasies themes from attachment anxiety, attachment avoidance, and gender (Study 1, N ¼ 176) Sexual fantasies factors Unrestricted Sex Romance Submission Dissociation Dominance Frequency of fantasies

Anxiety Avoid

Gendera

.21** .15* .38*** .29*** .08 .25***

2.44*** .21** .05 2.01 2.23** 2.30***

.03 2.04 2.13 .03 2.08 .04

Anxiety
Anxiety
Avoid
Three-way Avoid Gender Gender interaction .04 2.02 2.13 .15* 2.08 .08

.15* 2.20** .09 .11 2.05 .01

2.02 .16* .02 2.04 .08 .13

.06 .07 .08 .08 2.13 .04

Note. Entries are the standardized regression coefficients for each effect at the step in which it was entered into the regression. a A dichotomous variable contrasting women, 1, to men, 21. *p , .05. **p , .01. ***p , .001.

Attachment orientations and sexual fantasies

men were more likely than women to report dominance scenes and fantasies of unrestricted and emotionless sex. Attachment anxiety was positively associated with the reported frequency and percentage of sexual fantasies. Attachment anxiety also made a significant unique contribution to four of five fantasies factors, such that anxiety was positively associated with Submission, Dissociation, and Unrestricted and Emotionless Sex, along with Romance. The latter two main effects were qualified by significant interactions between anxiety and gender. Using Aiken and West’s (1991) procedure, I found that attachment anxiety was positively associated with Unrestricted and Emotionless Sex among women, b ¼ .36, p , .001, but not among men, b ¼ .06. The regression coefficients also indicated that anxiety was positively associated with Romance among men, b ¼ .35, p , .001, but not among women, b ¼ 2.05. In addition, a significant interaction between anxiety and avoidance was found for fantasies involving dissociation. Using Aiken and West’s (1991) procedure for examining simple slopes, I found that anxiety was significantly associated with sexual fantasies involving dissociation when attachment avoidance was high (1 SD above the mean), b ¼ .44, p , .001, but not when attachment avoidance was low (1 SD below the mean), b ¼ .14. That is, sexual fantasies involving dissociation were most likely to be reported by participants scoring high on both attachment anxiety and avoidance dimensions (what Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991, called ‘‘fearful avoidance’’). Finally, a significant interaction between avoidance and gender was also found for Romance. The regression coefficients showed that attachment avoidance was marginally (and negatively) associated with Romance among men, b ¼ 2.20, p , .08, but not among women, b ¼ .12. The moderating effects of relationship status As reviewed above, little is known about whether and how the content of sexual fantasies varies across relationship status. Still, past studies suggested that some of the associations between attachment avoidance and sexual

329

motives might be more pronounced among people not currently involved in committed relationships (e.g., affirmation; Schachner & Shaver, 2004). This pattern is therefore likely to be paralleled in the fantasy realm. To examine whether relationship status moderated the link between attachment orientations and sexual fantasies, I conducted three-step hierarchical regressions examining unique and interactive effects of attachment anxiety, attachment avoidance, and relationship status—a dichotomous variable contrasting participants who were currently involved in a romantic relationship (code ¼ 1, N ¼ 114, 73 women and 41 men) to those who were not currently involved in such a relationship (code ¼ 21, N ¼ 62, 34 women and 28 men). These analyses revealed that the significant main effects for attachment orientations reported in Table 3 did not notably change and were still significant after the statistical control for relationship status. Relationship status made a significant unique contribution to four factors, such that involved people reported lower frequency and percentage of sexual fantasies than people who were not currently involved in a romantic relationship, b ¼ 2.20, p , .01. Involved people were also lower on Unrestricted and Emotionless Sex, b ¼ 2.18, p , .01, Dissociation, b ¼ 2.14, p , .05, and Romance, b ¼ 2.20, p , .01. In addition, a significant interaction between avoidance and relationship status was found for submission fantasies, b ¼ 2.15, p , .05. The regression coefficients showed that attachment avoidance was negatively associated with submission fantasies among involved people, b ¼ 2.28, p , .05, but not among people who were not currently involved in a romantic relationship, b ¼ .02. The regression analyses revealed no other significant main effects for relationship status and no other significant interactions between relationship status and attachment orientations. Overall, the findings of Study 1 support the hypotheses. More anxiously attached persons were especially likely to fantasize on sexrelated themes. Specifically, they were more likely than those low in attachment anxiety to experience submission fantasies. More anxiously attached women were more likely to report fantasizing on unrestricted sex, whereas

330

more anxiously attached men were more likely to report romantic fantasies. This pattern accords with documented gender differences in the effects of attachment anxiety on the tendency to engage in extrapair sex (e.g., Cooper et al., 2006; Gangestad & Thornhill, 1997). More avoidant men, on the other hand, were particularly less likely to report romantic fantasies. This finding is consistent with empirical evidence showing stronger effects of attachment avoidance on sexual behaviors among men (e.g., Cooper et al., 2006). This pronounced ‘‘avoidant effect’’ on men’s sexual fantasies may be exacerbated by traditional gender roles that emphasize the expression of sexual rather than emotional needs in the sexual arena (e.g., DeLamater, 1987; Gagnon & Simon, 1973). Study 2 Fantasies checklists, such as the one used in Study 1, include a preselected list of specific sexual themes that may not be sufficiently comprehensive and may therefore constrain or bias participants’ responses. Study 2 examined the associations between attachment orientations and sexual fantasies, while attempting to overcome these methodological shortcomings by employing an open-ended methodology. A sample of adult participants described in narrative form a sexual fantasy and reported their attachment orientations. To content analyze the sexual fantasies, a coding system was developed. This coding system allowed the identification of three central components of relational themes: desires expressed in the sexual fantasies, responses from others (i.e., the objects of the fantasy) to the subject (‘‘others’ responses’’), and responses of the subject to others (‘‘subject’s responses’’). Then, each sexual fantasy was evaluated for the presence of these components of relationship themes. Method Participants One hundred fifteen Israeli participants (59 women, 56 men) ranging from 19 to 37 years of age (M ¼ 26.24, SD ¼ 3.57) volunteered for the study without compensation. A research assistant recruited participants from universi-

G. E. Birnbaum

ties and community centers in central Israel. All participants had experienced heterosexual intercourse, either in a current or past relationship; 58.3% of the participants were currently involved in a romantic relationship and 12.2% were married. Length of current relationship ranged from 1 to 162 months (M ¼ 32.34, SD ¼ 35.96). Years of education ranged from 12 to 22 years (M ¼ 14.31, SD ¼ 2.05). Measures and procedure A research assistant approached potential participants and asked whether they would like to take a part in a study on sexuality and close relationships. After agreeing to participate, they were presented with the following definition of the term sexual fantasy, adapted from Leitenberg and Henning (1995): ‘‘Sexual fantasies refer to any mental imagery that is sexually arousing or erotic to the individual. A sexual fantasy can be an elaborate story, or it can be a fleeting thought of some romantic or sexual activity. It can involve bizarre imagery, or it can be quite realistic. It can involve memories of past events, or it can be a completely imaginary experience.’’ Then, participants were given the following instructions: ‘‘Please think of a sexual fantasy that you may have recently had, and write about it in the space below. You can write about the first one that comes to mind, or, if you think of several, write about one that is common for you, or that is one of your favorites. Please describe in detail the specific scene, series of events, the figures, wishes, sensations, feelings, and thoughts that were experienced by you and the other figures in your fantasy. At this point, I wish to note that you are writing anonymously, so feel free to write anything you like.’’ For the present study, I developed a coding system analyzing the sexual fantasies by their content. This coding system was based on the Core Conflictual Relationship Theme (CCRT) measure (Luborsky, 1977; Luborsky & CritsChristoph, 1998), a system applied for identifying the central patterns of interpersonal relationships in both dreams and waking narratives (e.g., Popp et al., 1996). Narratives are evaluated for the presence of three components of relationship themes: (a) wishes, needs, or

Attachment orientations and sexual fantasies

intentions of the subject; (b) responses from others to the subject (‘‘others’ responses’’); and (c) responses of the subject to others (‘‘subject’s responses’’). In order to assess each of these three components in sexual fantasies, a checklist of relationship themes was constructed. This checklist included 22 items that were uniquely formulated for the content of sexual fantasies, corresponding to tailor-made CCRT components (e.g., Popp et al., 1996). The first component of the relationship theme, the desires expressed in the sexual fantasy, included five items (e.g., desire for intimacy). The second component, others’ responses, was composed of nine items (e.g., perceiving the others as affectionate). The third component, subject’s responses, incorporated eight items (e.g., representation of the self as passive). Two judges (psychology graduate research assistants), who were trained to perform the coding, used this themes checklist to score fantasies for the different components of relationship themes. These judges independently rated the extent to which each item described the expressed desires, responses from others, and responses of the subject in each sexual fantasy on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from not at all (1) to very much (5). Neither of the judges had access to additional information about the participants, while the fantasies were being rated. Pearson correlations computed between the scoring of both judges for the expressed desires, responses from others, and responses of the subject yielded reliability coefficients of .88 on the average, reflecting high agreement between judges. Accordingly, I averaged the scores of the two judges. The five expressed desires items (desire for intimacy, desire to be irresistibly desired, desire to escape reality, desire to sexually satisfy others, and desire to be sexually satisfied) represent central sexual desires expressed in sexual fantasies (see Leitenberg and Henning, 1995, for an extensive review). Each of these items embodies a broader category of desires (e.g., the desire for intimacy includes a desire for emotional connection and the desire to feel loved, the desire to sexually satisfy includes the desire to indulge and pamper the other). These items were therefore analyzed singly rather than being grouped into factors to prevent

331

further information loss. Also, the correlations among the five expressed desires items were of small magnitude (ranging from .01 to .11, except for the correlations between the desire to sexually satisfy others and the desire to be sexually satisfied, as well as between the desire to be irresistibly desired and the desire to be sexually satisfied, .55 and .25, respectively) and thus did not justify grouping items into factors either. A common factor analysis with varimax rotation, which was performed on the nine items of the others’ responses component, yielded three main factors (eigenvalue . 1) that explained 53.57% of the variance. Items did not cross load (at .40 or higher) on multiple factors. Factor 1 (25.70% of explained variance), Aggressive and Alienated Others, included three items (loading . .50) dealing with perceiving others as aggressive, abusive, and alienated. Factor 2 (15.42%), Affectionate and Pleasing Others, included three items dealing with perceiving others as supportive, pleasing, and affectionate. Factor 3 (12.45%), Humiliated and Helpless Others, included three items dealing with perceiving others as humiliated, abused, and helpless. Cronbach’s alpha coefficients for the three others’ responses factors ranged from .68 to .80, implying adequate internal consistency. On this basis, three scores were computed for each participant by averaging the items loading on each factor. A common factor analysis with varimax rotation, which was performed on the eight items of the subject’s responses component, yielded three main factors (eigenvalue . 1) that explained 45.80% of the variance. Items did not cross load (at .40 or higher) on multiple factors. Factor 1 (20.36% of explained variance), Affectionate and Passionate Subject, included four items (loading ..40) reflecting the portrayal of the self as affectionate, supportive, pleasing, and passionate in the sexual fantasy. Factor 2 (14.51%), Aggressive and Abusive Subject, included two items tapping the representation of the self as aggressive and abusive. Factor 3 (10.93%), Humiliated and Helpless Subject, included two items reflecting the representation of the self as humiliated, as well as passive and helpless. Coefficient alpha reliabilities and the interitem

332

correlation were adequate for the two subject’s responses factors (.64 for Affectionate and Passionate Subject, r ¼ .52, p , .001 for the two Aggressive and Abusive Subject items), suggesting adequate internal consistency. On this basis, two scores were computed for each participant by averaging the items loading on each of the first two factors. The two Humiliated and Helpless Subject items correlated at .28, implying that representing the self as humiliated might be conceptually different from representing the self as passive and helpless, and did not warrant a combined score. These two items were therefore analyzed singly. Before ending the study, participants were asked to complete a Hebrew version of the ECR (Brennan, Clark, et al., 1998) described in Study 1. In the current sample, Cronbach’s alphas were high for the anxiety (.89) and avoidance dimensions (.88). Higher scores indicated greater attachment-related avoidance or anxiety. Participants were also asked to provide demographic and relationship information, including age, current relationship status, and length of current relationship. Results and Discussion Initially, zero-order correlations were computed among all major variables: attachment scores, relational themes in sexual fantasies, and gender (a dichotomous variable contrasting women, 1, to men, 21). The intercorrelations among relational themes scores are presented in Table 4. The correlations among attachment scores, gender, relationship length, and relational themes in sexual fantasies are presented in Table 5. Women were more likely than men to express the desire for intimacy and to represent the others as affectionate, whereas men were more likely than women to represent the others as both alienated and helpless. Relationship length was negatively associated with perceiving the others as humiliated and helpless. In addition, as predicted, attachment anxiety was positively associated with expressing the desire for intimacy and to be irresistibly desired, as well as with representing oneself as both affectionate and helpless, and the others as affectionate. Attachment avoidance was associated with representing oneself as both helpless and humiliated.

G. E. Birnbaum

I then analyzed the data by three-step hierarchical regressions examining the unique and interactive effects of attachment anxiety, attachment avoidance, and gender. In the first step, I examined main effects for gender—a dichotomous variable comparing women (1) to men (21)—and the attachment scores of anxiety and avoidance (entered as standard scores). I examined the two-way interactions in the second step and entered the three-way interaction in the third step. Table 6 presents the standardized regression coefficients (bs) for each effect at the step in which it was entered into the regression. With regard to the expressed desires items, attachment anxiety was positively associated with the desire to be irresistibly desired. Gender made a significant unique contribution to the desire for intimacy, with men expressing less desire for intimacy than women. Significant interactions between avoidance and gender were found for the desire for intimacy and the desire to escape reality. Using Aiken and West’s (1991) procedure, I found that attachment avoidance was negatively associated with the desire for intimacy, b ¼ 2.36, p , .01, and positively associated with the desire to escape reality, b ¼ .36, p , .01, among women, but not among men, bs of .12 and 2.12, ns. In addition, I found a significant interaction between anxiety and gender for the desire to sexually satisfy the other. Using Aiken and West’s procedure, I found that attachment anxiety was positively associated with the desire to sexually satisfy the other among men, b ¼ .33, p , .01, but not among women, b ¼ 2.11. With regard to the others’ responses factors, gender made a significant unique contribution to Affectionate and Pleasing Others and Humiliated and Helpless Others, with women perceiving others in their fantasies as more affectionate and pleasing and less humiliated and helpless than men. The interaction between attachment avoidance and gender was significant for Affectionate and Pleasing Others. Using Aiken and West’s (1991) procedure, I found that attachment avoidance was marginally (and positively) associated with perceiving others as affectionate and pleasing among men, b ¼ .25, p , .10, but not among women, b ¼ 2.15.

*p , .05. **p , .01. ***p , .001.

Expressed desires Intimacy To be desired To escape reality To sexually satisfy To be satisfied Others’ responses Aggressive and Alienated Affectionate and Pleasing Humiliated and Helpless Subject’s responses Affectionate Aggressive Passive and Helpless

Themes

Others

Self

2.01

.02 2.04

.11 .08 .06

2.05 .25** .06 .55***

2.33*** 2.00 2.00

2.32*** .71*** 2.24* .02 .21* 2.12 .15 2.01 2.10 2.06 .12 .33*** 2.04 .04 .10 2.02 .45*** 2.07

.60*** .25** .03 .33*** .06

.56*** 2.03 2.13 .03 2.03

2.15

2.11 .28** .07 2.19* .00 2.02 2.07 .32***

2.18 .04 2.01 .06 .12

.11 .13 .28**

.71*** 2.10 .00

2.13 .05 2.01 2.04 2.11

Desired Escape Satisfy Be satisfied Alienated Pleasing Helpless Affectionate Aggressive Passive Humiliated

Desires

Table 4. Intercorrelations among relational themes scores (Study 2, N ¼ 115)

Attachment orientations and sexual fantasies 333

334

G. E. Birnbaum

Table 5. Correlations among attachment scores, gender, relationship length, and relational themes in sexual fantasies (Study 2, N ¼ 115) Attachment scores Relational themes Expressed desires Intimacy To be desired To escape reality To satisfy sexually To be satisfied Others’ responses Aggressive and Alienated Affectionate and Pleasing Humiliated and Helpless Subject’s responses Affectionate Aggressive Passive and Helpless Humiliated

Anxiety .18* .22** 2.05 .09 .09

Avoidance 2.13 .03 .08 2.02 .03

2.04 .19* .02

.11 .04 .07

.18* 2.07 .22* .03

2.10 .10 .19* .27**

Gendera

Relationship length

.40*** .01 .09 2.07 2.14

.20 2.08 2.10 2.09 .10

2.18* .29** 2.25**

2.04 2.01 2.24*

.12 2.15 .03 2.10

.07 2.17 2.02 2.08

a A dichotomous variable contrasting women, 1, to men, 21. *p , .05. **p , .01. ***p , .001.

With regard to the subject’s responses factors, attachment anxiety made significant unique contributions to Passive and Helpless Subject and Affectionate and Passionate Subject: Higher anxiety was associated with representing the self as more passive and helpless as well as more affectionate and passionate. Attachment avoidance made significant unique contributions to Humiliated Subject: Higher avoidance was associated with representing the self as more humiliated. This effect was qualified by a significant interaction between avoidance and gender. Using Aiken and West’s (1991) procedure, I found that attachment avoidance was associated with representing the self as humiliated among men, b ¼ .54, p , .001, but not among women, b ¼ 2.02. The interaction between avoidance and gender was also significant for Affectionate and Passionate Subject. The regression coefficients showed that attachment avoidance was associated with representing the self as less affectionate and pleasing among women, b ¼ 2.31, p , .01, but not among men, b ¼ .05.

Targets of sexual fantasies A logistic regression analysis examined the effects of attachment orientations and gender on the identity of the sexual partners in the fantasies (current partner, others) among participants who were currently involved in a relationship. The regression was set up hierarchically, with attachment avoidance, attachment anxiety, and gender (a dichotomous variable contrasting women, 1, to men, 21) entered as main effects on Step 1; all twoway interactions of these variables were entered on Step 2. There was a significant main effect for gender, B ¼ 22.14, SE ¼ 0.65, Wald ¼ 10.90, p , .001, such that men were less likely to fantasize about their partners than women. There was also a significant main effect for attachment anxiety, B ¼ 20.87, SE ¼ 0.37, Wald ¼ 5.65, p , .05, such that more anxiously attached people were less likely to fantasize about their partners. As expected, however, this main effect was qualified by a significant interaction between anxiety and gender, B ¼ 21.03, SE ¼ 0.50, Wald ¼ 4.21,

Attachment orientations and sexual fantasies

335

Table 6. Predicting relational themes in sexual fantasies from attachment anxiety, attachment avoidance, and gender (Study 2, N ¼ 115) Relational themes Expressed desires Desire for intimacy Desire to be desired Desire to escape reality Desire to sexually satisfy Desire to be satisfied Others’ responses Aggressive and Alienated Affectionate and Pleasing Humiliated and Helpless Subject’s responses Affectionate and Passionate Aggressive and Abusive Passive and Helpless Humiliated

Anxiety Avoid .14 .23* 2.10 .11 .12 2.03 .13 .07

2.12 2.03 .12 2.05 2.02 .09 .05 .03

Gendera

Anxiety
Anxiety
Avoid
Three-way Avoid Gender Gender interaction

.35*** 2.04 .13 2.09 2.16

.08 .01 2.17 .09 .12

2.10 2.09 2.13 2.22* 2.13

2.24** 2.03 .24** .05 .06

2.05 2.01 2.01 .01 .10

2.17 .27** 2.26**

2.11 .13 2.06

2.01 2.01 .11

2.07 2.20* 2.08

.08 2.06 2.04

.03 2.02 2.12 2.01

2.13 .11 .11 .04

2.18* 2.12 2.11 2.28**

2.05 .05 .13 .01

.19* 2.13 .07 2.06 .10 2.12 .18* .15 .01 2.01 .26** 2.07

Note. Entries are the standardized regression coefficients for each effect at the step in which it was entered into the regression. a A dichotomous variable contrasting women, 1, to men, 21. *p , .05. **p , .01. ***p , .001.

p , .05. Attachment anxiety was negatively associated with fantasizing about one’s partner among women, B ¼ 21.82, SE ¼ 0.72, Wald ¼ 6.36, p , .05, but not among men (B ¼ 0.08, SE ¼ 0.61, Wald ¼ 0.02). The moderating effects of relationship status To examine whether relationship status moderated the link between attachment orientations and sexual fantasies, I conducted three-step hierarchical regressions examining unique and interactive effects of attachment anxiety, attachment avoidance, and relationship status—a dichotomous variable comparing participants who were currently involved in a romantic relationship (code ¼ 1, N ¼ 67, 34 women and 33 men) to those who were not currently involved in such a relationship (code ¼ 21, N ¼ 48, 25 women and 23 men). These analyses showed that the significant main effects for attachment orientations reported in Table 6 did not notably change and were still significant after the statistical control for relationship status. Relationship status made a significant unique contribution only to the

desire to be desired, such that involved people expressed less desire to be irresistibly desired than people who were not currently involved in a romantic relationship, b ¼ 2.27, p , .01. In addition, a significant interaction between avoidance and relationship status was found for the desire for intimacy, b ¼ 2.23, p , .05, the desire to escape reality, b ¼ 2.26, p , .01, Aggressive and Alienated Others, b ¼ 2.22, p , .05, and Affectionate and Passionate Subject, b ¼ 2.27, p , .01. The interaction between avoidance and relationship status also approximated statistical significance for Humiliated Subject, b ¼ 2.18, p , .06. The regression coefficients showed that attachment avoidance was negatively associated with the desire for intimacy and Affectionate and Passionate Subject (bs of 2.41, p , .01 for both) among involved people but not among people who were not currently involved in a romantic relationship (bs of .05 and .13, respectively). Furthermore, attachment avoidance was positively associated with the desire to escape reality, b ¼ .36, p , .05, Aggressive and Alienated Others, b ¼ .34, p , .05, and Humiliated

336

Subject, b ¼ .45, p , .01, among people who were not currently involved in a romantic relationship, but not among involved people (bs of 2.16, 2.10, and .09, respectively). The regression analyses revealed no other significant main effects for relationship status and no other significant interactions between relationship status and attachment orientations. Test of Mediation Having found that attachment anxiety was associated with both the desire to be irresistibly desired and submission themes, I wanted to explore whether the association between attachment anxiety and representing oneself as passive and helpless may be accounted for by the desire to be desired. This exploratory examination was based on the suggestion of Hariton (1973) that submission fantasies in which the fantasizer is represented as helpless may affirm one’s desirability because they imply that the fantasizer is so desirable that others are overwhelmed by his or her attractiveness and cannot resist desiring him or her. To test for mediation, I conducted a series of analyses following procedures recommended by Baron and Kenny (1986). First, representing oneself as passive and helpless was regressed on attachment anxiety to establish that there was an association to be mediated. Attachment anxiety was a significant predictor of representing oneself as passive and helpless, b ¼ .22, p , .05. Second, the hypothesized mediator, the desire to be desired, also significantly predicted representing oneself as passive and helpless, b ¼ .28, p , .01. Third, attachment anxiety significantly predicted the desire to be desired, b ¼ .22, p , .05. Finally, the dependent variable (representing oneself as passive and helpless) was regressed simultaneously on the independent variable (attachment anxiety) and the proposed mediator (the desire to be desired). This analysis determined whether the association between attachment anxiety and representing oneself as passive and helpless could be accounted for by the desire to be desired. The association between attachment anxiety and representing oneself as passive and helpless was reduced to nonsignificance (b ¼ .16), after controlling for the desire to be desired. A Sobel test found that this reduc-

G. E. Birnbaum

tion was marginally significant, Z ¼ 1.88, p , .06. These data therefore showed that the desire to be irresistibly desired marginally mediated the association between attachment anxiety and representing oneself as passive and helpless. Taken together, the findings of Study 2 extended those of Study 1 and showed that more anxiously attached persons were more likely than less anxious individuals to express the desire to be irresistibly desired as well as to represent themselves as affectionate and helpless in their sexual fantasies. The later finding replicated the results of Study 1. Of importance, the desire to be irresistibly desired marginally mediated the association between attachment anxiety and representing oneself as passive and helpless. Highly avoidant people’s sexual fantasies, on the other hand, seemed to reflect intimacy concerns. The nature of these concerns depended on participants’ current involvement in a romantic relationship. Attachment avoidance was negatively associated with the desire for intimacy and representing the self as affectionate, primarily among involved people. Interestingly, avoidance was associated with submission themes (representing the self as humiliated), mainly among people who were not currently involved in a romantic relationship. These people were also more likely to perceive the objects of their fantasies as more aggressive and alienated, and to express the desire to escape reality. These findings are in line with past studies showing that highly avoidant persons maintain distance, even in ongoing relationships (e.g., Birnbaum et al., 2006). This usage of distancing strategies might take the form of relatively hostile and humiliating interactions among people who were not involved in a romantic relationship, at least in the fantasy realm. As expected, attachment effects varied for men and women. Consistent with Study 1, more anxiously attached women were more likely to fantasize about individuals other than their romantic partners. More anxiously attached men were particularly likely to express the desire to sexually satisfy the others in their fantasies. This finding suggests that men’s tendency to focus on satisfying their

Attachment orientations and sexual fantasies

partners during sexual activity (Birnbaum & Laser-Brandt, 2002) may be amplified by attachment anxiety. In contrast, more avoidant men were especially likely to perceive the others in their fantasies as affectionate and pleasing, which might reflect their tendency to perceive the other as more interested in affection than they were (e.g., Mikulincer & Shaver, 2003). More avoidant women, as compared to less avoidant women, were more likely to express the desire to escape reality and less likely to desire intimacy in their sexual fantasies. Similarly, they were less likely to perceive themselves as affectionate. These findings indicate that the relational goal of maintaining emotional distance, characterizing deactivation strategies (e.g., Mikulincer & Shaver), is most likely to be manifested in highly avoidant women’s open-ended accounts of sexual fantasies, unlike Study 1, in which the avoidant effects were stronger for men. General Discussion The current research extends previous work on the expression of attachment insecurities in the sexual arena by examining the manifestations of attachment-related strategies and goals in the content of sexual fantasies. Study 1 indicated that more anxiously attached individuals were more likely to fantasize on sex-related themes than those low in attachment anxiety. They were particularly likely to report fantasies involving submission themes. Interestingly, more anxiously attached women were more likely to report fantasizing on unrestricted sex, whereas more anxiously attached men were more likely to report romantic fantasies. In contrast, more avoidant men were especially unlikely to report romantic fantasies. A complementary picture emerged in Study 2. Results showed that more anxiously attached individuals were particularly likely to express the desire to be irresistibly desired as well as to represent themselves as affectionate and helpless. In line with Study 1, more anxiously attached women were more likely to fantasize about individuals other than their romantic partner, whereas more anxiously attached men were particularly likely to express the desire to sexually satisfy the others in their fantasies. Highly avoidant

337

people’s sexual fantasies reflected intimacy concerns, whose nature depended on participants’ gender and relationship status. To the extent that sexual fantasies reflect current relational and sexual concerns (Klinger, 1971), it is hardly surprising that more anxiously attached persons fantasize about sex more frequently than less anxious individuals. Highly anxious individuals tend to rely heavily on the sexual route to serve their insatiate attachment needs (Cooper et al., 2006; Davis et al., 2004; Schachner & Shaver, 2004). This inclination may account for their enhanced sexual motivation (Davis et al.) that, in and of itself, may fuel frequent fantasizing about sex (see review by Leitenberg & Henning, 1995). Beyond that, for highly anxious individuals, sexualizing attachment-related needs goes hand in hand with channeling excessive relational worries into the sexual route (Birnbaum et al., 2006) that, in turn, may further amplify preoccupation with sex-related themes. In line with this reasoning, Davis and her colleagues (Davis, Shaver, & Vernon, 2003) found that perceived relationship threat was associated with increased fantasizing about sex, particularly among highly anxious people. The subordination of sexuality to attachment may also be manifested in the unique constellation of themes that occupy highly anxious persons’ sexual fantasies. In particular, the findings imply that just as highly anxious persons sexualize their romantic relationships, they may ‘‘romanticize’’ their sexual interactions. Highly anxious persons tend to be obsessed with their romantic partners and exhibit passionate, clinging, intrusive, and controlling patterns of relational behaviors (e.g., Collins & Read, 1990; Hatfield, Brinton, & Cornelius, 1989; Hazan & Shaver, 1987). Consistent with the nature of their romantic relationships, the findings indicated that more anxiously attached individuals were especially likely to report romantic fantasies and represent themselves in their fantasies as affectionate, passionate, supportive, and pleasing. This self-representation is also congruent with research showing that relative to less anxious persons, highly anxious persons report greater use of sex to care for their partners (Davis et al., 2004). As argued by Davis et al., this form of

338

caregiving may be an expression of ‘‘egoistic’’ relational needs (e.g., maintaining closeness), rather than genuine concern for the partner (see also Feeney & Collins, 2003). More anxiously attached persons were also particularly likely to report submission themes. The preference of this specific route of sexual expression is facilitated by erotophilic approach to sexuality (e.g., Strassberg & Lockerd, 1998), which fits highly anxious persons’ tendencies (Bogaert & Sadava, 2002), and may fulfill diverse attachment-related needs at the same time. As suggested by Hariton (1973), submission fantasies may affirm sexual irresistibility because the fantasizer perceives himself or herself to be so desirable that others cannot resist desiring him or her. This explanation was somewhat supported by the mediation test that indicated that the association between attachment anxiety and representing the self as helpless was marginally accounted for by the desire to be irresistibly desired. Submission themes also display the clinginess highly anxious persons bring to their relationships and may thus serve the need for experiencing the power of their partners and eliciting caregiving (Davis et al., 2004). The same ‘‘dependent stance’’ in close relationships may lead highly anxious persons to believe that sexual interactions are controlled by their partners (Feeney et al., 2000) and may result in engagement in destructive behavior (e.g., unprotected sex; Ciesla, Roberts, & Hewitt, 2004) in the real world. As expected, there were gender differences in how attachment anxiety was expressed in the content of sexual fantasies. More anxiously attached men were particularly likely to report romantic fantasies and to express the desire to sexually satisfy the others in their fantasies. More anxiously attached women, in contrast, were especially likely to report fantasizing on unrestricted fantasies that involve extrapair sex. This pattern fits well with documented gender differences in the effects of attachment anxiety on overt sexual behavior. More anxiously attached men are especially unlikely to use sex to bolster their self-esteem (Cooper et al., 2006). Unsurprisingly, they are also less likely to cheat on their partners (Cooper et al., 2006) and have fewer sex partners overall

