Three factors that affect resilience to romantic breakups

[Skip]

In an online survey of 1,404 university students ages 18–25 who reported experiencing recent breakups, individuals with secure parental bonding (see attachment theory), past positive time orientation (see time perspectives theory), and lower future relationship orientation reported less distress after their breakup.

However, time perspectives did not buffer the negative effects of poor parental bonding on mental health.

What is your attachment style? Take the test:


___ Secure
___ Anxious-Ambivalent
___ Dismissive-Avoidant
___ Fearful-Avoidant
___ Dependent
___ Codependent

What is your time orientation and future relationship orientation?
(read definitions at bottom of post)

___ Present-Oriented Person
___ Present-Hedonistic Person
___ Present-Fatalistic Person
___ Future-Orientated Person
___ Past-Oriented Person

Please enter your determination in the survey (top) and post to tell us why you belong in tehe categories you are in and how you think it is affecting you.

Bouncing Back from a Breakup: Attachment, Time Perspective, Mental Health, and Romantic Loss
Steven P. Gilbert & Sarah K. Sifers
Pages 295-310 | Published online: 27 Sep 2011


TIME PERSPECTIVE BIASES: GENERAL, PHENOMENOLOGICAL CHARACTERIZATIONS OF EACH TIME PERSPECTIVE
By Phil Zimbardo

Although individual differences in time perspective are continuous along each of the dimensions specified by factor analyses, as are the combinations of factor scores an individual gets on each of the temporal dimensions that comprise the time perspective inventory, extreme “types” may be selected for research and didactic purposes. They are typically identified by selecting respondents who are above the group median on one time dimension and below the median on all others. With larger samples, it is possible to select percentile cutoffs for assigning respondents to different categories. We have always done within- sample relative comparisons rather than using standardized norms against which to select individuals for categorical assignment. When we have a larger population base to draw from, we expect to establish standardized scores for use with different local samples.

The time perspective biases, or time frames, that emerge most consistently from our factor analysis of the Zimbardo Time Perspective Inventory are: Future-Orientation, Past-Orientation, Present-Hedonistic Orientation, and Present-Fatalistic Orientation. There may be sub- distinctions within the Future category, such as subjects who focus on planning and persevering toward longer-term goals; or on a shorter-term future in which meeting deadlines is most important. But for most purposes, those categories are combined within the general Future- Orientation. However, to test more specific hypotheses, investigators may give subjects separate scores on each of the future factors and assign them to different treatments or analyze the data according to subtypes within the Future-Orientation.

With some samples, a separate factor emerges which I characterize as Time Press, a sense of time urgency in which the respondent endorses as self-relevant a set of inventory statements of the pressures and constraints that time imposes on him or her. Part of this dimension also includes emotional aspects that are time-bound, such as, getting angry at others when kept waiting. Time Press correlates positively and highly with Future-Orientation and negatively with Present-Orientation.

The following general characterization of Time Perspective Types is loosely derived from interviews, case studies, correlational analysis of time perspective scores and other data, and experimental evidence. It is intended to serve only as a working heuristic to help investigators form a sense of the kind of person that is prototypical of each category. In my analysis, each type of time bias involves trade-offs, gains against Losses, and must be considered in the social environmental context in which the individual is functioning at any given period in her c life. The fit between environmental/structural/system demands and the person’s time perspective must be taken into account, so that the optimal time perspective bias in one s may be sub-optimal in others.

Central to my perspective on differences in time perspective is the consideration of the most relevant factors that influence a person’s decisions and actions at a given time.

Present-Oriented Person: This person focuses on concrete factors in the immediate, sensory present (physical salience, sensory qualities, current social pressures) while ignoring or minimizing the abstract qualities relevant to the decision that exist only in an anticipated future context or a remembered past context. Such people tend to be narrowly focused on what is rather than what might be, or used to be. Their thinking is more concrete, less abstract ( a bird in the hand is worth at least two in an uncertain bush), they use more present-tense verbs and references to events and things in the present. It is difficult for them to delay gratification, especially when it is salient and pressing. They give in easily to temptation, can be distracted from task performance by a host of physical and social stimuli. Their focus is less on instrumental activities designed to achieve future goals than it is on consummatory activities that bring pleasure or avoid immediate pain. Of great importance is the evidence we are accumulating that they tend not to be influenced by educational or persuasive messages, either written or oral, in which the necessary action to take or refrain from taking is in some future context. Having the relevant knowledge does not translate into the appropriate action, as it does for the future-oriented, and often the past-oriented person.

Present-Hedonistic Person: Self indulgent, playful, enjoys all things that bring immediate pleasure and avoids those that involve much effort, work, planning, or unpleasantness. Lives to consume the good life and takes many different kinds of risks in part because he or she does not fully consider the realities of negative consequences and at the same time seeks stimulation and excitement. Is vulnerable to addictions of all sorts, regardless of knowledge of potential negative consequences. These people focus more on process and intrinsic motivation, rarely on products and extrinsically- motivated task performance. They are vulnerable to being caught up in social taps where short- term gains capture attention more than long- term negative consequences of imprudent actions. They do more poorly in academics (or when forced to function in future- oriented environments) than do the future people. However, where process and focus on immediate details is important, presents may do well, notably on some types of creative tasks, or activities with immediate feedback, such as video games. They can also enjoy play, sports, hobbies, high energy activities, intimacy, sexuality, parties, and may be more intense as friends. On the other hand, they are more emotional, volatile, easily upset, likely to violate convention and behave in anti-social ways, be delinquent, criminal, and aggressive.

Present-Fatalistic Person: These people are Present-Oriented by default rather than by choice. They believe it does not pay to plan since nothing works out for them as they envision. They feel their lives are externally controlled rather than internally orchestrated by them. Their self image is largely as a passive pawn of fate, of higher spiritual authority, or ideological, political, structural forces in their environment. For some, the fatalism is part of a religious value system in which individual initiative is subordinated to the power of a deity. For others, it is a byproduct of economic failure, of being lower class or of a stigmatized caste, with little real opportunity for changing their circumstances. The positive side of fatalism is belief in luck for changing current circumstances rather than hard work or planning; it is also likely to be bolstered by superstition and rituals. These people also have a negative attributional bias that sustains their fatalism by accepting blame for failure and disowning success as personally caused. They are likely to experience more severe psychological problems than those of other time types. Depression, eating disorders, drug addiction, suicide all ought to be more common for the fatalistic present person than others. They will perform most poorly in school because of their sell-fulfilling prophesy that nothing good happens to them, the game is fixed, they are disadvantaged, etc. These people are at great danger for engaging in all high risk, poor health activities, such as practicing unsafe sex even with a clear and present danger of AIDS or sexualiy transmitted diseases, since ‘ whatever will be, will be.”

Future-Orientated Person: This person’s decisions tend to be based less on concrete, empirical aspects of the current behavioral setting and relatively more on his or her anticipated, abstract imaginings of future consequences of alternative courses of action. The focus is on if-then reasoning, probabilistic thinking, logical analysis, reasoning backward from imagined goal states to start points as well as forward tracking from starts to finishes. There is a clear concern for the consequences of one’s actions, attention to responsibility, liability, optimizing outcomes. This person accepts delays of immediate gratification to achieve longer-term better goals. She or he is also willing to invest effort and resources in current activities that only have a distant payoff, and to endure unpleasant current situations that have the potential for positive future outcomes. They are willing to save for a rainy day, accept that a stitch in time may save unnecessary work later. They are goal-oriented and may be either very competitive or cooperative depending on which strategy is situationally appropriate. They do not take physical risks, and tend to be health conscious, engaging in a variety of health enhancing behaviors some of which involve effort, time, money, and little immediate gain — but prevent long-term negative consequences (flossing teeth, taking vitamins, eating health foods, getting health and dental checkups, etc.). They are good at problem solving and abstract reasoning tasks, get higher grades, fewer incompletes or extensions required in courses. They are able to avoid temptations and distractions that are perceived as short-term inducements or time wasting, such as play and other consummatory activities, when there is work to be done or tasks to be accomplished. Much of their behavior is primarily an instrumental means to goal attainment. On the down side, the future-oriented person is unable to enjoy present, transient, consumable activities and experiences. Often they are labeled as wasting time. They may have more difficulty than other time types with intimate relationships since they thrive on control and predictability, which ought to be absent or shared in intimate encounters. Also their micro level of planning means that they do not allow natural acts, such as sexual arousal, to occur without concern for controlling it, anticipating consequences, and being apprehensive about being evaluated for sexual performance. One of their main goals is increasing efficiency, getting more done in less time. To this end they will buy a host of time saving appliances and engage in time management activities. Their form of negative mental health should revolve around high levels of anxiety, manic behavior, workaholism, and failures to achieve their ideal state. If their goals, when attained, are not substantial, it is likely they will feel as if they have worked hard and become successful at something that really wasn’t worth it, thus leaving them with a sense of existential meaningless of their life’s worth — in other words, being set up for mid-life crises.

Past-Oriented Person: This type of person is relatively rare in the United States general population compared to the above types, and especially infrequent among college students. So we have less information available on them. But we might say tentatively is that their actions and decisions are primarily constrained by recalling similar situations and action-consequence sequences that did or did not work in the past. They are able to distance themselves from the concrete reality of the immediate situation, with its temptations, while focusing on their obligations, contractual arrangements, and standard operating procedures. Much more of their behavior will be influenced by the operation of guilt over discordance between current thoughts and actions and prior commitments. These people tend to be conservative, concerned over maintaining the status quo, whether it is really good or bad for them. They do not take risks and are not impressed by new, more efficient ways of doing familiar things. Rituals and myths play important roles in their lives as do traditional or fundamental values in religion and politics. They are suspicious of the new and different. Although they are likely to prize family and family rituals and enjoy social gatherings with friends and family, they do not open themselves to new experiences or to strangers. They may be prone to prejudices more so than future-oriented or present-hedonistic types, to the extent that they fear what is different. In social traps they will cooperate rather than compete because maintaining good social relationships is very important, rather than perceiving cooperation as a strategy for personal gain in these situations. They will also tend not to be adventurous, not to want to travel far afield or to live far from home. A positive side of past orientation is a sense of personal continuity or a stable sense of self over time, a sense of rootedness, that is lacking in futures and present-hedonists. To the extent that their past experiences are generally positive, these people will enjoy a nostalgic remembrance of the good old times despite current ills. But with a negative past, they become Smithsonians of trauma, failure, and frustration, endlessly recycling the non-modifiable past despite current good times.

[once removed]

im not entirely sure how to read this result. if im reading it correctly it seems to say i have low level avoidancy, but the summary seems to contradict that, or at least suggest its very low.


Snapshot Report
Avoidance of Closeness
 32
 
Whether it involves emotional expression or developing a deep intimate bond, you're the type of person who is very at ease getting close to a partner. You are also comfortable relying on your partner when necessary, as well has having him/her dependent upon you in times of need.


it was difficult for me to answer in a romantic context for a variety of reasons. i think i was characteristically insecurely attached (tended to feel i liked my partners more than they liked me, and i think now that it was largely true if not a self fulfilling prophecy) in most of my romantic relationships - largely, but not entirely, got that out of my system many years ago, but i have over pursued since. i tried to keep some of this in my answers. im pretty well versed in keeping it to myself, and not acting on impulse or ways that make things worse, but i can still get pretty insecure in the very early stages with the "why isnt she reaching out? surely i should act!" and obsessing. sort of a chicken and the egg thing - if theres consistency, im cool, but one or both parties tend to render that not the case. still seems like that falls on me.

in my relationship with my uBPDex, there was a lot of avoidance. not of closeness or availability or support, so much, but it was my response when things would go bad. i had a foot out the door at least half the time. i also need my privacy and space, and would take any opportunity i could for time apart, even at the risk of a blow up. i tried to keep some of this in my answers too. it was comforting to get a result that says im okay with a partner being dependent on me in times of need - i like to think thats true. still, the idea of a jealous, possessive, clingy, overly needy/dependent partner who depends on me for their happiness gives me the willies; im also not ready at this stage of my life to limit my independence much and i think thats okay.

the difficulty for me, obviously, has been finding that healthy balance. i dont have this difficulty with friendships, family, or other relationships. i took a test a year or so ago (i forget where but i could have sworn it was on bpdfamily), that said i largely have a secure attachment style. it said i have a mildly avoidant relationship with my father, and id chock that up to minor stuff; we are very very close.

adding difficulty is that i have not been in a position to date for some years now and wont be any time soon; i am, right now, necessarily avoidant. the progress ive made, the changes ive been through, the tools ive picked up, i havent had the opportunity to practice in a romantic setting. its tricky to say where i am but ive no doubt i still have some unhealthy tendencies to shake.

past-oriented person seems to fit me the best. im not as closed off to new ideas or experiences as it suggests, but theres a lot of truth to it, and the rest.

[tryingsome]

You need to buy the report to actually see your Attachment style. Avoidance of Closeness is just one of the Categories.

For me, I scored Secure Attachment Style and would relate to the Past Oriented Person (with the Positive Past Slant). What does all this mean? Perhaps some horoscope lookie-loo or maybe something else. There is a lot of ways to capture the same info; I guess it is what you want to take away from it all.

