Observational study links attachment injury with increased risk of intimate partner violence in young adults, suggesting the need for support.
Psychological and physical intimate partner violence (IPV) in young adult couples is a major public health concern with devastating consequences. IPV shatters fundamental assumptions of safety and trust and exerts profound consequences for emotional and relational well-being. Understanding the factors associated with IPV in young adults is therefore essential. One factor may be an attachment injury, a potentially serious stressful relational event that occurs when one partner feels betrayed or abandoned by the other during a critical moment of need, damaging trust and emotional security. An attachment injury can trigger or intensify couple distress, which may increase the risk for IPV. This study examined associations between variables related to a specific attachment injury (i.e., severity, onset, stress-related symptoms, and frequency of other such injuries in the current relationship) occurring at least 3 months prior to participation, and the perpetration and victimization of physical and psychological IPV within the past 3 months. In total, 347 young adults who identified as the injured partner completed questionnaires online. Controlling for IPV that did not occur in the past 3 months but did happen before in the relationship, greater attachment injury-related stress symptoms, and greater severity of the attachment injury were linked to increased perpetration of physical IPV. In addition, greater attachment injury-related stress symptoms were associated with increased victimization of physical IPV. These findings suggest that a more severely experienced attachment injury may contribute to situational physical IPV in young adults. Efforts to promote relational well-being in this population should prioritize enhancing attachment security by addressing unresolved attachment injuries, as this may help reduce vulnerability to situational IPV.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lafontaine et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: