健康与遗传心理学研究室知识库

目的:本研究参考心理健康双因素模型的理念探讨成人依恋与负性情绪及成人依恋与主观幸福感之间的关系，并检验经验性回避和正念水平在成人依恋与负性情绪之间、以及经验性回避和正念水平在成人依恋与主观幸福感之间的中介效应。

方法:采用自编人口学量表、亲密关系经历量表(ECR)、总体生活满意度量表、情感量表、接纳与行动问卷第二版中文版(AAQ-rI、正念觉知量表(MAAS对436位20-60岁以上的成年人施测，经筛选保留42}位进行统计分析。

研究采用SPSS25.0进行统计分析，通过T检验、单因素方差分析、偏相关、多元线性回归分析做数据处理，.采用AMOS22.0进行中介效应检验。考察了人口学变量对成人依恋、负性情绪、主观幸福感的影响;不同经验性回避程度和不同正念水平对成人依恋维度得分的影响;不同经验性回避程度、不同正念水平、不同依恋类型对负性情绪的影响;不同经验性回避程度、不同正念水平、不同依恋类型对主观幸福感的影响;成人依恋、负性情绪、主观幸福感、经验性回避以及正念水平之间的相关;以负性情绪、主观幸福感作为因变量的回归;以及经验性回避、正念水平作为中介变量的中介效应。

结果:

偏相关分析表明，依恋焦虑与依恋回避、抑郁、焦虑、压力、负性情绪总分、消极情感、经验性回避均显著正相关(r=0.35, 0.45, 0.45, 0.53, 0.52, 0.47, 0.539P<0.001)，与生活满意度、主观幸福感总分、正念水平显著负相关(r=-0.30、-0.37、-0.4},P<0.001)，与积极情感显著负相关(r=-0.12, P<0.05)。依恋回避与抑郁、焦虑、压力、负性情绪总分、消极情感、经验性回避均显著正相关(r=0.32, 0.31, 0.26, 0.32, 0.23, 0.31,P<0.001)，与生活满意度、主观幸福感总分、正念水平均显著负相关(r=-0.31、-0.32、0.36, P<0.001)。经验性回避与依恋焦虑、依恋回避、抑郁、焦虑、压力、负性情绪总分、消极情感显著正相关(r=0.53, 0.31, 0.56, 0.54, 0.61, 0.63, 0.51，P<0.001)，与生活满意度、积极情感显、主观幸福感总分显著负相关(f0=V0.35、-0.15、0.43 , P<0.01) 。正念水平与依恋焦虑、依恋回避、抑郁、焦虑、压力、负性情绪总分、消极情感、经验性回避显著负相关(r=-0.48、-0.36、-0.49、-0.47、-0.49、-0.53、-0.39, -0.59,P<0.001)，与生活满意度、主观幸福感总分、积极情感显著正相关(r=0.17,0.19, 0.27,P<0.001)。

多元线性回归表明，依恋焦虑、经验性回避、正念水平、经济水平共同解释了负性情绪总分50% 的变异量（β=-0.20-0. 39, P< 0.01);依恋焦虑、经验性回避、正念水平、性别、经济水平共同解释了抑郁43%的变异（β=-0.23-0.3S,P<0. 01) ；依恋焦虑、经验性回避、正念水平共同解释了焦虑38%的变异(β=-0.17-0.33,P<0. 001); 依恋焦虑、经验性回避、正念水平、经济水平共同解释了压力48%的变异（β=-0.17-0.40,P<0.01) 。

依恋焦虑、依恋回避、经验性回避、年龄段、婚恋状况、经济水平共同解释了主观幸福感总分44%的变异（β=-0.29-0.52, P<0.05; 依恋回避、经验性回避、正念水平、性别、年龄段、婚恋状况、经济水平共同解释了生活满意度44%的变异（β=-0.26-0.53, P<0.05; 正念水平和经济水平共同解释了积极情感10%的变异（β=0.13-0.19, P<0.05;依恋焦虑、经验性回避、年龄段、经济水平共同解释了消极情感40%的变异（β=-0.22-0.07, P<0.05）。

经验性回避作为依恋焦虑和负性情绪之间的中介变量的路径系数均显著(Estimate=0.608, 0.240, 0.577， P<0.001)，经验性回避在依恋焦虑和负性情绪之间的部分中介效应显著，占总效应的59.39%。正念水平作为依恋焦虑和负性情绪之间的中介变量的路径系数均显著(Estimate=-0.550, 0.391、-0.3 51, P<0.001)，正念水平在依恋焦虑和负性情绪之间的部分中介效应显著，占总效应的33:00%。经验性回避作为依恋依恋回避和主观幸福感之间的中介变量的路径系数均显著(Estimate=0.415、-0.131、-0.425， P<0.05 )，经验性回避在依恋回避和主观幸福感之间的完全中介效应显著，占总效应的57.32%。正念水平作为依恋回避和主观幸福感之间的中介变量的路径系数均显著(estimate=-0.479, -0.213 , 0.182， P<0.01，正念水平在依恋回避和主观幸福感之间的部分中介效应显著，占总效应的28.90% 。

结论:

第一，依恋焦虑、依恋回避、经验性回避程度越高负性情绪越多、主观幸福感越低;正念水平越高负性情绪越少而主观幸福感越高。

第二，经验性回避和正念水平在依恋焦虑和负性情绪之间的中介效应均显著，可以通过降低经验性回避程度以及提升正念水平来缓解依恋焦虑对负性情绪的影响，降低负性情绪。

第三，经验性回避和正念水平在依恋回避与主观幸福感之间的中介效应均显著，可以通过降低经验性回避程度以及提升正念水平来提升主观幸福感。

Purpose: This study explored the relationship between adult attachment and negative emotions, adult attachment and subjective well-being by referring to the concept of the two-factor model of mental health, and examined the mediation of experiential avoidance and mindfulness between adult attachment and negative emotions, and the mediation of experiential avoidance and mindfulness between adult attachment and subjective well-being.

Meth.ds: 436adults aged 20 to, 60 years and over were tested by self-designed demographic scale, Experiences in Close Relationships Inventory (ECR), Satisfaction With life Scale (SWL), Affect Scales, Acceptance and Action Questionnaire (AAQ-II), Mindful Attention Awareness Scale (MARS). 428 adults were screened and retained for statistical analysis.

SPSS25.0 was used for statistical analysis, T test, one-way ANOVA, partial correlation and multiple linear regression were used for data processing, and AMOS22.0 was used for mediating effect test. The effects of demographic variables on adult attachment, negative emotions and subjective well-being were investigated; the effects of different levels of experiential avoidance and mindfulness on adult attachment dimension scores; the effects of different levels of experiential avoidance and mindfulness, and attachment types on negative emotions; and the effects of different levels of experiential avoidance and mindfulness. The influence of different attachment types on subjective well-being; the correlation between adult attachment, negative emotions, subjective well-being, experiential avoidance and mindfulness level; the regression of negative emotions and subjective well-being as dependent variables; and subjective well-being as dependent variables; and the mediating effect of experiential avoidance and mindfulness level as mediating variables.

Result:

Partial correlation analysis showld that attachment anxiety was positively correlated with attachment avoidance, depression, anxiety, stress, total score of negative emotions, negative affect and experiential avoidance (r=0.35,0.45,0.45,0.53,0.52,0.47,0.53, P<0.001), and negatively correlated with life satisfaction subjective well-being and mindfulness level (f0=-0.30，-0.3 7，-0.48, P<0.001) was significantly negatively correlated with positive emotions (r=-0.12, P<0.05). Attachment avoidance was positively correlated with depression, anxiety, stress, total scores of negative emotions, negative affect and experiential avoidance(r=-0.32,0.31,0.26,0.32,0.23,0.31,P<0.001), and negatively correlated with life satisfaction, subjective well-being and mindfulness (}=-0.31，-0.32，-0.3 G, P<0.001). Experiential avoidance was positively correlated with attachment anxiety, attachment avoidance, depression, anxiety, stress, negative emotions and negative affect (r=0.53,0.31,0.56,0.54,0.61,0.63,0.51，P<0.001)，and negatively correlated with life satisfaction, positive emotions and subjective well-being (r=-0.35，-0.15, -0.43, P<0.01). The level of mindfulness was negatively correlated with attachment anxiety, attachment avoidance, depression, anxiety, stress, negative emotions, negative affect and experiential avoidance (r=-0.48，-0.36，-0.49，-0.47，-0.49，-0.53, well-being and positive emotions (r=0.17,0.19,0.27, P<0.001).

Multivariate linear regression shoved that attachment anxiety, experiential avoidance, mindfulness level and economic level together explained SO% of the variance of total score of negative emotions β=0.20.39,P<0.01); attachment anxiety, experiential avoidance, mindfulness level, gender, economic level together explained 43% of the variance of depression(β=-0.23-0.35,P<0.01); attachment anxiety, experience Sexual avoidance and mindfulness level together explained 38% of the variation of anxiety(β=-0.17-0.33, P<0.001);attachment anxiety, experiential avoidance, mindfulness level and economic level together explained 48% of the variation of stress（β=-0.17-0.40, P<0.01).

Attachment anxiety, attachment avoidance, experiential avoidance, age, marital status and economic level together explained 44% of the variation of subjective well-being (β=-0.29-0.52, P<0.05); attachment avoidance, experiential avoidance mindfulness level, gender, age, marital status and economic level together explained 44% of the variation of life satisfaction(β=-0.26-0.53, P<0.05),mindfulness level and economic level together explained 10% variation of positive emotion(β=0.13-0.19, P<0.05), attachment anxiety, experiential avoidance, age and economic level together explained 40% variation of negative affect(β=-0.22-0.07,P<0.05).

The path coefficients of experiential avoidance as mediator between attachment anxiety and negative emotion were significant (Estimate=0.608,0.240,0.577, P<0.001), and the mediating effect of experiential avoidance between attachment anxiety and negative emotion was significant, accounting for 59.39% of the total effect. The bath coefficients of mindfulness as a mediating variable between attachment anxiety and negative emotions were significant (Estimate=0.550,0.391，-0.351，P<0.001), and the mediating effect of mindfulness on attachment anxiety and negative emotions was significant, accounting for 33.00% of the total effect. The path coefficients of experiential avoidance as a mediator between attachment avoidance and subjective well-being were significant (Estimate=0.415，-0.131，-0.425, P<0.05). The complete mediating effect of effect of experiential avoidance between attachment avoidance and subjective well-being was significant, accounting for 57.32% of the total effect. The path coefficients of mindfulness as a mediating variable between attachment avoidance and subjective well-being were significant (Estimate=-0.479，-0.213,0.182, P<0.01). The mediating effect of mindfulness on attachment avoidance ans subjective well-being was significant, accounting for 28.9% of the total effect.

Counclusion:

Firstly, the higher the degree of attachment anxiety and attachment avoidance and experiential avoidance, the more negative emotions and the lower subjective well-being; the higher level of mindfulness, the less negative emotions and the higher subjective.

Secondly, experiential avoidance and mindfulness level have significant mediating effects between attachment anxiety and negative emostion , which can be alleviated by reducing the degree of experiential avoidance and improving the level of mindfulnes.

Thirdly, Experiential avoidance and mindfulness have significant mediating effects between attachment avoidance and subjective well-being, which can be improved by reducing the degress of experiential avoidance aid raising the level of mindfulness.