G. E. Birnbaum

(Gentzler & Kerns, 2004). Conversely, more anxiously attached women are more likely than less anxious women to have sex for selfenhancement reasons (Cooper et al., 2006) and to have extrapair sex (Bogaert & Sadava, 2002; Gangestad & Thornhill, 1997). Traditional gender roles that assign the role of sexual initiator to men (e.g., Byers & Heinlein, 1989; O’Sullivan & Byers, 1992) and encourage women to adopt a relatively emotionalinterpersonal orientation to sexuality (e.g., DeLamater, 1987; Reiss, 1981) may moderate the adverse effects of attachment anxiety on sexual expressions. Highly anxious men’s lower perceived self-attractiveness (Bogaert & Sadava) may interfere with initiating sex with new partners, whereas highly anxious women’s difficulty differentiating between sexual desire and other relational components (e.g., intimacy, commitment; Birnbaum et al., 2006) may be exacerbated by norms emphasizing interpersonal orientation to sexuality. Consequently, at the same time that relational worries may lead highly anxious men to invest more in current relationships (and thus raise their mate value), these insecurities may lead highly anxious women to secure alternatives to their current partner both in the real and in the virtual worlds. Attachment avoidance was associated with limited expressions of affection and intimacy in the fantasies realm. The nature of this apparent usage of distancing strategies depended on participants’ gender and relationship status. Among more avoidant people, those who were currently involved in a romantic relationship were particularly unlikely to desire intimacy and represent themselves as affectionate. Interestingly, those who were not currently involved in a romantic relationship were especially likely to perceive the objects of their fantasies as more aggressive and alienated as well as to represent themselves as humiliated. These people were also more likely to express the desire to escape reality. Highly avoidant individuals have sex for attachment-irrelevant reasons (e.g., Schachner & Shaver, 2004). Accordingly, their tendency to maintain distance and limit intimacy in sexual encounters may take many forms (e.g., dislike for affectionate sexual activities, engaging in uncommitted sex,

Attachment orientations and sexual fantasies

Brennan, Wu, et al., 1998; Schachner & Shaver, 2002), including more hostile and humiliating interactions. Highly avoidant persons’ sexual fantasies may therefore be merely another manifestation of deactivating strategies that takes a rather extreme form among people who were not currently involved in a romantic relationship. These fantasies may also reflect highly avoidant persons’ typical sexual motivation and corresponding experiences. These explanations raise the question of why attachment avoidance was not significantly associated with fantasizing about unrestricted sexual themes. This unexpected finding implies that deactivating strategies are manifested somewhat differently in sexual fantasies and in sexual behavior, as more avoidant people may be more likely to actually engage in casual sex than to fantasize about it. To the extent that the endorsement of self-enhancement motives mediates highly avoidant persons’ tendency to engage in casual sex (Cooper et al., 2006), these motives may be less relevant to the fantasy world, at least for more avoidant individuals. The findings from the current study are also ostensibly at odds with past research that showed that attachment avoidance was associated with similar patterns of sexual behaviors among men and women, but the effects were stronger for men (e.g., Cooper et al., 2006). Although highly avoidant men were especially unlikely to report romantic fantasies, highly avoidant women were those who were more likely than their less avoidant counterparts to express the desire to escape reality and less likely to desire intimacy in their sexual fantasies. Similarly, they were more likely to perceive themselves as less affectionate. Together, these results revealed that the tendency to maintain distance from partners was most pronounced in highly avoidant women’s openended accounts of sexual fantasies. A possible explanation for these discrepancies is that more avoidant women may find it easier to eschew gender roles, which encourage women to be affectionate and nurturant, in the virtual private world of fantasy than in the real world. Furthermore, individual differences in discomfort with intimacy may be more discerned in women’s open-ended accounts of sexual

339

fantasies than in men’s because women emphasize the aversive and positive relational aspects of sex in their descriptions of sexual experiences (Birnbaum & Laser-Brandt, 2002). These results should be interpreted with the following caveats in mind. For one, although the research employed both university and community samples, the use of volunteers introduces bias (see review by Catania, Gibson, Chitwood, & Coates, 1990), and it is therefore unclear how generally applicable the findings would be to more diverse populations. The Israeli context (e.g., religious influences, warrelated threats, differences in sexual education between the Israeli society and other societies) may also compromise the general applicability of the findings. The current findings might also reflect the systematic effect of cognitive and motivational biases associated with retrospective studies (e.g., sentiment override; Reis & Gable, 2000). Furthermore, the current research did not take into consideration sexual and relational variables that may affect the frequency of sexual fantasies (e.g., sexual guilt, sexual satisfaction; see review by Leitenberg & Henning, 1995). Thus, the correlations between attachment orientations and sexual fantasies found in the current research might reflect unmeasured individual differences in these variables. For example, unhappily married women are more likely to fantasize than happily married women (Davidson & Hoffman, 1986; Hariton & Singer, 1974). Relationship satisfaction may therefore account for the association between attachment anxiety and preoccupation with sex-related themes. Indeed, sexual fantasies do not usually occur in a ‘‘relational vacuum,’’ and the role played by sexual fantasies may not be fully understood without taking into account the relational context that may generate them or affect their content. Future research should employ a daily experience methodology that can more accurately assess how individual differences in attachment orientations contribute to the dynamic and temporal interplay of sexual fantasies, sexual activity, and relationship quality. Finally, although people may be guided by global attachment orientation, which is primarily a result of attachment

340

experiences encountered during childhood and adolescence, they also develop beliefs and expectancies regarding specific relationships (Creasey & Ladd, 2005; Treboux, Crowell, & Waters, 2004) that may change over time (Kirkpatrick & Hazan, 1994). Global and partner-specific attachment representations may not necessarily be highly correlated (e.g., Crowell, Treboux, & Waters, 1999) and therefore uniquely predict romantic relationship behavior (e.g., Creasey & Ladd; Simpson & Rholes, 2002). Future studies should examine the effects of both generalized and specific attachment representations on the content of sexual fantasies. In conclusion, the findings imply that the content of sexual fantasies reflects the relational goals associated with different attachment orientations, rather than compensates for attachment-related concerns. These findings encourage the identification of the unique components of relational themes of preferred sexual fantasies in distressed couples. Researchers and clinicians may then examine whether modification of potentially distress-provoking themes may lead to corresponding changes in relational goals and resulting sexual and relational interactions. The current research suggests additional questions about the contextual determinants and relational consequences of sexual fantasizing. For example, do sexual fantasies function as a maintenance mechanism in longterm relationships? Does the content of sexual fantasies compensate for relational difficulties (dissatisfaction, burnout) or reflect them? Do extrapair fantasies encourage actual infidelity or help maintain sexual desire within the context of current relationships? Does felt security facilitate exploration in the fantasy realm? Does perceived relational threat encourage extrapair fantasies or facilitate investment in current partners? Will the pattern of associations between attachment orientations, sexual fantasies, and relationship quality be changed with the transition into the different subjective stages of romantic relationship? The present research is an initial step toward elucidating the role of sexual fantasies in close relationships. Further research is required to address these questions and to explore the implications of fantasizing for interpersonal well-being at different stages

G. E. Birnbaum

of relationship development and in more diverse samples.

References Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Arndt, W. B., Foehl, J. C., & Good, F. E. (1985). Specific sexual fantasy themes: A multidimensional study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 472–480. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderatormediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182. Bartholomew, K., & Horowitz, L. M. (1991). Attachment styles among young adults: A test of a four-category model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 226–244. Birnbaum, G. E. (2007). Attachment orientations, sexual functioning, and relationship satisfaction in a community sample of women. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 24, 21–35. Birnbaum, G. E., & Gillath, O. (2006). Measuring subgoals of the sexual behavioral system: What is sex good for? Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 23, 675–701. Birnbaum, G. E., & Laser-Brandt, D. (2002). Gender differences in the experience of heterosexual intercourse. The Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, 11, 143–158. Birnbaum, G. E., Reis, H. T., Mikulincer, M., Gillath, O., & Orpaz, A. (2006). When sex is more than just sex: Attachment orientations, sexual experience, and relationship quality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 929–943. Bogaert, A. F., & Sadava, S. (2002). Adult attachment and sexual behavior. Personal Relationships, 9, 191–204. Bowlby, J. (1969/1982). Attachment and loss: Vol. 1. Attachment (2nd ed.). New York: Basic Books. Bowlby, J. (1973). Attachment and loss: Vol. 2. Separation: Anxiety and anger. New York: Basic Books. Brennan, K. A., Clark, C. L., & Shaver, P. R. (1998). Selfreport measurement of adult attachment: An integrative overview. In J. A. Simpson & W. S. Rholes (Eds.), Attachment theory and close relationships (pp. 46–76). New York: Guilford Press. Brennan, K. A., & Shaver, P. R. (1995). Dimensions of adult attachment, affect regulation, and romantic relationship functioning. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 21, 267–283. Brennan, K. A., Wu, S., & Loev, J. (1998). Adult romantic attachment and individual differences in attitudes toward physical contact in the context of adult romantic relationships. In J. A. Simpson & W. S. Rholes (Eds.), Attachment theory and close relationships (pp. 248–256). New York: Guilford. Buss, D. M., & Schmitt, D. P. (1993). Sexual strategies theory: An evolutionary perspective on human mating. Psychological Review, 100, 204–232. Byers, E. S., & Heinlein, L. (1989). Predicting initiations and refusals of sexual activities in married and

Attachment orientations and sexual fantasies cohabiting heterosexual couples. The Journal of Sex Research, 26, 210–231. Cassidy, J. (1999). The nature of the child’s ties. In J. Cassidy & P. R. Shaver (Eds.), Handbook of attachment: Theory, research, and clinical applications (pp. 3–20). New York: Guilford Press. Cassidy, J., & Kobak, R. R. (1988). Avoidance and its relationship with other defensive processes. In J. Belsky & T. Nezworski (Eds.), Clinical implications of attachment (pp. 300–323). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Catania, J. A., Gibson, D. R., Chitwood, D. D., & Coates, T. J. (1990). Methodological problems in AIDS behavioral research: Influences on measurement error and participation bias in studies of sexual behavior. Psychological Bulletin, 108, 339–362. Ciesla, J. A., Roberts, J. E., & Hewitt, R. G. (2004). Adult attachment and high-risk sexual behavior among HIVpositive patients. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34, 108–124. Collins, N. L., & Read, S. J. (1990). Adult attachment, working models, and relationship quality in dating couples. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 644–663. Cooper, M. L., Pioli, M., Levitt, A., Talley, A., Micheas, L., & Collins, N. L. (2006). Attachment styles, sex motives, and sexual behavior: Evidence for gender specific expressions of attachment dynamics. In M. Mikulincer & G. S. Goodman (Eds.), Dynamics of love: Attachment, caregiving, and sex. New York: Guilford Press. Creasey, G., & Ladd, A. (2005). Generalized and specific attachment representations: Unique and interactive roles in predicting conflict behaviors in close relationships. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 1026–1038. Crowell, J., Treboux, D., & Waters, E. (1999). The adult attachment interview and relationship questionnaire: Relations to reports of mothers and partners. Personal Relationships, 6, 1–18. Davidson, J. K., & Hoffman, L. E. (1986). Sexual fantasies and sexual satisfaction: An empirical analysis of erotic thought. The Journal of Sex Research, 22, 184–205. Davis, D., Shaver, P. R., & Vernon, M. L. (2003). Physical, emotional, and behavioral reactions to breaking up. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 871–884. Davis, D., Shaver, P. R., & Vernon, M. L. (2004). Attachment style and subjective motivations for sex. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 1076–1090. DeLamater, J. D. (1987). Gender differences in sexual scenarios. In K. Kelley (Ed.), Females, males, and sexuality (pp. 127–140). Albany: State University of New York Press. Diamond, L. M. (2003). What does sexual orientation orient? A biobehavioral model distinguishing romantic love and sexual desire. Psychological Review, 110, 173–192. Ellis, B. J., & Symons, D. (1990). Sex differences in sexual fantasy: An evolutionary psychological approach. The Journal of Sex Research, 27, 527–555. Feeney, B. C., & Collins, N. L. (2003). Motivations for caregiving in adult intimate relationships: Influence on caregiving behavior and relationship functioning. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 950–968. Feeney, J. A., & Noller, P. (2004). Attachment and sexuality in close relationships. In J. H. Harvey, A. Wenzel, &