Here are the details of my attachment style to those interested:

Intense Need for Security (score 23)
Although you would most likely be hurt if rejected or abandoned by your partner, you do not let such a fear consume your thoughts. You believe that even if things don't work out, it's not the end of the world - you'll be able to find someone else. As such, issues with security are unlikely to be a problem in your relationship.

Avoidance of Closeness (score 29)
Whether it involves emotional expression or developing a deep intimate bond, you're the type of person who is at ease with getting close to a partner. You are also comfortable relying on your partner when necessary, as well has having him/her dependent upon you in times of need.

Self-esteem (score 89)
According to your score, you believe yourself to be a valuable person who has a lot to offer to a partner, creating a strong sense of self-worth. You realize that you deserve to be loved and respected just like everyone else, and know that your partner sees something wonderful in you.

Need to Please (score 34)
Although you are likely more than willing to make your partner happy and make a few sacrifices for the sake of your relationship, you're not about to bend over backwards to please others. This stance is essential for the health of your relationship as well as your own well-being. Constantly going out of your way to satisfy your partner to the point where your own needs and desires are ignored can result in a build-up of resentment and frustration.

Indecisiveness (score 43)
Even when in a relationship, you maintain your independence and are
comfortable standing on your own two feet. You rarely require reassurance from your partner, and likely prefer that decisions in your relationship be made together.

Need to Control (score 20)
While some may prefer to take on a more dominant role in a relationship, you're not the type of person who exhibits an excessive desire to control your partner. You likely prefer a healthy balance of give-and-take, and are not one to tell your partner what to do, nor allow him/her to call all the shots.

Extreme Altruism (score 31)
Being supportive, dependable and helpful are all outstanding qualities in a partner, but even altruism can be taken to an extreme. Although you'd be more than willing to help your partner out of a jam and even take on some of the burden of his/her problems, you won't let it get to a point where he/she becomes entirely dependent upon you. You realize that sometimes, the best way to aid someone is to help them
help themselves.

[Mutt]

I learned something new with time perspectives theories, it explains a lot about my family, my dad, brother and one sister used to all frustrate me because they live with their blinders on and don't have peripheral vision, they don't want to self reflect or think too deeply about things, I think they're not comfortable with feelings. I'm not saying that everyone with a time perspective bias is shallow, I'm just saying that I feel like my family members are, I started searching for my biological mom in my early 30's because I had enough of the invalidation and felt so different than my family members, I wanted to find out where I came from.

One way that I'm different is that I'm a future orientated person, I think that this knowledge helps, it's more information on the psychological and family dynamics and it helps me to depersonalize them, I've been working on depersonalizing their behaviors for awhile, I've healed from some things but every bit of information helps, thanks for that Skip.

[Skip]

You need to buy the report to actually see your Attachment style. Avoidance of Closeness is just one of the Categories.

We'll check into that. We don't host pay-per-surveys.   

[Turkish]

Avoidance of Closeness 52
 
Whether it involves emotional expression or developing a deep intimate bond, you're the type of person who gets somewhat uneasy when a relationship becomes closer. You are also not entirely comfortable relying on your partner when necessary, nor having him/her dependent upon you in times of need.

No surprise,  being the latch key only child of a single BPD mother.  Thankfully,  I wasn't enmeshed.  Unfortunately,  I expected more emotional strength,  while at the same time engaging in rescuing behaviors on my side, which led to mutual resentment 

I don't feel I fit any of the time oriented categories.  The closest would be future-oriented, but I do take risks,  or did. 

A month ago,  my ex and I got into a short conversation about our r/s. She said,  "I never felt like you shared your goals and dreams with me." I shut the conversation down because it wasn't going to go anywhere good.  I felt like saying,  "my goal was to have the family I never had,  and even now,  I do.  I wanted to be financially independent,  and I have been for 25 years, helping others along the way, dependent upon no one (because I can't count on others, nor should I as an adult). I don't feel the need to talk about it,  nor journal [she does] nor set milestones: I just do it without making a big deal about it." I've demonstrated it by my actions without being emotional.  Talk about a "mismatch" as my T said... .

There should be a category for latch key kids who are forced to grow up early or are "old souls" from too early an age.  Independence good; underlying cynicism not so good... .she being BPD or not,  it certainly didn't help us mesh given my underlying emotional barriers. The challenge in raising our kids is passing on what works without my junk.