ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026
The cognitive compass of attachment: how primed security and insecurity navigate mental representations.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: This study examined the domain-specific patterns associated with supraliminal attachment priming on the cognitive accessibility of attachment-related mental representations. Methods: Seventy participants were randomly assigned to one of three experimental conditions: attachment-insecurity priming, attachment-security priming, or a non-attachment control (non-primed reference) condition. Participants underwent supraliminal priming via a guided imagery task specific to their condition, followed by a lexical decision task measuring reaction times for five word categories: proximity-related, distance-related, positive, negative, and neutral words. Results: Relative differences between priming conditions emerged exclusively for attachment-related word categories. Participants in the attachment-insecurity priming condition showed faster reaction times to both proximity- and distance-related words relative to the non-primed reference condition. In contrast, participants in the attachment-security priming condition showed faster reaction times to proximity-related words than the non-primed reference condition only at low levels of attachment anxiety; no such differences were observed at higher levels of anxiety. Reaction times to distance-related words did not differ between the security priming and non-primed reference conditions. Attachment avoidance did not moderate any effects. Bayesian analyses provided affirmative evidence for the absence of priming effects in positive, negative, and neutral word categories. Given the observed effect sizes, moderation trend-level patterns should be interpreted as exploratory. Conclusion: These findings advance understanding of attachment system dynamics by showing that differences between insecurity and security priming in attachment-related processing depend on attachment anxiety.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.