341 S. Sprecher (Eds.), Handbook of sexuality in close relationships (pp. 183–201). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Feeney, J. A., Peterson, C., Gallois, C., & Terry, D. J. (2000). Attachment style as a predictor of sexual attitudes and behavior in late adolescence. Psychology and Health, 14, 1105–1122. Fisher, H. E. (1998). Lust, attraction, and attachment in mammalian reproduction. Human Nature, 9, 23–52. Fisher, H. E., Aron, A., Mashek, D., Li, H., & Brown, L. L. (2002). Defining the brain systems of lust, romantic attraction, and attachment. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 31, 413–419. Freud, S. (1908/1962). Creative writers and daydreaming. In J. Strachy (Ed.), The standard edition of the complete psychological works of Sigmund Freud (Vol. 9, pp. 142–152). London: Hogarth. Gagnon, J. H., & Simon, W. (1973). Sexual conduct: The social sources of human sexuality. Chicago: Aldine Publishing. Gangestad, S. W., & Thornhill, R. (1997). The evolutionary psychology of extra-pair sex: The role of fluctuating asymmetry. Evolution and Human Behavior, 18, 69–88. Gentzler, A. L., & Kerns, K. A. (2004). Associations between insecure attachment and sexual experiences. Personal Relationships, 11, 249–265. Hariton, E. B. (1973). The sexual fantasies of women. Psychology Today, 6, 39–44. Hariton, E. B., & Singer, J. L. (1974). Women’s fantasies during sexual intercourse: Normative and theoretical implications. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 42, 313–322. Hatfield, E., Brinton, C., & Cornelius, J. (1989). Passionate love and anxiety in young adolescents. Motivation and Emotion, 13, 271–289. Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. R. (1987). Romantic love conceptualized as an attachment process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 511–524. Hazan, C., Zeifman, D., & Middleton, K. (1994, July). Adult romantic attachment, affection, and sex. Paper presented at the 7th International Conference on Personal Relationships, Groningen, the Netherlands. Hicks, T. V., & Leitenberg, H. (2001). Sexual fantasies about one’s partner versus someone else: Gender differences in incidence and frequency. The Journal of Sex Research, 38, 43–50. Kirkpatrick, L. A., & Hazan, C. (1994). Attachment styles and close relationships: A four year prospective study. Personal Relationships, 1, 123–142. Klinger, E. (1971). Structure and functions of fantasy. New York: Wiley-Interscience. Knafo, D., & Jaffe, Y. (1984). Sexual fantasizing in males and females. Journal of Research in Personality, 18, 451–462. Laumann, E. O., Gagnon, J. H., Michael, R. T., & Michaels, S. (1994). The social organization of sexuality. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Leitenberg, H., & Henning, K. (1995). Sexual fantasy. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 469–496. Lentz, S. L., & Zeiss, A. M. (1983). Fantasy and sexual arousal in college women: An empirical investigation. Imagination, Cognition, and Personality, 3, 185–202. Luborsky, L. (1977). Measuring a pervasive psychic structure in psychotherapy: The core conflictual relationship theme. In N. Freedman & S. Grand (Eds.), Communicative structures and psychic structures (pp. 367–395). New York: Plenum Press.

342 Luborsky, L., & Crits-Christoph, P. (1998). Understanding transference: The core conflictual relationship theme method in research and clinical practice (2nd ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Main, M. (1990). Cross-cultural studies of attachment organization: Recent studies, changing methodologies, and the concept of conditional strategies. Human Development, 33, 48–61. Mikulincer, M., & Florian, V. (2000). Exploring individual differences in reactions to mortality salience— Does attachment style regulate terror management mechanisms? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 260–273. Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2003). The attachment behavioral system in adulthood: Activation, psychodynamics, and interpersonal processes. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 35, pp. 53–152). New York: Academic Press. Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2007). Attachment in adulthood: Structure, dynamics, and change. New York: Guilford Press. O’Sullivan, L. F., & Byers, E. S. (1992). College students’ incorporation of initiator and restrictor roles in sexual dating interactions. The Journal of Sex Research, 29, 435–446. Pelletier, L. A., & Herold, E. S. (1988). The relationship of age, sex guilt, and sexual experience with female sexual fantasies. The Journal of Sex Research, 24, 250–256. Person, E. S., Terestman, N., Myers, W. A., Goldberg, E., & Borenstein, M. (1992). Associations between sexual experiences and fantasies in a nonpatient population: A preliminary study. Journal of the American Academy of Psychoanalysis, 20, 75–90. Popp, C., Diguer, L., Luborsky, L., Faude, J., Johnson, S., Morris, M. et al. (1996). Repetitive relationship themes in waking narratives and dreams. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 64, 1073–1078. Reis, H. T., & Gable, S. L. (2000). Event-sampling and other methods for studying everyday experience. In H. T. Reis & C. M. Judd (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in social and personality psychology (pp. 190–222). New York: Cambridge University Press. Reiss, I. L. (1981). Some observations on ideology and sexuality in America. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 43, 271–283.

G. E. Birnbaum Renaud, C. A., & Byers, E. S. (1999). Exploring the frequency, diversity, and content of university students’ positive and negative sexual cognitions. Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, 8, 17–30. Schachner, D. A., & Shaver, P. R. (2002). Attachment style and human mate poaching. New Review of Social Psychology, 1, 122–129. Schachner, D. A., & Shaver, P. R. (2004). Attachment dimensions and motives for sex. Personal Relationships, 11, 179–195. Shaver, P. R., Hazan, C., & Bradshaw, D. (1988). Love as attachment: The integration of three behavioral systems. In R. J. Sternberg & M. Barnes (Eds.), The psychology of love (pp. 68–99). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Shaver, P. R., & Mikulincer, M. (2006). A behavioral systems approach to romantic love relationships: Attachment, caregiving, and sex. In R. J. Sternberg & K. Weis (Eds.), The new psychology of love (pp. 35–64). New Heaven, MS: Yale University Press. Simpson, J., & Rholes, W. (2002). Fearful-avoidance, disorganization, and multiple working models: Some directions for future theory and research. Attachment and Human Development, 4, 223–229. Singer, J. L. (1966). Day dreaming. New York: Random House. Stephan, C. W., & Bachman, G. F. (1999). What’s sex got to do with it? Attachment, love schemas, and sexuality. Personal Relationships, 6, 111–123. Strassberg, D. S., & Lockerd, L. K. (1998). Force in women’s sexual fantasies. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 27, 403–414. Tracy, J. L., Shaver, P. R., Albino, A. W., & Cooper, M. L. (2003). Attachment styles and adolescent sexuality. In P. Florsheim (Ed.), Adolescent romance and sexual behavior: Theory, research, and practical implications (pp. 137–159). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Treboux, D., Crowell, J., & Waters, E. (2004). When ‘‘new’’ meets ‘‘old’’: Configurations of adult attachment representations and their implications for marital functioning. Developmental Psychology, 40, 295–314. Trudel, G. (2002). Sexuality and marital life: Results of a survey. Journal of Sex and Marital Therapy, 28, 229–249. Wilson, G. D. (1997). Gender differences in sexual fantasy: An evolutionary analysis. Personality and Individual Differences, 22, 27–31.